Skip to main content

Table 4 Results from models with significant interaction effects between affective disorders and personality or work circumstances a

From: The impact of conscientiousness, mastery, and work circumstances on subsequent absenteeism in employees with and without affective disorders

  Odds Ratio p-value 95% C.I.
Interaction model 1. Affective disorders  x conscientiousness
 Main effect depressive disorder 2.35 <.001 1.50–3.69
 Main effect anxiety disorder 1.13 .63 .70–1.82
 Main effect comorbid disorder 1.65 .04 1.02–2.65
 Main effect conscientiousness 0.75 .045 .56–.99
 Depressive disorder x conscientiousness 1.58 .06 .99–2.51
 Anxiety disorder x conscientiousness 2.05 .003 1.27–3.31
 Comorbid disorder x conscientiousness 1.61 .03 1.06–2.47
Interaction model 2. Affective disorders x job demands
 Main effect depressive disorder 2.47 <.001 1.55–3.93
 Main effect anxiety disorder 1.32 .24 .83–2.11
 Main effect comorbid disorder 1.74 .03 1.07–2.84
 Main effect job demands 0.82 .13 .63–1.06
 Depressive disorder x job demands 1.67 .03 1.07–2.62
 Anxiety disorder x job demands 1.42 .13 .91–2.21
 Comorbid disorder x job demands 1.33 .15 .90–1.96
  1. a Variables not shown in the table are: gender, education, age, chronic diseases, previous absenteeism, conscientiousness (only model 2), job demands (only model 1), mastery, job support, job control. All independent variables except dichotomous ones are standardized
Back to article page

BMC Psychology

ISSN: 2050-7283

Contact us