Table 1.
ProQoL scores.
Table 2.
Comparison of age, years of experience, alexithymia and altruism between men and women.
Figure 1.
Comparison of (A) empathy subscores, (B) professional quality of life subscores, and (C) work-related personal perceptions between male and female participants.
Error bars in A and B represent S. E. M.
Table 3.
Dispositional measures.
Table 4.
Multiple regression analysis on the positive (CS) and negative (BO, STS) aspects of professional quality of life.
Figure 2.
Factor analysis on dispositional measures revealed two principal components.
Table 5.
Principal Component Analyses (PCA) including IRI and ProQoL subscales.
Table 6.
Principal Component Analyses (PCA) including IRI, ProQoL, TAS-20, ALT subscales.
Figure 3.
Empathy subdomain scores for participants (A) in the low, average, and high groups across the different aspects of professional quality of life and (B) grouped based on their compassion satisfaction (CS) and compassion fatigue (CF) profiles.
Error bars are S. E. M.
Figure 4.
Comparison of (A) professional quality of life and (B) empathy across physicians who had no alexithymia, borderline alexithymia and alexithymia, as determined by their scores on the TAS-20.
Figure 5.
The top of the figure shows correlations between the tendency to favor indirect altruistic acts and the different aspects of professional quality of life.
Favoring indirect, abstract, helping behaviors was associated with higher scores of compassion satisfaction. The bar graphs compare scores on Compassion Satisfaction, Burnout, and Secondary Traumatic Stress between physicians who favor direct (ALT-D>ALT-I) and indirect (ALT-I>ALT-D) helping behaviors. Error bars are SEM. Grey dots/bars represent preferably direct helpers, while black bars represent preferably indirect helpers.
Figure 6.
Summary findings from the present study highlighting the positive associations between individual dispositions and the positive and negative aspects of professional quality of life.
Values shown next to each arrow represent beta coefficients derived from simple linear regression analyses (i.e. each individual disposition’s effect on the corresponding ProQoL domain).