Creative Education
Vol.07 No.03(2016), Article ID:65191,10 pages

Relationship between Personality Types and Job Stress among Teachers at First Period (Guidance Schools) and Second Period of High School (Secondary Schools)

Abbas Sadeghi1, Gholam Hossein Niyafar2, Ali Hossein Pour2, Anita Zamani3, Fatemeh Gholami3

1Department of Educational Sciences, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran

2General Psychology, Free University, Rasht Unit, Guilan, Iran

3Clinical Psychology, Free University, Lahijan Unit, Guilan, Iran

Copyright © 2016 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY).

Received 23 January 2016; accepted 27 March 2016; published 30 March 2016


This research has investigated the relationship between John Halland’s personality types (realist, investigative, conventional) with job stress among teachers at first period (guidance school) and second duration of high school (secondary school). 327 teachers were selected by multistage cluster sampling method and Philip Rice job stress questionnaire and John Halland’s job-personality questionnaire were used. Pearson correlation coefficient, linear regression and the analysis of multivariable variance (Manova) were used to measure the relationships. The results showed that there was a reversed relationship between personality types and the degree of stress, with correlation coefficient of r = −1.15, respectively, in the level of p = 0.05 and reversed relationship between conventional personality type and job stress was obtained by (r = −1.17). There was not any significant relationship between realist and investigative personality type with job stress of teachers and there was just a significant relationship between gender, personality type and the degree of stress in the level of (p = 0/05). Also, the degrees of stress in male teachers were more than female.


Personality Type, Job Stress, Teachers

1. Introduction

Our world is the world of organizations and today technicians believe that the main role of managing organizations is upon human force. Certainly, progress of any society depends on the efficient use of human forces of that community. In development planning, human forces are the most important factor in achieving the goals. Efficient staffs are the most valuable asset of any country. Many countries have got welfare and comfort for the lack of natural resources as a result of having trained human force and use of their expertise and follow the path of progress and development (Mustafa, 2010). It’s necessary to understand that the modern world is undergoing information, social and technical fast changes. Agent, subject and the main carrier of these changes are human. The right combination of subjectivity, agency and being carrier creates a sense of satisfaction and efficiency (DDI, 1997) .

One of the most important, complex and extensive organizations of society is education system. In the case of education, existence of healthy and committed human force plays a major role in education organization for achieving successful performance of each educational activity in addition to financial resources, tools and technology. Notice to teachers as one of the important elements of education requires special sensitivity. Teachers perform educational programs at the frontline of this system and achieving to the bulk of organization goals is upon them (Aghaei & Atashpoor, 2001). Also, in this organization, teacher who can achieve enough maneuver power in a good level of job position in all three cases of subjectivity, agency and being carrier, will have high inner and outer energy for progress and job satisfaction. Lack and absence of each of above effective factors include separation, expertise, ability and relish will have harmful physical and mental effects on employer in working situations and overturns the foundation of security and work peace, neglecting mental health of teachers will have side effect on students and education system. One of the most important factors that damage the mental health, especially teachers is job stress. Chirt & Chen (2014) have argued that when job stress increases, job satisfaction decreases and therefore has negative effect on physical and mental health of employer and rises the risk of burnout in that person.

Sing (2014) states that more stressful jobs will have more negative results that lead to leaving work and reducing the efficiency and business products. Regarding teachers’ psychological state is not a new issue. Although the teacher and teaching are considered as a low stress profession, over the past two decades, teaching has changed to a challenging profession.

Kyriacou & Sutcliffe (1989) have considered the effective factors on teachers’ job satisfaction as following:

1) Large amount of work; 2) Lack of career growth; 3) Lack of social status; 4) Unfriendly and inappropriate relationships between staff; 5) Factors related to number and students education progress, 6) Factors related to low salary and benefits.

In addition to above mentioned factors, there are other cases that will be the precursor of job stress, that are:

Working conditions, workload, role ambiguity, job features, responsibility, relationships with superiors, relationships with factors (such as with subordinates, colleagues and job security) (Astora 1996).

