Emotion-rule dissonance and job satisfaction: A moderated mediation model of work engagement and hotel segment

Silvia Ortiz-Bonnin; María Esther García-Buades

doi:10.1515/tw-2022-0022

Article Open Access

Emotion-rule dissonance and job satisfaction: A moderated mediation model of work engagement and hotel segment

Silvia Ortiz-Bonnin
Dr. Silvia Ortiz-Bonnin is an Asisstant Professor of Work and Organizational Psychology at University of the Balearic Islands (UIB). Ctra. Valldemossa, km 7.5. Guillem Cifre. CP07122, Palma de Mallorca, Spain. E-mail: silvia.ortiz@uib.es. Her research focuses on psychosocial work conditions and wellbeing in hospitality and tourism industry. Silvia was a visiting research student at Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main and she taught at the Università del Salento (Erasmus +) https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1896-1048
and María Esther García-Buades
Dr. María Esther García-Buades is a Senior Lecturer at the Faculty of Psychology, University of the Balearic Islands (UIB), Ctra. Valldemossa, km 7.5. Guillem Cifre. CP07122, Palma de Mallorca, Spain. E-mail: esther.garcia@uib.es. Her research interests include psychosocial work conditions in the hospitality industry, well-being, performance, and service quality. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8596-1481

Published/Copyright: March 17, 2023

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Submit Manuscript Author Information Explore this Subject

From the journal Zeitschrift für Tourismuswissenschaft Volume 15 Issue 1

Abstract

Traditional hospitality and tourism literature has underestimated the importance of hotel segment (resort hotels vs. urban hotels) for the effects of emotional-rule dissonance in frontline employees. The present study analyses the relationships among emotion-rule dissonance, work engagement, job satisfaction, and hotel segment through a moderated mediation model. A sample of 131 frontline employees of Spanish hotels completed self-reported measures at two time points. Results revealed that the effect of emotion-rule dissonance on job satisfaction through lower work engagement was only significant in urban hotels, suggesting that emotion-rule dissonance was more harmful for urban hotel employees. This paper provides new insights into the way emotion-rule dissonance decreases job satisfaction and offers advice for managers to enable them to prevent its detrimental impact, particularly in urban hotels.

Keywords: emotion-rule dissonance; job satisfaction; work engagement; hotel segment; resort hotel; urban hotel

1 Introduction

Research on emotion work or emotional labour in the tourist and hospitality industry has a long tradition. Emotion work is a job demand that involves suppressing or expressing certain emotions during interaction with customers. Specifically, hospitality employees are often required to be friendly and nice during service interactions to comply with customers’ and hoteliers’ expectations (Hofmann & Stokburger-Sauer, 2017). Sometimes, the required emotions do not match with the emotions felt by an employee in a particular situation; this gap between felt and required emotions refers to as emotion-rule dissonance (Holman et al., 2008).

Emotion-rule dissonance is critical for hospitality employee’s wellbeing because suppressing emotions to express certain emotions can lead to emotional discomfort that in turn causes job dissatisfaction (Cheung & Tang, 2010; Zapf, 2002; Zito et al., 2018) A recent systematic review (Lee & Madera, 2019) and a meta-analysis (Xu et al., 2020) suggest the lack of mediating models when examining the impact of emotion-rule dissonance on employees’ wellbeing. To respond to this call, the present study selects work engagement as a mediator in the relationship between emotion-rule dissonance and job satisfaction. There is evidence about the negative relationship between emotion-rule dissonance and work engagement (Pace & Sciotto, 2020; Xanthopoulou et al., 2013) and the positive relationship between work engagement and job satisfaction (Bakker, 2011; Moura et al., 2014); however, no study to date has examined whether engagement mediates the emotion-rule dissonance – job satisfaction link. Therefore, following the circumplex model (Warr & Inceoglu, 2012), this study explores whether hotel employees that feel emotion-rule dissonance may find it difficult to engage in their work, which in turn would decrease their job satisfaction.

Although the vast majority of research has concluded that emotion-rule dissonance harms employees’ wellbeing (Hofmann & Stokburger-Sauer, 2017; Ortiz-Bonnin et al., 2021; Ortiz-Bonnín et al., 2016; Zapf et al., 2021). Kern et al. (2021) have recently argued that emotion-rule dissonance is not always negative and its negative character depends on the context (i. e. boundary conditions) in which it takes place (e. g. characteristics of the service interactions). As far as we know, no studies have considered whether the effects of emotion-rule dissonance on employees’ wellbeing depend on third contextual variables such as hotel segment. This is noteworthy since there is large interest in studying segmentation in the hospitality industry because it helps in designing policies or products that can increase profitability (Jackman & Naitram, 2021). To fill this gap, the present study explores the impact of emotion-rule dissonance on employees’ job satisfaction and work engagement in two main hotel segments in Spain as a major tourism destination: resort hotels (which are usually located on the coast, present high seasonality, and accommodate leisure customers) and urban hotels (usually located in the city, present low seasonality, and frequently accommodate business customers).

This research makes three important contributions. First, the design of the present study is time-lagged with two waves of data collection, which allows establishing predictive relationships between emotion-rule dissonance, work engagement, and job satisfaction. Furthermore, we complement previous research on emotion work, which typically reports cross-sectional data (Lee & Madera, 2019; Xu et al., 2020). Second, this study contributes to the field of human resources in the tourism and hospitality industry by considering its heterogeneity through the incorporation of hotel segment in our study model. Third, the current study focuses on job satisfaction and work engagement, which are a priority issue for hotel managers. Satisfied and engaged staff provide a high-quality service which is very important in generating organizational competitive advantage (Dirisu et al., 2018; García-Buades et al., 2016; Shuck & Wollard, 2010). Given the strong competitiveness in the hospitality industry, there is a need for understanding the relationship between emotion-rule dissonance, work engagement and job satisfaction in different hotel segments.

In sum, the research question of the current study is whether the impact of emotion-rule dissonance (time 1) on job satisfaction (time 2) through work engagement (time 2) is different for employees that work in resort hotels and urban hotels (see Figure 1).

2 Literature review

2.1 Work engagement and job satisfaction

Job satisfaction and work engagement are essential for employees’ wellbeing. Job satisfaction refers to a positive emotional response toward various facets of one’s job such as pay, promotion and work itself, among others (Smith et al., 1969). Thus, it reflects “the extent to which people like their jobs” (Spector, 1996, p. 214). Work engagement is defined as a “positive, fulfilling, work-related state of mind that is characterized by vigor, dedication, and absorption” (Schaufeli et al., 2002, p. 72). Vigor refers to high energy levels, mental resilience and willingness to invest effort while working. Dedication is manifested by enthusiasm, inspiration and pride related to the job. Absorption is characterized by full concentration and happiness at work. As indicated by Schaufeli et al. (2002) and Bakker and Albrecht (2018), engaged employees experience positive states such as enjoyment and enthusiasm while working. Besides, they feel energetic and connected with their job, which turns into high levels of organizational commitment, job performance, and extra-role behaviors (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2004; Sonnentag, 2003).

