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

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

	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

^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

ISSN: 2050-7283