Job stress has impressed varies aspects of mental health and teachers performance in education and learning (Kokkins, 2009) , and also provides negative behavioral feedbacks such as leaving Workplace, Consecutive absences, violet behaviors with students and generally failure and unhappiness (Chan & Hui, 2009) , decreases in confidence and anxiety action (McCormick, 2012) .

Now this question should be asked that why some people are more damaged in dealing with stress and some neglect it and maintain job Security and gain job satisfaction and progress?

This question that why humans are different from each other is necessary for understanding human’s behavior. It’s clear that individual differences cause many behavioral differences that the first source of these differences is human personality. Personality is “a complex and very deep model of psychological characteristics that cannot be easily eradicated and almost appear themselves in all aspects of individuals performance”.

These characteristics are inherent and comprehensive and form a complex matrix of biological preparation and learning and also form perceptual, emotional, thinking patterns and individuals coping strategies (Millon, 1990) .

Each person behaves in a certain way and has exclusive expectations, ability, requirements and behavioral skills that are based on his/her personality model. However, all organizations also supply requirements. And special expectations, based on their goals, tasks and current activities. Thus, for each of different personalities a different job environment is suitable (Refahi et al., 2009).

According to theoretically definition of personality, we can say that individuals based on differences in their inner schema toward each other, behave differently with favorable and or traumatic events.

Also related to job and profession, different theories were formed that over the nineteenth century tried to process professional and employment―related behaviors that each of specific perspectives refer to effective factors in job selection of people in society and their outcomes. (Shafie Abadi, 2011) therefore, theories such as agent characteristic theory, job adaptation theory, developmental theories and social learning theories are known as dominant processor theories of individual job selection. Among mentioned job theories, John’s personality and career theory that is considered typology of employed people in different professions and environments has considerable importance and has proved its reliability in different studies (Halland, 1997) . Halland emphasizes the importance of self-Knowledge in achieving job satisfaction and stability. From Halland’s perspective, self-knowledge is a person ability to identify potential talents in social environments. Self-knowledge is the same knowledge and information that person has about himself. Also, Halland considers early childhood experiences and method of upbringing in childhood and Social pressures as important factors in determining preferences and type of personality and individual self-knowledge (Shafie Abadi, 2011) . In Short, we can say that John Halland’s theory emphasizes on self-Knowledge and necessary job information for decision making and this theory has considerable impact on evaluating interests and job methods ( Zonker, 2009 , Persian translation of Yoosefi and Abed, 2011). Four main hypotheses form the central part of this theory, these hypotheses explain personality types and environmental models and demonstrate that how types and models have been assigned and how job, teaching and social phenomena are created by their interaction (Table 1).

1) We can classify individuals one of the six types, realist, and spiritual, art, social, bold and contractual.

2) We can classify environments in one of the six types, realistic, exploratory, art, social, boldly and contractual.

3) Individuals search for environments that could put into practice their skills and abilities.

4) Behavior will be determined by interaction between personality and environment.

Above four hypotheses are completed by fire secondary hypotheses (homology, differentiation, identity, forecast, match) which are true about individuals and environments. The purpose of hypotheses or secondary concepts, is adjustment or determination of forecasts that is derived from basic concepts.

Regarding theoretical patterns, various studies practically prove that individual personality types can have relationship with job factors like stress.

For example in a research related to general health and personality types with health center staff job satisfaction by Bakhshayesh (2013) , he achieved this result that general health relationship with neurosis type is direct and has no relationship with extroversion, agreeableness, flexibility and responsibility. Public health relationship with three factors of job satisfaction that is, nature of work, job promotion, salary and total score of job satisfaction was reverse and had no relationship with satisfaction with coworkers and supervisors. Low public health was associated with neuroticism and good public health had relationship with extrovert personality type and agreeableness. Also low public health was associated with low job satisfaction and vice versa. In this study, in

relation to personality types and job satisfaction, there was a correlation between satisfaction with the nature of work and extroversion.

Table 1. Unique characteristics of John Halland’s personality types.