In line with the circumplex model (Warr & Inceoglu, 2012), job satisfaction and work engagement refer a to a positive state towards the job and the work environment but they differ in their level of activation. Job satisfaction is a passive state, whereas work engagement is an energized state. In fact, Rich et al. (2010) described engagement as a “motivational concept”. Further, several studies confirm that job satisfaction and engagement are positively related (Alarcon & Lyons, 2011; Giallonardo et al., 2010) and, more specifically, work engagement precedes job satisfaction (Bakker, 2011; Moura et al., 2014). They argue that engaged employees tend to have more positive experiences partially because they feel committed to and enthusiastic about their work. Further, engaged employees find their daily tasks interesting and motivating, which increases their job satisfaction.

2.2 Emotion work: emotion-rule dissonance

Emotion work is defined as the requirement to display organizationally desired emotions during service interactions (Zapf, 2002). Based on the job characteristics approach (Zapf et al., 1999), emotion work comprises different dimensions (the requirement to display positive emotions, negative emotions, neutral emotions, sensitivity towards customers’ emotions, and emotion-rule dissonance). In this study, we focus on emotion-rule dissonance which is defined as the discrepancy between organizationally desired emotions and employees’ real emotions (Zapf, 2002).

Emotion-rule dissonance is frequent among frontline hospitality employees because their jobs generally require being friendly and nice even when interacting with impatient, aggressive or demanding customers, which usually elicits negative emotional reactions (Pizam, 2004). Additionally, working conditions in the hospitality industry are mostly poor (for example, staff shortages, lack of adequate communication or coordination within and between departments, overbooking or high workload (Poulston, 2009). These poor working conditions might lead to stressful situations that make it difficult to display the appropriate emotions, thus leading to emotion-rule dissonance.

According to the challenge-hindrance model (Lepine et al., 2005), challenge demands tend to be viewed as stressful demands that have the potential to promote learning, goal attainment and personal growth (for example, high workload); and hindrance demands tend to be appraised as stressful demands that have the potential to threat learning and goal attainment, and harm personal growth (for example, role conflict). Challenges are associated to positive outcomes such as personal growth and development (Crawford et al., 2010), whereas hindrances lead to stress (Van den Broeck et al., 2010). Following this theoretical model, emotion rule-dissonance can be characterized as a hindrance stressor (Kern et al., 2021). In this vein, the overwhelming majority of previous studies has shown that emotion-rule dissonance impairs employees’ wellbeing and it is associated with other negative indicators such as low organizational commitment and performance (Dormann & Kaiser, 2002; Hülsheger & Schewe, 2011; Lu & Guy, 2014; Morris & Feldman, 1996; Pugh et al., 2011). Emotion-rule dissonance leads employees to experience a specific form of person-role conflict due to the discrepancy between felt and required emotions. When employees feel emotion-rule dissonance they might decide between: a) showing the required positive emotions leading to feelings of inauthenticity or b) showing their genuine felt emotion ignoring the emotional job requirement (also called display rule), failing in their service delivery and leading to stress. In sum, emotion-rule dissonance hinders work and requires more effort from employees (Kern et al., 2021).

Thus, following the challenge-hindrance model we hypothesize:

H1a:	Emotion-rule dissonance will be negatively related to work engagement

H1b:	Emotion-rule dissonance will be negatively related to job satisfaction.

2.3 The mediating role of work engagement

Recent studies have demonstrated that work engagement might act as mediator between individual variables (e. g. trait emotional intelligence or proactive personality) and job satisfaction (Gong et al., 2020; Li et al., 2017). Given that emotion-rule dissonance is expected to diminish work engagement according to the challenge-hindrance model, and that work engagement has been shown to predict job satisfaction (Bakker, 2011; Moura et al., 2014), it is logical to anticipate that work engagement can mediate the relationship between emotion-rule dissonance and job satisfaction. In other words, we propose a direct time-lagged relationship between emotion-rule dissonance (time 1) and job satisfaction (time 2) and an indirect link through work engagement (time 2). Specifically, we suggest that emotion-rule dissonance acts as a hindrance stressor diminishing work engagement, which in turn impairs job satisfaction. Since direct effects are expected, only partial mediation is hypothesized:

H2.	Work engagement will partially mediate the negative relationship between emotion-rule dissonance and job satisfaction.

2.4 The moderating role of hotel segment

Hotel segmentation can aid to identify and separate customers into groups with similar wants and needs (Dolnicar, 2002). Literature on tourism has reported many examples of market or hotel segmentations, such as motivations, spending or quality (Aksu et al., 2021; Ismail et al., 2021; Jeong et al., 2018). Noteworthy, the literature focuses on the customer, not the employee, and most often it examines tourist behaviors and hotel preferences (e. g. Falcão et al., 2019; Jackman & Naitram, 2021). Given this literature gap, this study explores the role of hotel segment from the employee perspective. Specifically, this study is focused on two typical hotel segments in Spain: urban hotels and resort hotels. Urban and resort hotels present some differences (e. g. the type of customers they accommodate) that might influence employees’ performance of emotion work and its effects on wellbeing.

First, resort hotels are a popular accommodation option for leisure travelers. Leisure travelers often interact with employees and the service encounter is usually long and personalized. Service encounters in resorts demand employees to manage their emotions to ensure quality customer experiences and to produce a unique environment (Brey, 2010). Resort customers expect interacting with employees who are friendly, empathetic and polite, who contribute to enjoy their vacations. Indeed, resort hotel’s employees and guests build a special relationship throughout their stay contributing meaningfully to the service experience (Ariffin & Maghzi, 2012). Further, the professionalism in resort hotels depends on the capacity of the employee to give personalized suggestions (Yang & Chan, 2010). In this vein, a qualitative study carried in family resort hotels found that the lack of personalization towards children ages and interests was a source of dissatisfaction for parents (Khoo-Lattimore et al., 2015). By contrast, urban hotels are usually associated with business customers and service encounters are less frequent, shorter, and more standardized (i. e. check-in, check-out, or dealing with specific questions) than in resort hotels, because urban customers spend most of their day outside the hotel facilities (e. g. visiting customers or suppliers, meeting with clients or companies, attending congresses) or they stay in their rooms resting or working. In this vein, business customers are less dependent and involved with hotel staff to the point that urban customers present positive attitudes and benefits toward being served by robots (Zhong et al., 2022). Therefore, since the “enjoyment goal” is less relevant for business travelers because they give priority to other functional and tangible aspects (e. g. equipment and physical facilities, Sánchez-Franco et al., 2016), urban hotel employees might perceive emotion work less legitimate than employees that work in resorts for whom emotion work is a core task.

