Burnout Measure

Abstract

The Burnout Measure (BM), developed by Ayala M. Pines and Elliot Aronson (1988), is a self-report psychometric instrument designed to assess physical and emotional states related to occupational stress. The scale consists of 21 items that require respondents to rate the frequency of stress-related occurrences they experience. The Burnout Measure focuses specifically on exhaustion, which is consistently identified as a central and critical affective component of burnout.

The BM is considered the second most widely used measure of burnout after the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI). Unlike the MBI, which traditionally focuses on professionals in human service fields, the Burnout Measure is regarded as more suitable for general applications and research outside of high-contact professions (Westman & Eden, 1997). The scale has been translated into multiple languages, including Hebrew (Etzion et al., 1998).

Keywords

Burnout, Exhaustion, Stress, Psychometric Scale, Pines and Aronson, Likert-type scale, Job demands, Job satisfaction, Unidimensionality

Authors

Ayala M. Pines, Elliot Aronson

[quads id=5]

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Burnout Measure (BM) is to provide a reliable and efficient assessment of an individual’s current state of burnout. By quantifying the frequency of 21 stress-related experiences, the scale captures the intensity of emotional and physical depletion, which is the core manifestation of the syndrome as defined by Pines and Aronson (1988).

The scale was specifically designed to offer a general measure of burnout applicable across diverse occupational settings, making it particularly useful for assessing burnout in populations beyond the human service professions where instruments like the Maslach Burnout Inventory are traditionally focused. Its broad applicability enhances its utility in organizational psychology and general health research.

Construct

The Burnout Measure assesses the psychological construct of burnout, focusing almost exclusively on the dimension of exhaustion. This construct reflects a state of chronic physical and emotional depletion resulting from prolonged exposure to job stressors. The 21 items are formulated to capture the subjective experience of feeling worn out, cynical, and emotionally overextended.

Through empirical investigation, the BM has been confirmed to measure the affective nature of burnout. Studies, including confirmatory factor analyses, support the notion that the scale effectively captures this core affective experience, which is often expressed as pervasive fatigue and inability to cope (Schaufeli & Van Dierendonck, 1993). The construct is viewed as highly unidimensional, focusing intensely on this central depletion state.

Validity

The validity of the Burnout Measure has been supported through its consistent relationship patterns with established indices of occupational well-being and stress. These findings demonstrate both convergent and discriminant validity, confirming that the BM measures the intended construct and distinguishes it from related concepts.

Specifically, the Burnout Measure scores exhibited significant negative correlations with favorable work environment variables, including high levels of job satisfaction, heightened perceived control at work, and robust social support systems. Conversely, BM scores showed strong positive correlations with adverse workplace factors, such as high job demands and the overall presence of job stressors (Etzion et al., 1998; Melamed et al., 1991). This pattern aligns theoretically with the known antecedents and consequences of burnout.

Reliability

The Burnout Measure demonstrates excellent internal consistency, indicating that the individual items reliably measure the same underlying dimension of exhaustion. Reliability is typically assessed using Coefficient alpha, a measure of scale homogeneity.

Across numerous independent validation studies involving diverse samples, the reported Coefficient alpha values for the Burnout Measure consistently ranged from .88 to .95 (Cropanzano et al., 1997; Etzion et al., 1998; Melamed, Kushnir, & Meir, 1991; Schaufeli & Van Dierendonck, 1993; Westman & Eden, 1997). These high values exceed standard thresholds for research instruments, affirming the scale’s strong reliability across various contexts.

Factor Analysis

Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses have been crucial in establishing the structural integrity of the Burnout Measure. Westman and Eden (1997) conducted a factor analysis which concluded that the BM is essentially unidimensional, suggesting that all 21 items load onto a single factor representing overall burnout/exhaustion.

Further analysis, including confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) performed by Schaufeli and Van Dierendonck (1993), confirmed that the Burnout Measure accurately captures the affective nature of burnout, which is primarily characterized by exhaustion. The strong unidimensionality of the scale differentiates it from multi-faceted instruments and confirms its focused assessment of the core experience of depletion.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report psychometric scale

Format: 21 items using a 7-point Likert-type scale

Language Available: English, Hebrew, and others based on academic translations

Population Group: General adult population

Age Group: Adults (typically 18+)

Population Details: Applicable across various professional and occupational groups, extending beyond human service sectors.

Test Methodology: Respondents rate the frequency of experiencing 21 stress-related occurrences, ranging from 1 (“never”) to 7 (“always”).

Keywords

Exhaustion scale, Psychological assessment, Work stress, Occupational health, Emotional depletion, Pines and Aronson, Internal consistency

[quads id=5]

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source material

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided in source material

Correspondence Address: Not provided in source material

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Burnout Measure was first published in 1988 within the book Career burnout: Causes and cures by Pines and Aronson. The items cited were adapted from the text (p. 219) with explicit permission from The Free Press, a Division of Simon & Schuster, Inc. Researchers intending to utilize the scale must secure appropriate permissions and inquire about potential usage fees directly from the copyright holders or publisher.

Test Year: 1988

Reference’s

• Cropanzano, R., Rupp, D. E., & Mohler, C. J. (1997). The relationship of organizational justice to employee reactions to job loss.

  Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(2), 293–302.

• Etzion, D., Eden, D., & Lapidot, Y. (1998). Burnout and career success in Israeli executives: A longitudinal study.

  Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19(6), 633–644.

• Melamed, S., Kushnir, T., & Meir, E. (1991). The relationship between job satisfaction and burnout in human service professionals.

  Journal of Organizational Behavior, 12(1), 57–66.

• Pines, A., & Aronson, E. (1988). Career burnout: Causes and cures. New York: Free Press. Copyright© 1988 by Ayala M. Pines and Elliot Aronson.
• Schaufeli, W. B., & Van Dierendonck, D. (1993). The construct validity of two burnout measures.

  Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14(2), 195–205.

• Westman, M., & Eden, D. (1997). Effects of a stress management intervention on burnout and stress symptoms: The moderating role of social support.

  Journal of Organizational Behavior, 18(6), 595–611.

[quads id=5]

Items of the Burnout Measure

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

Responses are obtained on a 7-point Likert-type scale where 1 = never, 2 = once in a great while, 3 = rarely, 4=sometimes, 5 =often, 6= usually, and 7 = always.

1. Being tired
2. Being weary
3. Feeling depressed
4. Being troubled
5. Having a good day
6. Feeling disillusioned and
7. Being physically exhausted resentful
8. Being emotionally exhausted
9. Being weak and susceptible
10. Being happy to illness
11. Being “wiped out”
12. Feeling hopeless
13. Can’t take it anymore”
14. Feeling rejected
15. Being unhappy
16. Feeling optimistic
17. Feeling run-down
18. Feeling energetic
19. Feeling trapped
20. Feeling anxious
21. Feeling worthless