Taghizadeh (2012) relating to John Halland’s bold, art and social personality types with teachers job stress, found that there is a reverse and significant relationship between art type and job stress, significant and negative relationship between social type and job stress and significant relationship between bold type and job stress. In a research as investigating the relationship between personality traits with primary teachers’ burnout in Tabriz, this result was found that among personality traits, extroversion, flexibility and conscientiousness have more effect on teachers’ burnout. Regression analysis manifested that conscientiousness had the greatest impact on job burnout. In investigation of personality role in inhibition of stress on police officers in India, Suburban (2012) found that various personality traits in police officers causes to deal with stress forces in different ways. In another study, in investigating the personality impact on working stress. Tomas (2003) argued that there is a meaningful relationship between different aspects of personality and prevailing thinking on work among nurses in Italy, Hungary, Britain and U.S.A.

In investigation the relationship between job stress, job satisfaction and quality of life in anesthetist nurses of southern Taiwan. Chen et al. (2014) concluded that there is a significant relationship between variables of age, monthly overtime, working conditions, intention to resign with amount of job stress in nurses. In a research that was conducted by Menon (2012) as a relationship between type of personality and It professionals stress, found that evident personality traits and attributes such as high ambition, anger, hostility and distrust can be effective on mental and physical health and also argued that there is a positive and direct relationship between type of personality and amount of job stress and personality type A is more exposed of risk of work related stress. In another study that was conducted by Fontana & Abouserie (2012) as the level of stress and gender and personality factors in teachers, it was shown that 76/2% have experienced an average level of stress and 23/2% a serious level of stress. A significant correlation was achieved between stress and neurotic, this research result demonstrated that extroversion and neuroticism are the best predictor of job stress and it seems that personality has more effect on job stress than other factors such as age and gender. In a research about job stress and psychopathology and occupational health. Iliceto et al. (2012) have introduced the job stress as multivariate process include source of mental pressure, mental and physical turmoil. Job stress results have been stated as dissatisfaction with work, depression, anxiety, mental disorders, hopelessness or even suicidal thoughts.

In a study as diagnosis psychosomatic and source of stress in Hong Kong teachers, Jin et al. (2008) aimed to survey the relationship between psychosomatic symbols and source of stress in Hong Kong teachers, this research results indicate that among the six key factors, in teachers working stress such as student’s issues, role of others, non-school officials’ duties schedule, high volume of work and lack of necessary information, high volume of work shows the most correlation. However all the studied cases, had relationship with psychosomatic symbols. Also in a study by Ferrari Occhionero (2010) . He surveyed the jobs tress and burnout in teachers, his research results indicated that there is a significant relationship between job stress in female and male teachers. Matsui & Onglatco (1992) surveyed the moderating role of job self-efficacy in relation to job stress and its outcomes in a sample of female staff in Japan. Findings showed that individuals with low self-efficacy when the work pressure and responsibility was high, indicated high levels of job stress. Stresses were more frightening for those who had low self-confidence.

Job stress has negative impact on self-efficacy, mental health, positive performance and teachers’ relationship and this effect is also observable in students’ educational process. As it was stated, various inner and outer factors are precursor to job stress and one of the most important of them is dissimilarity of individual personality type with the job that she/he chooses. As individual personality type shows the type of coping in person with different situations and these types should be especially considered as career and education guidance (Montazer & Gheib, 2012) . Regarding theoretical background and mentioned items, general purpose of this research is to investigate the relationship between personality types generally and separation of John Halland’s realist, exploratory and contractual type with job stress in guidance and high-school teachers of Rasht.

2. Methodology


The main hypothesis:

There is a significant relationship between personality types and teachers job stress.

1) There is a significant relationship between realist personality type and teachers job stress.

2) There is a significant relationship between exploratory personality type and teachers’ job stress.

3) There is a significant relationship between contractual personality type and teachers job stress.

3. Research Questions

In which of demographic variables of gender, antecedent, education, and teachers’ marital status, there is a significant difference from personality type relationship with job stress aspect?

4. Research Method

This research is correlation type that the criterion (dependent) variable of job stress (independent) variable of personality traits and method of gathering information is field type. Statistic Society of this research is all male and female teachers in guidance and high-school level of areas 1 and 2 in Rasht that their total number is 2255. Among employed teachers of guidance and high-school in city of Rasht region 1 and 2327 were selected by Kerjeci and Morgan table through multi-stage cluster sampling method. Two different methods have been used in this research, descriptive statistic which includes tables and diagrams and descriptive statistic indicators like central indicators and distribution and deductive statistic for evaluating the relationship between predictor and criterion variables from Pearson correlation coefficient r, linear regression and multivariate variance analysis (Manova).