Second, resort hotels are typically located on the coast and present a seasonal concentration of demand in the Summer months (Fernández-Morales & Mayorga-Toledano, 2008); whereas urban hotels are usually located in the city and present lower seasonal fluctuations in demand (Law, 2002). Seasonality entails longer and irregular working hours, excess of workload, insufficient training during the high season, and a higher percentage of temporary contracts (Hoel & Stale, 2003; Lo & Lamm, 2005; McNamara et al., 2011). Hence, seasonality has some negative implications for employees, such as job stress (Cox et al., 2000), which hinders being nice and friendly with customers, that is, the performance of emotion work.

In light of the differences between working in a resort and urban hotel due to seasonality and the perception of the legitimacy of emotion work, it is interesting to explore the role or hotel segment in the relationship between emotion-rule dissonance, work engagement and job satisfaction. Specifically, this study examines whether hotel segment moderates (a) the direct link between emotion-rule dissonance and job satisfaction, (b) the direct link between emotion-rule dissonance and work engagement; and (c) the indirect link from emotion-rule dissonance to job satisfaction through work engagement. In other words, we hypothesize that the harmful effects of emotion-rule dissonance will be different among employees who work in resort and urban hotels.

H3a:	Hotel segment moderates the direct link between emotion-rule dissonance and job satisfaction.

H3b:	Hotel segment moderates the direct link between emotion-rule dissonance and work engagement

H3c.	Hotel segment moderates the indirect link between emotion work and job satisfaction through work engagement.

Based on the literature, this study proposes the following research model (see Figure 1)

Figure 1:

The study model

3 Method

3.1 Participants and procedure

We contacted hotel managers via telephone and offered their organizations to participate in the study. Once agreed, trained interviewers administered the questionnaires at the workplace ensuring anonymity and confidentiality of the data. We collected data in two waves with a three months gap between time 1 and time 2. We chose a time lag of 3 months because research has shown that stressors such as emotion-rule dissonance (Zapf, 2002) tend to influence employee outcomes such as engagement or job satisfaction within shorter (i. e. 2 or 4 months) rather than longer (e. g. 6 or 8 months) (Liu et al., 2015; Meier & Spector, 2013). This time lag was also determined by the seasonality of the resort hotels. The first survey was administered from May to June and the second one in September and October, thus just before and after the peak (summer) season in Spain. The sample description below refers to the 131 individuals who completed the two waves. This sample size is similar to existing studies in the hospitality literature in which a time-lag design was used (e. g. Wang et al., 2017).

The participants in this study were 131 frontline employees working in three (38.8 %) and four stars hotels (61.2 %) located on the Spanish Mediterranean coast. Hotels represent two typical segments in Spain: resort hotels (35.1 %) and urban hotels (64.9 %). The average age of respondents was M = 31.57 years (SD = 9.25) and 56 were women (42.7 %). The participants were full-time customer-contact employees who had frequent face-to-face interactions with customers. Specifically, there were receptionists (57.5 %) and waiting staff and the average job tenure was M = 5.57 years (SD = 7.72).

3.2 Instruments

Emotion-rule dissonance was measured using the Spanish version of the Frankfurt Emotion Work Scales (Ortiz-Bonnín et al., 2012). The scale consists of 4 items (e. g. “How often in your job do you have to display emotions that do not agree with your actual feelings towards the clients?”). Each item was rated on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (very rarely/never) to 5 (very often/several times an hour).

Job satisfaction was measured assessing different job facets: satisfaction with the pay, promotion, supervision, co-workers, and tasks. Employees responded to the Kunin Faces Scale by circling the face that indicated how satisfied they were with each job facet (Kunin, 1955) with scores ranging from 1 (extremely dissatisfied) to 7 (extremely satisfied).

Work engagement was assessed with the Spanish version of the Work Engagement Scale (UWES, Schaufeli et al., 2006), made up of 17 items (e. g. “I am enthusiastic about my job”). All items were scored on a 7-point frequency rating scale ranging from 0 (never) to 6 (always). High scores were indicative of engagement.

3.3 Control variables

We controlled for gender, job tenure, and job position in this study because previous research has shown these variables to affect the relationship between emotion work, work engagement, and job satisfaction. Gender was controlled for because men and women deal in a different way with the effects of emotion-rule dissonance (Kruml & Geddes, 2000; Totterdell & Holman, 2003). Besides, “emotion work has been assumed to be typical for ‘female’ jobs” (Tschan et al., 2005, p. 204). Job tenure was included because employees who have more experience in their jobs should reflect more knowledge and practice in dealing with emotion-rule dissonance (Wang et al., 2011). Finally, we controlled for job position (receptionists vs. waiting staff) because different job positions go along with different interaction leeway (Kern et al., 2021; Tschan et al., 2005).

3.4 Data analyses

Descriptive statistics for the study variables and bivariate correlations among emotion-rule dissonance (time 1), work engagement (time 2), and job satisfaction (time 2) were calculated with SPSS 24.0. We tested the study hypotheses executing a number of regression analyses using PROCESS macro (Hayes, 2013). We tested the first hypothesis (the direct effects of emotion-rule dissonance on work engagement and job satisfaction) and second hypothesis (the indirect effect of emotion-rule dissonance on job satisfaction via work engagement), using the Model 4 of the PROCESS macro. The third hypothesis (moderating effects of hotel segment and the moderated mediation model) was assessed by applying the Model 8 of the PROCESS macro. These models are based on a biased-corrected bootstrap with 5000 samples. This technique (Hayes et al., 2017) conducts a more reliable estimation of indirect effects and does not make assumptions about the normality of the sampling distribution, which are often unrealistic (Preacher & Hayes, 2008). The mediation and the moderated mediation models are judged significant (p<.05) when the 95 % confidence interval does not include zero. To facilitate the interpretation of effect sizes, all continuous variables were standardized (z-scored) prior to analysis.

4. Results

4.1 Descriptive results

Prior to the examination of the hypotheses, initial correlations between the study variables were examined. As can be seen in Table 1, high levels of emotion-rule dissonance were negatively associated with work engagement (r = –.22, p < .05) and job satisfaction (r = –.30, p < .001). Additionally, work engagement and job satisfaction were positively correlated (r = .46, p < .001).