5. Instruments

Two personality-job questionnaires and Filip’s job stress have John Halland’s have been used:

A) One of the used instruments in this research is John Halland’s job-personality questionnaires (1971). This test has been written by John Halland and based on his job-personality theory that classifies individuals and job environments to 6 types or environmental model of realist, explorer, contractual, Social, bold and art, this questionnaire has 45 phrases that they see in themselves and the highest score the person gets from answering to each of the personality types of realist, explorer, and contractual, 15 separate phrases and special to that personality type has been considered.

5.1. Validity

Comprehensive and increasing use of this instrument in job and personality dimensions and also education proves its high validity

5.2. Reliability

For achieving reliability, this questionnaire was conducted on 45 tastes of 9 job groups. Achieved reliability was calculated by Cronbach’s Alfa and questions homogeneity indicator was equal to 88% (Montazer & Vakikhanzhad, 2012) .

B) Another used instrument of this research is Philip Rice’s job stress scale (1992) which has 40 items and gives us information about job stress. This questionnaire has sub-scales of interrelationships, physical status and job interests. Questionnaire sentences (1 - 22), have been collected for evaluating existence problems in interrelationships and job satisfaction or dissatisfaction. After that, questions have been devoted to physical status that causes daily fatigue, and the third part of questionnaire has been devoted to job interests, that estimates this factor questions (32 - 40). This test has no limitation, but most testes finish it within 30 minutes. Scoring of this test is conducted in five-point Likert scale as (1 = never, 2 = rarely, 3 = Sometimes, 4 = often, 5 = most of the time). Final scoring is conducted by answer key and job stress score is achieved by total sum of score. Hatami (1998) investigated Philip Rice’s job stress questionnaire for 275 samples of school teachers. Amount of calculated reliability was achieved 89% by Chronbach’s Alfa and amount of Validity for whole questionnaire 921% and for three sub-scales of interrelationships, physical status and job interests is 89%, 88% and 88% in order. Rice (1992) argued Cronbach’s Alfa of this questionnaire 92%. Also questionnaire Cronbach’s Alfa of this research on a sample of 30 persons is similar to main sample of 78%.

6. Findings

First main hypothesis: there is a relationship between personality types and teachers job stress.

Table 2 shows that in this hypothesis for evaluating the relationship between personality type and teachers job stress, Pearson correlation coefficient has been used and significant level of personality type and job stress also has been estimated. According to achieved results in above table, with 95% of confidence we can say that there is a reverse correlation between individuals’ personality type and their amount of job stress. That is, it seems that with increasing score in personality types, their amount of stress decreases.

Table 3 shoes that after evaluating the relationship between personality types with criterion variable (job stress) from three predictor variables, with 95% of confidence we can say that there is a significant and reverse relationship just between contractual personality type with job stress and explorer and realist personality type has no significant relationship with job stress.

Sub-hypotheses Regression:

Table 4 shoes that according to multiple regression equation indicators, it was demonstrated that because among three predictors in regression equation just contractual personality remains, it lonely processes about 1/5% of changes in criterion variable that is stress.

Table 5 shows that above variance analysis shows that multiple regression equation is liner equation. That is, its predictable criterion variable.

Table 6 shows that in above regression coefficients tables, it’s evident that contractual personality predictor variable can lonely process about 12% of criterion changes. But this relationship is negative, that is with increasing score in contractual personality, the amount of stress decreases.

As it was stated first, in the main research question we look for investigating the relationship between job stress and personality types with demographic variables, that descriptive indicators and different levels of variables are as shown in Table 7:

Table 8 shoes that according that based on Wilks Lambda’s test result in an above table it was evident that with 95% of confidence we can say that, linear combination of personality types, job stress and among employed

Table 2. Main hypothesis.

“Pearson correlation coefficient at level 0/05”.

Table 3. Sub-hypotheses.

“Pearson correlation coefficient at level 0/05*”.

Table 4. Multiple regression.

Table 5. Analysis of multiple regression variance.

Table 6. Regression coefficients.

Table 7. Descriptive indicators of questions.

Table 8. Multivariate variance tests of research question factors.

female and male (teachers) has significant difference. In another words, based on achieved average scores from teachers job stress scale in table number 7-descriptive indicator of questions-male teachers have higher job stress them female teachers. It’s necessary to say that in other demographic variables based on Wilks Lambda’s test result, significant difference has not been achieved in their related different groups that was referred to it in descriptive indicators table of research question (Table 7).

7. Discussions and Conclusions

7.1. Main Hypothesis: There Is a Significant Relationship between Personality Type and Teachers Job Stress

Research result showed that there is a reverse correlation between individuals’ personality type and their amount of job stress. That is, with 95% confidence we can say that it’s seems the more amount of individuals score in personality types, their job stress decreases, and vice versa.

Personality traits and features have highlight and effective role on individual’s behavioral characteristics. In a way that everybody based on his/her personality type deals with events and situations that he/she copes with it. Role of personality types is effective in personal life and various aspects of social life, that is, a community that person has relationship with environment and others.

This relationship also appears in situations like workplace and employment. It’s necessary to say that individuals are not always compatible with these situations and get into troubles as job stress. As it was mentioned to personality types in individuals life style, it’s clear that everybody based on his/her exclusive personality traits deals with various stressful and pressuring events and those specifications determine that how the person reacts and acts to considered situation.

This result is indirectly Consistent with Bakhshayesh (2013) , Rasouli (2011), Aghili Nezhad (2007) , Subburaj & Shunmuga (2012) , Montazer Gheib (2012) , Esfandiyari (2012) , Safari & Goodarzi (2009) , Sshwartez and Sugi’s (2010) researches. As Rasouli (2012) argued in his research, there is a significant relationship between individuals personality type and their job specifications such as job satisfaction and stress and we can provide employees by training necessary skills and selection based on personality types in mental health occupations. In other mentioned researches also there is a significant relationship between personality traits, characteristics and types of research samples with amount of job stress, type of dealing with stressful events and coping strategies with stress.

7.2. First Sub-Hypothesis: There Is a Relationship between Realist Personality Type and Teachers’ Job Stress

After statistical analysis, this hypothesis was rejected with 95% confidence. In the other words, it was evident that there is no significant relationship between realist personality type and teachers job stress.

As individuals with personality type of realist, self-efficacy-unanimous-persistent-normal-practical-strict and self-centered appears in situations especially in their jobs, it can process that because of existing such positive personality traits for compatibility and success in activities, job stress will not be such that destroy and affect their personality and job situation and if deal with stressful issues in job situations they will deal with stress in a compatible and efficient way. So it’s clear that individuals with such characteristics cannot have a significant relationship with job stress.

This result is indirectly consistent with Reza Khani (2012) , Gangi et al. (2009), Narimani & Abbasi (2004) , Lu et al. (2005) , Togad and Fredricson (2004) and Montazer Cheib’s research results.

7.3. Second Sub-Hypothesis: There Is a Significant Relationship between Explorer Personality Type and Teachers Job Stress

Statistical analysis of this research also indicates that with 95% confidence we can say that there is no significant relationship between explorer personality type and job stress and this hypothesis was rejected.

As individuals who are in explorer personality type, use search―oriented authorities for solving problems that exist in work and other environments, consider themselves as researcher, intellectual, analyst, creative, logical, introvert, and having scientific and mathematics abilities, the characteristics within them, causes to deal with less job stress in coping with incompatible events and solve pressure from incompatible situation by analysis and presenting reasonable solutions and even not to deal with it and direct the path to career advancement. This result is consistent with Chen et al. (2009) . Rice (2006) , Hajlou (2012), Ahmadi, et al.’s findings (2011). Ahmadi (2011) argues in his study that one way to success and progress of an organization is creativity of its staff and this creativity results in presenting plans, ideas and analysis and research that, in turn all of these prevent job stress and also with increasing such specifications, individuals’ job stress decreases and job satisfaction increases.