4.2 Hypothesis testing

First, the results for the time-lagged direct effects show that emotion-rule dissonance (time 1) is significantly and negatively related to engagement (time 2) (b = –.23, p < .05) and to job satisfaction (time 2) (b = –.19, p < .05). Thus, H1 was supported. Second, the results for the mediating effects of work engagement in the relationship between emotion-rule dissonance and job satisfaction are reported in Figure 2. The results show that the effect of emotion-rule dissonance on job satisfaction was mediated by work engagement over time (b = –.10, BootSE = .04; bootstrap 95 % CI [–.19, –.03]). Thus, H2 was supported.

Third, we evaluated if the time-lagged direct effect of emotion-rule dissonance on job satisfaction and work engagement was moderated by hotel segment. As shown in Table 2, the interaction term “Emotion-rule dissonance × Hotel segment” was significant for work engagement (H3b supported), but not for job satisfaction (H3a not supported). Therefore, the influence of emotion-rule dissonance on work engagement (but not on job satisfaction) was conditioned by hotel segment. Specifically, the simple slopes plotted in Figure 3 revealed that the negative effect of emotion-rule dissonance on work engagement was only significant in urban hotels (b = –.40; se = .09; t = – 4.01; [–.59, –.20]).

Finally, we evaluated if the time-lagged indirect effect of emotion-rule dissonance on job satisfaction via work engagement was conditioned by hotel segment. The index of moderated mediation was –.20 and bootstrapped 95 % CI [–.38, –.06]) indicating a moderating effect of hotel segment on the relationship between emotion-rule dissonance and job satisfaction via work engagement. In other words, the mediating role of work engagement on the relationship between emotion-rule dissonance and job satisfaction differs between resort hotels and urban hotels. Specifically, the effect of emotion-rule dissonance on job satisfaction through work engagement is only significant in urban hotels (b = –.16; bootstrapped 95 % CI [–.28, –.06] (see table 2), thus supporting H3.

Table 1:

Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations Matrix Among Variables

	M	SD	1	2	3
1. Emotion-rule dissonance (T1)	3.12	1.05	--
2. Work Engagement (T2)	4.13	1.09	–.22*	--
3. Job satisfaction (T2)	4.56	1.07	–.30**	.46**	--

Note. N=131. M: mean; SD: standard deviation; p*<.05; p**<.01

Table 2:

Conditional indirect effects of hotel segment on emotion-rule dissonance and job satisfaction via work engagement

	B	SE	t
Work engagement (T2)
Gender^a	.20	.17	1.16
Job position^b	.44*	.17	2.56
Job tenure	.03	.09	.32
ERD (T1)	.11	.13	.79
Hotel segment^c	–.24	.17	–1.39
ERD × Hotel segment	–.51**	.17	–2.95
Job satisfaction (T2)
Gender^a	–.09	.15	–.64
Job position^b	–.07	.15	–.48
Job tenure	–.01	–00	–1.63
Engagement (T2)	.40**	.07	5.12
ERD (T1)	–.15	.12	–1.30
Hotel segment^c	–.11	.15	–.71
ERD × Hotel segment	–.02	.15	–.18
	Boot indirect effect/index	Boot SE	95 % CI
Resort Hotels	.04	.05	[–.05, 15]
Urban Hotels	–.16	.05	[–.28, –.06]
Index of moderated mediation	–.20	.08	[–.38, –.06]

Note. ERD = Emotion-Rule Dissonance; ^a 0 = male, 1 = female; ^b0= waiter staff, 1 = receptionist, ^c0 = resort hotels, 1= urban hotels ^c0 = resort hotels, 1 = urban hotels, p*<.05; p**<.01

Figure 2:

The indirect effect of emotion-rule dissonance (T1) on job satisfaction (T2) via engagement (T2). T1= time 1, T 2= time 2. To simplify the model, the effects of control variables (gender, job tenure and job category) are not presented in figure 2.

Figure 3:

Moderating effect of hotel segment on the prediction of engagement from emotion-rule dissonance.

5 Discussion

Emotion-rule dissonance has been widely studied in the hospitality literature because of its frequency among frontline hospitality employees and the detrimental effects of emotion-rule dissonance on employees’ wellbeing and performance (Hofmann & Stokburger-Sauer, 2017; Ortiz-Bonnin et al., 2021; Ortiz-Bonnín et al., 2016). The present study contributes to the existing literature by investigating the potential role of hotel segment (resort vs. urban hotel) in the relationship between emotion-rule dissonance, work engagement, and job satisfaction. Specifically, the research model suggested a partial mediation of work engagement on the emotion-rule dissonance and job satisfaction connection, and the moderating role of hotel segment in this relationship.

While it is important to address the study model in its entirety, it should be noted that in line with the first hypothesis, this study confirmed a negative association between emotion-rule dissonance (time 1), engagement (time 2), and job satisfaction (time 2) over time. This finding supports the notion that emotion-rule dissonance is a hindrance stressor (see challenge-hindrance model, Lepine et al., 2005) that reduces engagement (Xanthopoulou et al., 2013) as well as job satisfaction (Hofmann & Stokburger-Sauer, 2017).

Additionally, in line with our second hypothesis, emotion-rule dissonance is connected with job satisfaction both directly and indirectly, via work engagement. This finding contributes to existing literature due to the lack of studies regarding the mediating role of work engagement in the relationship between emotion work and job satisfaction. The result demonstrated that emotion-rule dissonance had an indirect negative relation with job satisfaction via decreased work engagement over time. That is, emotion-rule dissonance partially reduces job satisfaction because faking emotions is likely to reduce the energy and the concentration of employees when interacting with customers as well as their pride related to the job. Previous research confirmed that pretending emotions had a negative and significant effect on work engagement (Lu & Guy, 2014), and work engagement has been shown to be a predecessor of job satisfaction (Alarcon & Edwards, 2011; Giallonardo et al., 2010; Yeh, 2013).

Another critical finding of the present study was that hotel segment moderated the direct link between emotion-rule dissonance and work engagement and the indirect relationship between emotion-rule dissonance and job satisfaction via work engagement. This finding is especially relevant when one takes into consideration that the hospitality industry is diverse and working in different hotel segments might affect how employees perceive and are affected by emotion work. Our results show that employees who experienced emotion-rule dissonance reported lower engagement which, subsequently, decreased their job satisfaction in urban hotels. The moderated mediation model was not significant for employees working in resorts.