7.4. Third Sub-Hypothesis: There Is a Significant Relationship between Contractual Personality Type and Teachers Job Stress

Statistical analysis results indicate that there is a significant relationship between contractual personality type and teacher’s job stress, that with 95% confidence we can say that there is a significant and reverse relationship between contractual personality type and teacher’s job stress, in another words with increasing score in contractual personality, amount of job stress decreases and vice versa. Here we can say that because these individuals have characteristics that prefer works such as simple, regular, and orderly activities, foresight, extroversion, self-efficacy, follow up, and compatibility of duty is high in these subjects and we can say that with increasing and reinforcement of such personality traits in subjects, we can prevent appearance of job stress and have job success. This result is indirectly consistent with Montazer Gheib (2012) , Mostaghni (2012) , Safari & Goodarzi (2009) , Garcia et al. (2005) and Brich’s researches (2003) . Safari & Goodarzi (2009) argue that characteristics such as loyalty and work commitment can reduce job incompatible events that cause physical and mental destruction. Furthermore, Mostaghni (2012) states in his research that there is a negative and significant relationship between work commitment and accountability with job stress.

This research has limitations that result in cautious in generalize findings that are: for acquiring information we have to use questionnaire, lack of cooperation and interest in teachers because their previous research results have not been reflected, is observed in teachers. In the process of research and data collection, lack of time is seen as a limitation.

Useful points that can get from this research is that, with regard to personality traits relationship with teachers job stress, it’s necessary that education authorities regard teachers personality traits in addition to general and specific conditions set out in the regulations. Realist and explorer types because of lacking significant relationship and contractual type for reverse relationship with job stress are seem suitable for teacher ship and teaching position.

Cite this paper

Abbas Sadeghi,Gholam Hossein Niyafar,Ali Hossein Pour,Anita Zamani,Fatemeh Gholami, (2016) Relationship between Personality Types and Job Stress among Teachers at First Period (Guidance Schools) and Second Period of High School (Secondary Schools). Creative Education,07,544-553. doi: 10.4236/ce.2016.73056


  1. 1. Aghili Nezhad, M. (2007). Investigation the Relationship of Job Stress with Mental Health, Personality Type, and Stressful Events of Life in Tehran Driving Police Officers (Research in Medical). Research Journal of Medical College, 31, 44-51.

  2. 2. Ahmadi, A. (2011). Relationship between Organizational Creativity and Job Satisfaction with Job Stress among Agricultural Staff in Fars Province. Journal of New Things about Industry/Organizational Psychology, 8, 71-84.

  3. 3. Bakhshayesh, A. (2013). Investigation the Relationship between General Health and Personality Types with Staff Job Satisfaction of Sanitary Center in Yazd. Medical College Journal at University of Medical Science in Tehran, 7, 20-26.

  4. 4. Brich, P. L. (2003). The Need for an Operational Definition of Burnout. Family and Community Health, 6, 12-24.

  5. 5. Chan, D. W., & Hui, E. K. P. (2009). Burnout and Coping among Chinese Secondary Teachers in Hong Kong. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 65, 15-25.

  6. 6. Chen, Y., Shin, A., Hsiang, H., & Tang Fan, K. (2009). The Effect of Organizational Change on Team Creativity. ASBBS Annual Conference on Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment, and Work Performance, 33-41.

  7. 7. Chirt & Chen (2014). The Correlations between Work Stress, Job Satisfaction and Quality of Life among Nurse Anesthetists Working in Medical Centers in Southern Taiwan. Nursing and Health, 2, 35-47.

  8. 8. DDI: Development Dimensioned International (1997). Yearly Report. N. J.

  9. 9. Esfandiyari, Z. (2012). Relationship between Personality Traits and Coping Strategies and Job Stress in Nurses. Nurse Management Journal, 6, 12-17.

  10. 10. Ferrari Occhionero, J. W. (2010). Factors That Influence Nurses’ Job Satisfaction. Journal of Nursing Administration, 33, 293-299.

  11. 11. Fontana, D., & Abouserie, R. (2012). Stress Levels, Gender and Personality Factors in Teachers. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 261-270.

  12. 12. Garcia, F. J., Munoz, E. M., & Pandoritz, M. A. (2005). Personality and Contextual Variables in Teacher Burnout. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 929-940.

  13. 13. Gheib, M. (2012) Relationship of John Haland’s Burnout and Personality Types among Elementary-Schools Teachers and Principals. Journal of Job and Organizational Consultation, No. 10, 33-38.

  14. 14. Halland, J. L. (1997). What Is Your Suitable Job? Translation of Simin Hosen Niyan and MonavarYazdi, Tehran: Physical Perfection, AEGON Print, 26.

  15. 15. Hatami, M. (1998). Determining the Tension of Employed and Unemployed Mothers in Terms of Child Mother Characteristics and Effect of Distress Therapy on Its Reduction. PhD Thesis, Tehran: Allameh Tabatabai University.

  16. 16. Iliceto, P. et al. (2012). Occupational Stress and Psychopathology in Health Professionals: An Explorative Study with the Multiple Indicators Multiple Causes (MIMIC) Model Approach. Stress: The International Journal on the Biology of Stress, 16, 143-152.

  17. 17. Jin, J., Yeung, A., Tang, T.-O., & Low, R. (2008). Identifying Teachers at Risk in Hong Kong: Psychosomatic Symptoms and Sources of Stress. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 65, 357-362.

  18. 18. Kokkins, C. M. (2009). Job Stressors, Personality and Burnout in Primary School Teachers. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 229-243.

  19. 19. Kyriacou, C., & Sutcliffe, J. (1989). Teacher Stress: Prevalence, Sources and Symptoms. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 48, 159-167.

  20. 20. Lu, C.-Q., Siu, O.-L., & Cooper, C. L. (2005). Managers’ Occupational Stress in China: The Role of Self-Efficacy. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 569-578.

  21. 21. Matsui, T., & Onglatco, M.-L. (1992). Career Self-Efficacy as a Moderator of Relation between Occupational Stress and Strain. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 41, 79-88.

  22. 22. McCormick, J. (2012). An Attribution Model of Teachers’ Occupational Stress and Job Satisfaction in Large Educational Systems. Work and Stress, 11, 17-32.

  23. 23. Menon, P. (2012). Personality Type and Stress of It Professionals. International Journal of Current Research, 4, 195-196.

  24. 24. Millon, T. (1990). Toward a New Personality. New York: Wiley.

  25. 25. Mostaghni (2012) Relationship of Personality Traits and Psychology Obstinacy with Nurses Mental-Job Pressure at Public Hospitals in Shiraz. Journal of Knowledge and Research in Applied Psychology, No. 11, 124-132.

  26. 26. Narimani, M., & Abbasi, M. (2004) Investigation the Relationship between Psychology Obstinacy and Self-Tolerant with Burnout. Journal of Behavioral Sciences, No. 9, 18-23.

  27. 27. Rasouli, Z. (2012) Relationship between Job Satisfaction and Personality Traits with Army Staff Mental Health. Journal of Scientific Research, 6, 16-21.

  28. 28. Reza Khani, S (2012) Different Personality Types Strategies for Getting along with Mental Pressures. Journal of Alzahra University, No. 8, 66-63.

  29. 29. Rice, G. (2006). Individual Values, Organizational Context, and Self-Perceptions of Employee Creativity: Evidence from Egyptian Organizations. Journal of Business Research, 59, 233-241.

  30. 30. Safari, S., & Goodarzi, H. (2009) Investigation the Relationship between Personality Traits with Burnout among Faculty Members and Islamic Free University Staff. Journal of Educational Leadership and Management (Free University of Garmsar), No. 16, 85-101.

  31. 31. Shafie Abadi, A. (2011). Career and Professional Guidance and Consultation and Ideas of Choosing Job. Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance.

  32. 32. Subburaj, A. M., & Shunmuga, S (2012). Big Five Personality Traits—A Tool for Managing Stress. Tactful Management Research Journal, 1, 19-25.

  33. 33. Taghizadeh, F. (2012). Investigation the Relationship between John Haland’s Art, Bold and Social Types and Teachers’ Burnout, Guide. Thesis, Tehran: Allameh Tabataba’i University.

  34. 34. Zonker, V. (2009). Consulting Career with a Holistic Approach. Translators: Yousefi and Abedi. University of Isfahan Publication.