We suggest two mechanisms may explain why emotion-rule dissonance is detrimental only for urban employees’ wellbeing. First, employees that work in urban hotels may perceive emotion work as less legitimate or a less important task than their counterparts in resort hotels because urban customers give priority to other functional and tangible aspects during their stay (e. g. equipment and physical facilities, Sánchez-Franco et al., 2016). Accordingly, employees that work in urban hotels deal with emotion-rule dissonance by faking in bad faith (i. e. faking the required emotional expression) which negatively affects wellbeing (Abraham, 1998; Adelmann, 1995; Amissah et al., 2021; Semmer et al., 2019). In this vein, emotion-rule dissonance is more harmful for employees that work in urban hotels than for employees that work in resort hotels. Conversely, employees that work in resort hotels might deal with emotion-rule dissonance by acting in good faith (i. e. adjusting the inner feelings in line with the required emotional expression) because the employee aims to appear genuine in his/her emotional expression to satisfy customer expectations and to ensure quality customer experiences (Brey, 2010). Second, there may be a trade-off or compensation between different types of emotions during service interactions in resort hotels. Interactions with emotion-rule dissonance may be limited in number compared to the amount of positive social interactions with a majority of customers, and thus have a limited effect on job satisfaction and work engagement. In this vein, employees of resort hotels interact with leisure customers, who are often happy and relaxed and they are likely to respond back showing more positive emotions, thereby transmitting their good mood to employees that work in resort hotels satisfying their affiliation needs (Zapf, 2002). Third, employees also value the financial gains they get (e. g. tips) when they express the required emotions increasing their engagement and job satisfaction.

6 Practical implications

This study found that emotion-rule dissonance decreases work engagement and job satisfaction. Therefore, the first practical implication of this research is to create satisfactory work environments to promote emotional harmony (Wang, 2019). Since emotion-rule dissonance is considered nearly impossible to avoid in specific occupational contexts (Xanthopoulou et al., 2013), it is important to provide employees with resources to better cope with emotional demands and prevent negative consequences for their wellbeing. In this vein, some strategies may include: a) providing job resources such as supervisor support to cope with emotion-rule dissonance (Karatepe & Olugbade, 2009); b) boosting interpersonal communication between employees, supervisors and coworkers (Choi et al., 2019), thus giving the employees the possibility to vent negative emotions (e. g. anxiety, frustration) derived from emotion-rule dissonance; c) training in emotion work and strategies to deal with difficult situations and customers that evoke emotion-rule dissonance.

Dealing with emotion work and its consequences may not have been a priority for urban hotels because customers do not frequently mention the immaterial nature of the services (e. g. employees friendliness) in their reviews (Sánchez-Franco et al., 2016). However, this study calls for attention by urban hotel managers to the costs of emotion-rule dissonance for employees’ wellbeing. Our results show that employees working for urban hotels who experience emotion-rule dissonance present lower levels of work engagement and job satisfaction than their counterparts in resort hotels. This highlights the need for urban hotel managers to develop measures to help their employees deal with emotion-rule dissonance. For example, past research has shown that urban hotels present higher standardization and organizational control of service interactions compared to other types of hotel (e. g. rural hotels; Salman & Uygur, 2010). Instead, urban hotels should provide job autonomy to employees in their interaction with customers (Slåtten & Mehmetoglu, 2011), and training to prevent the negative effects of emotion-rule dissonance.

Finally, this study reveals the importance of work engagement in frontline employees in the hospitality industry. We encourage hotel managers to monitor and to promote employee work engagement because it is positively related to job satisfaction, and it mediates the relationship between emotion-rule dissonance and job satisfaction.

Thus, improving work engagement is a way to decrease the negative impact of emotion-rule dissonance on job satisfaction. Besides, promoting work engagement and job satisfaction should be in the agenda of hotel managers since past research has shown that job satisfaction and engagement improve service quality and customer loyalty (García-Buades et al., 2016; Kusluvan, 2003; Salanova et al., 2005).

7 Theoretical implications

Despite the volume of literature on the relationship between emotion-rule dissonance and job satisfaction (e. g. Zito et al., 2018), little research has tried to clarify the mechanism explaining the process of how employees’ emotion-rule dissonance decreases job satisfaction in the hospitality industry (Park, 2018). By filling this gap, this study provides a valuable contribution to the literature on emotion work in the hotel workplace.

This is the first study that demonstrated that emotion-rule dissonance decreases job satisfaction directly (Amissah et al., 2021; Sora & Vera, 2020; Zito et al., 2018) and indirectly via diminishing work engagement using data collected from frontline hotel employees with a time lag of three months. The present study contributes to the existing recent research that emphasizes the importance of engagement in the hospitality industry (Swancott & Davis, 2022). Specifically, our results demonstrate that work engagement has a crucial role in the link between emotion-rule dissonance and job satisfaction. The mediation effect has added a new insight to the engagement literature traditionally focused on exploring the antecedents and the consequences separately.

Second, the findings of the current study highlight the importance of the role of hotel segment in the study of the effects of emotion-rule dissonance. Although the study of hotel segment is popular in the hospitality literature, most existing research has focused on the customers’ perspective (e. g. Falcão et al., 2019; Jackman & Naitram, 2021) ignoring the employee’s perspective. For instance, Yavas and Babakus (2005) examined the differences among leisure and business customers in terms of hotel choice attributes, but little is known whether employees respond differently to emotion-rule dissonance when they attend leisure and business customers who are lodged in resorts and urban hotels respectively. The analysis revealed a great deal of heterogeneity in the impact of the predictors across segments, which has likely remained uncovered in previous literature. Specifically, our findings show that employees who work in different hotel segments (with different job conditions, customers, and expected tasks) are affected by emotion-rule dissonance in a different way. Our results are in line with the theoretical postulations proposed by Grandey and Diamond (2010) and empirical findings by Kern et al. (2021), which contend that the consequences of emotion-rule dissonance depend on contextual factors such as occupational aspects. In this vein, we also contribute to the study of emotion-rule dissonance considering a job-related perspective, i. e. examining how the nature of the job in resorts or urban hotels may increase or decrease the negative effects of emotion-rule dissonance.

Finally, we support the challenge-hindrance model as a theoretical framework to study emotion work from the job characteristics approach (Zapf, 2002). We extend the knowledge on hindrance stressors by suggesting that, in certain cases, emotion-rule dissonance is not detrimental for employees. This is consistent with recent work that shows that emotion-rule dissonance is not always negative; instead, this research shows that emotion-rule dissonance may act as a challenge stressor with positive consequences under specific boundary conditions (Kern et al., 2021).

8 Limitations and future research

The present study has some limitations. First, the limited sample size threats the replicability and generalizability of the findings and therefore future research should focus on similar studies with larger sample sizes. Second, we examined two specific hotel segments and encourage other researchers to examine other types of segmentation such as hotel category. For example, future studies should attempt to study whether working for a luxury hotel, which generally offers training and reward programs to recognize employees who successfully perform emotion work (Johanson & Woods, 2008), entails different consequences of emotion-rule dissonance than working in a one or two-star hotel. In this vein, several contextual factors (i. e. hotel segments based on price, infrastructure, etc. or duration and repetition of guest-employee encounters) remain underexplored. Third, we conducted the study in a limited number of hotels within one territory (i. e., Spain). Extending the sample to other geographical locations would help generalizing our results. Fourth, the present study examines the frequency of emotion-rule dissonance, which is only one facet of emotion work. We propose to examine other dimensions of emotion work (e. g. the requirement to display positive emotions or to be sensitive to customers’ emotions) and compare its effects in different hotel segments. Besides, we suggest examining whether employees from different types of hotels use different emotion regulation strategies (surface acting and deep acting) to respond to emotion-rule dissonance and its consequences on employee’s wellbeing. Additionally, more research is needed to understand how urban hotels employees manage emotion work and its consequences. There is a lack of research on human resources practices in urban hotels in comparison to resort hotels (e. g. Hussien et al., 2021). Research on human resource practices would assist academics and practitioners in understanding the results of the present study and managing the negative effects of emotion work. Finally, future research could investigate dyadic interactions between frontline employees and customers because differences in hotel employees cannot be assumed by considering the hotel segment alone (Grandey & Diamond, 2010).

Ethics approval and Informed consent. Researchers have considered the ethical risks of the procedures of the present project since it involves human participation and personal data. We consulted the relevant University policies and personnel, before the project was undertaken. Since the present project is an opinion survey about the professional situation of the participants (thereby it is a non-interventional study), ethical approval or authorization from the ethics committee is not required. However, the present study received and followed advice by a member of the Research Ethics Committee’s on guaranteeing personal data protection, providing informed consent and withdrawal options for participants. We included a preamble in the survey indicating that it was part of a research project (explaining its objectives), the voluntariness of the participation, and the anonymous treatment of the data in accordance with the current Data Protection Law. Further, we have complied with the APA ethical principles regarding research with human participants in the conduct of the research presented in this manuscript.

Competing interests. We confirm that there are no relevant financial or non-financial competing interests to report.

Article Note:

This research was supported in part by a grant from Spanish Ministry of Education and Science (BSO2002-04483-C03-03)

About the authors

Dr. Silvia Ortiz-Bonnin

Dr. Silvia Ortiz-Bonnin is an Asisstant Professor of Work and Organizational Psychology at University of the Balearic Islands (UIB). Ctra. Valldemossa, km 7.5. Guillem Cifre. CP07122, Palma de Mallorca, Spain. E-mail: silvia.ortiz@uib.es. Her research focuses on psychosocial work conditions and wellbeing in hospitality and tourism industry. Silvia was a visiting research student at Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main and she taught at the Università del Salento (Erasmus +) https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1896-1048

Dr. María Esther García-Buades

Dr. María Esther García-Buades is a Senior Lecturer at the Faculty of Psychology, University of the Balearic Islands (UIB), Ctra. Valldemossa, km 7.5. Guillem Cifre. CP07122, Palma de Mallorca, Spain. E-mail: esther.garcia@uib.es. Her research interests include psychosocial work conditions in the hospitality industry, well-being, performance, and service quality. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8596-1481

References

Abraham, R. (1998). Emotional dissonance in organizations: Antecedents, consequences, and moderators. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 124(2), 229–246.Search in Google Scholar

Adelmann, P. K. (1995). Emotional labor as a potential source of job stress. In S. L. S. & L. R. Murphy (Ed.), Organizational risk factors for job stress (pp. 371–381). Washington: APA.10.1037/10173-023Search in Google Scholar

Aksu, A., Albayrak, T., & Caber, M. (2021). Hotel customer segmentation according to eco-service quality perception: the case of Russian tourists. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, 5(3), 501–514. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTI-10-2020-018810.1108/JHTI-10-2020-0188Search in Google Scholar

Alarcon, G. M., & Edwards, J. M. (2011). The relationship of engagement, job satisfaction and turnover intentions. Stress and Health, 27(3), e294–e298. https://doi.org/10.1002/SMI.136510.1002/smi.1365Search in Google Scholar

Alarcon, G. M., & Lyons, J. B. (2011). The relationship of engagement and job satisfaction in working samples. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 145(5), 463–480. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2011.58408310.1080/00223980.2011.584083Search in Google Scholar

Amissah, E. F., Blankson-Stiles-Ocran, S., & Mensah, I. (2021). Emotional labour, emotional exhaustion and job satisfaction in the hospitality industry. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTI-10-2020-019610.1108/JHTI-10-2020-0196Search in Google Scholar

Ariffin, A. A. M., & Maghzi, A. (2012). A preliminary study on customer expectations of hotel hospitality: Influences of personal and hotel factors. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(1), 191–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJHM.2011.04.01210.1016/j.ijhm.2011.04.012Search in Google Scholar

Bakker, A. B. (2011). An Evidence-Based Model of Work Engagement: Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(4), 265–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/096372141141453410.1177/0963721411414534Search in Google Scholar

Bakker, A. B., & Albrecht, S. (2018). Work engagement: current trends. Career Development International, 23(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-11-2017-020710.1108/CDI-11-2017-0207Search in Google Scholar

Brey, E. T. (2010). Developing a Better Understanding of Resort Management: An Inquiry into Industry Practices. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 20(1), 79–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2011.53018810.1080/19368623.2011.530188Search in Google Scholar

Cheung, F., & Tang, C. (2010). The Influence of Emotional Dissonance on Subjective Health and Job Satisfaction: Testing the Stress–Strain–Outcome Model. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 40(12), 3192–3217. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1559-1816.2010.00697.X10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00697.xSearch in Google Scholar

Choi, H., Mohammad, A. A. A., & Gon, W. (2019). Understanding hotel frontline employees’ emotional intelligence, emotional labor, job stress, coping strategies and burnout. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 82, 199–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.05.00210.1016/j.ijhm.2019.05.002Search in Google Scholar

Cox, T., Griffith, A., & Rial-Gonzalez, E. (2000). Work-related Stress. Luxembourg: European Agency for Safety and Health at Work.Search in Google Scholar

Crawford, E. R., LePine, J. A., & Rich, B. L. (2010). Linking job demands and resources to employee engagement and burnout: A theoretical extension and meta-analytic test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(5), 834–848. https://doi.org/10.1037/a001936410.1037/a0019364Search in Google Scholar

Dirisu, J., Worlu, R., Osibanjo, A., Salau, O., Borishade, T., Meninwa, S., & Atolagbe, T. (2018). An integrated dataset on organisational culture, job satisfaction and performance in the hospitality industry. Data in Brief, 19, 317–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2018.04.13710.1016/j.dib.2018.04.137Search in Google Scholar

Dolnicar, S. (2002). Business travellers’ hotel expectations and disappointments: A different perspective to hotel attribute importance investigation. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 7(1), 29–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/1094166020872210710.1080/10941660208722107Search in Google Scholar

Dormann, C., & Kaiser, D. M. (2002). Job conditions and customer satisfaction. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 11(3), 257–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432024400016610.1080/13594320244000166Search in Google Scholar

Falcão, R. P. de Q., da Costa Filho, M. C. M., & Ferreira, J. B. (2019). Segmentation of Brazilian travelers’ mobile purchase behavior. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, 3(2), 209–228. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTI-03-2019-0042/FULL/XML10.1108/JHTI-03-2019-0042Search in Google Scholar

Fernández-Morales, A., & Mayorga-Toledano, M. C. (2008). Seasonal concentration of the hotel demand in Costa del Sol: A decomposition by nationalities. Tourism Management, 29(5), 940–949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2007.11.00310.1016/j.tourman.2007.11.003Search in Google Scholar

García-Buades, E., Martínez-Tur, V., Ortiz-Bonnín, S., & Peiró, J. M. (2016). Engaged teams deliver better service performance in innovation climates. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 25(4), 597–612. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2016.117175210.4324/9780203732427-10Search in Google Scholar

Giallonardo, L. M., Wong, C. A., & Iwasiw, C. L. (2010). Authentic leadership of preceptors: predictor of new graduate nurses’ work engagement and job satisfaction. Journal of Nursing Management, 18(8), 993–1003. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1365-2834.2010.01126.X10.1111/j.1365-2834.2010.01126.xSearch in Google Scholar

Gong, Y., Wu, Y., Huang, P., Yan, X., & Luo, Z. (2020). Psychological Empowerment and Work Engagement as Mediating Roles Between Trait Emotional Intelligence and Job Satisfaction. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.0023210.3389/fpsyg.2020.00232Search in Google Scholar

Grandey, A. A., & Diamond, J. A. (2010). Interactions with the public: Bridging job design and emotional labor perspectives. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(2–3), 338–350. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.63710.1002/job.637Search in Google Scholar

Hayes, A. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis. NY: Guildford Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hayes, A. F., Montoya, A. K., & Rockwood, N. J. (2017). The analysis of mechanisms and their contingencies: PROCESS versus structural equation modeling. Australasian Marketing Journal, 25(1), 76–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2017.02.00110.1016/j.ausmj.2017.02.001Search in Google Scholar

Hoel, H., & Stale, E. (2003). Violence at work in hotels, catering and tourism. International Labour Office Geneva, October, 1–38. http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/@ed_dialogue/@sector/documents/publication/wcms_161998.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

Hofmann, V., & Stokburger-Sauer, N. E. (2017). The impact of emotional labor on employees’ work-life balance perception and commitment: A study in the hospitality industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 65, 47–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2017.06.00310.1016/j.ijhm.2017.06.003Search in Google Scholar

Holman, D., Martinez‐Iñigo, D., & Totterdell, P. (2008). Emotional Labor, Well‐Being, and Performance. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199211913.003.001410.1093/oxfordhb/9780199211913.003.0014Search in Google Scholar

Hülsheger, U. R., & Schewe, A. F. (2011). On the costs and benefits of emotional labor: A meta-analysis of three decades of research. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16(3), 361–389. https://doi.org/10.1037/a002287610.1037/a0022876Search in Google Scholar

Hussien, F. M., Ibrahim, Y., & Naser, H. A. (2021). The impact of human resource management practices on job satisfaction and affective commitment in Hurghada resort hotels. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTI-02-2021-0045/FULL/XML10.1108/JHTI-02-2021-0045Search in Google Scholar

Ismail, R., Jaafar, H., Ismail, R., & Khalid, K. (2021). Visitors’ Spending on Accommodation: A Segmentation Model using Two-Step CHAID Analysis. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), 12(3), 602–612. https://doi.org/10.17762/turcomat.v12i3.76510.17762/turcomat.v12i3.765Search in Google Scholar

Jackman, M., & Naitram, S. (2021). Segmenting tourists by length of stay using regression tree models. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTI-03-2021-0084/FULL/XML10.1108/JHTI-03-2021-0084Search in Google Scholar

Jeong, Y., Zielinski, S., Chang, J. soon, & Kim, S. il. (2018). Comparing Motivation-Based and Motivation-Attitude-Based Segmentation of Tourists Visiting Sensitive Destinations. Sustainability 2018, Vol. 10, Page 3615, 10(10), 3615. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU1010361510.3390/su10103615Search in Google Scholar

Johanson, M. M., & Woods, R. H. (2008). Recognizing the emotional element in service excellence. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 49(3), 310–316. https://doi.org/10.1177/193896550831626710.1177/1938965508316267Search in Google Scholar

Karatepe, O. M., & Olugbade, O. A. (2009). The effects of job and personal resources on hotel employees’ work engagement. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 28(4), 504–512. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2009.02.00310.1016/j.ijhm.2009.02.003Search in Google Scholar

Kern, M., Trumpold, K., & Zapf, D. (2021). Emotion work as a source of employee well- and ill-being: the moderating role of service interaction type. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 30(6), 850–871. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2021.187377110.1080/1359432X.2021.1873771Search in Google Scholar

Khoo-Lattimore, C., Prayag, G., & Cheah, B. L. (2015). Kids on Board: Exploring the Choice Process and Vacation Needs of Asian Parents With Young Children in Resort Hotels. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 24(5), 511–531. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2014.91486210.1080/19368623.2014.914862Search in Google Scholar

Kruml, S., & Geddes, D. (2000). Exploring the dimensions of emotional labor. Management and Communication Quarterly, 14(1), 8–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/089331890014100210.1177/0893318900141002Search in Google Scholar

Kunin, T. (1955). The construction of a new type of attitude measure. Personnel Psychology, 8, 8, 65–77.10.1111/j.1744-6570.1955.tb01189.xSearch in Google Scholar

Kusluvan, S. (2003). Employee attitudes and behaviors and their roles for tourism and hospitality businesses. In S. Kusluvan (Ed.), Managing employee attitudes and behaviors in the tourism and hospitality (pp. 25–50). New York: Nova Science Publishers.Search in Google Scholar

Law, C. M. (2002). Urban Tourism: The Visitor Economy and the Growth of Large Cities. British Library.Search in Google Scholar

Lee, L., & Madera, J. M. (2019). A systematic literature review of emotional labor research from the hospitality and tourism literature. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31(7), 2808–2826. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-05-2018-039510.1108/IJCHM-05-2018-0395Search in Google Scholar

Lepine, J. A., Podsakoff, N. P., & Lepine, M. A. (2005). A Meta-Analytic Test of the Challenge Stressor–Hindrance Stressor Framework: An Explanation for Inconsistent Relationships Among Stressors and Performance. Academy of Management Journal, 48(5), 764–775. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2005.1880392110.5465/amj.2005.18803921Search in Google Scholar

Li, M., Wang, Z., Gao, J., & You, X. (2017). Proactive Personality and Job Satisfaction: the Mediating Effects of Self-Efficacy and Work Engagement in Teachers. Current Psychology, 36(1), 48–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-015-9383-110.1007/s12144-015-9383-1Search in Google Scholar

Liu, S., Luksyte, A., Zhou, L., Shi, J., & Wang, M. (2015). Overqualification and counterproductive work behaviors: Examining a moderated mediation model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36(2), 250–271. https://doi.org/10.1002/JOB.197910.1002/job.1979Search in Google Scholar

Lo, K., & Lamm, F. (2005). Occupational Stress in the Hospitality Industry – An Employment Relations Perspective. New Zealand Journal of Employment Relations, 30(1), 23–47.Search in Google Scholar

Lu, X., & Guy, M. E. (2014). How emotional labor and ethical leadership affect job engagement for chinese public servants. Public Personnel Management, 43(1), 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/009102601351227810.1177/0091026013512278Search in Google Scholar

McNamara, M., Bohle, P., & Quinlan, M. (2011). Precarious employment, working hours, work-life conflict and health in hotel work. Applied Ergonomics, 42(2), 225–232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2010.06.01310.1016/j.apergo.2010.06.013Search in Google Scholar

Meier, L. L., & Spector, P. E. (2013). Reciprocal effects of work stressors and counterproductive work behavior: A Five-wave longitudinal study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98(3), 529–539. https://doi.org/10.1037/A003173210.1037/e577572014-355Search in Google Scholar

Morris, J. A., & Feldman, D. C. (1996). The dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of emotional labor. Academy of Magagement Review, 21(4), 986–1010.10.2307/259161Search in Google Scholar

Moura, D., Orgambidez, A. R., & Gonçalves, G. (2014). Role stress and work engagement as antecedents of job satisfaction. In K. A. M. Krzysztof Kaniasty (Ed.), Stress and Anxiety: Applications to Social and Environmental Threats, Psychological Well-Being, Occupational Challenges, and Developmental Psychology (pp. 169–176). Logos Verlag Berlin GmbH.Search in Google Scholar

Ortiz-Bonnin, S., García-Buades, M. E., Caballer, A., & Zapf, D. (2021). Linking ‘unit emotion work’ to customer satisfaction and loyalty: A multilevel study in the hospitality industry. Current Psychology, 41(5), 2521–2534. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01646-210.1007/s12144-021-01646-2Search in Google Scholar

Ortiz-Bonnín, S., García-Buades, M. E., Caballer, A., & Zapf, D. (2016). Supportive climate and its protective role in the emotion rule dissonance – emotional exhaustion relationship: A multilevel analysis. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 15(3), 125–133. https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a00016010.1027/1866-5888/a000160Search in Google Scholar

Ortiz-Bonnín, S., Navarro, C., García-Buades, E., Ramis, C., & Manassero, M. A. (2012). Validación de la versión española de la Escala de Trabajo Emocional de Frankfurt. Psicothema, 24, 337–342.Search in Google Scholar

Pace, F., & Sciotto, G. (2020). The Effect of Emotional Dissonance and Mental Load on Need for Recovery and Work Engagement among Italian Fixed-Term Researchers. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/IJERPH1801009910.3390/ijerph18010099Search in Google Scholar

Park, K.-H. (2018). The Effects of Emotional Labor on Job Satisfaction of Hotel Employees: Analyzing Moderating Effects of Emotional Intelligence. Stress, 26(3), 166–172. https://doi.org/10.17547/KJSR.2018.26.3.16610.17547/kjsr.2018.26.3.166Search in Google Scholar

Pizam, A. (2004). Are hospitality employees equipped to hide their feelings? International Journal of Hospitality Management, 23(4), 315–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2004.08.00110.1016/j.ijhm.2004.08.001Search in Google Scholar

Poulston, J. M. (2009). Working conditions in hospitality: Employees’ views of the dissatisfactory hygiene factors. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality and Tourism, 10(1), 23–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/1528008090271699310.1080/15280080902716993Search in Google Scholar

Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods 2008 40:3, 40(3), 879–891. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.40.3.87910.3758/BRM.40.3.879Search in Google Scholar

Pugh, S. D., Groth, M., & Hennig-Thurau, T. (2011). Willing and able to fake emotions: A closer examination of the link between emotional dissonance and employee well-being. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(2), 377–390. https://doi.org/10.1037/a002139510.1037/a0021395Search in Google Scholar

Rich, B. L., Lepine, J. A., & Crawford, E. R. (2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 617–635. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.5146898810.5465/amj.2010.51468988Search in Google Scholar

Salanova, M., Agut, S., & Peiró, J. M. (2005). Linking Organizational Resources and Work Engagement to Employee Performance and Customer Loyalty: The Mediation of Service Climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1217–1227. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.121710.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1217Search in Google Scholar

Salman, D., & Uygur, D. (2010). Creative tourism and emotional labor: An investigatory model of possible interactions. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 4(3), 186–197. https://doi.org/10.1108/1750618101106758310.1108/17506181011067583Search in Google Scholar

Sánchez-Franco, M. J., Navarro-García, A., & Rondán-Cataluña, F. J. (2016). Online Customer Service Reviews in Urban Hotels: A Data Mining Approach. Psychology & Marketing, 33(12), 1174–1186. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar10.1002/mar.20955Search in Google Scholar

Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: a multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 293–315. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.24810.1002/job.248Search in Google Scholar

Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The Measurement of Work Engagement With a Short Questionnaire. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701–716. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316440528247110.1177/0013164405282471Search in Google Scholar

Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The Measurement of Engagement and Burnout: A Two Sample Confirmatory Factor Analytic Approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(1), 71–92. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:101563093032610.1023/A:1015630930326Search in Google Scholar

Semmer, N. K., Tschan, F., Jacobshagen, N., Beehr, T. A., Elfering, A., Kälin, W., & Meier, L. L. (2019). Correction to: Stress as Offense to Self: a Promising Approach Comes of Age. Occupational Health Science, 4(1–2), 213–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41542-020-00054-510.1007/s41542-020-00054-5Search in Google Scholar

Shuck, B., & Wollard, K. (2010). Employee Engagement and HRD: A Seminal Review of the Foundations. Human Resource Development Review, 9(1), 89–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/153448430935356010.1177/1534484309353560Search in Google Scholar

Slåtten, T., & Mehmetoglu, M. (2011). Antecedents and effects of engaged frontline employees: A study from the hospitality industry. Managing Service Quality, 21(1), 88–107. https://doi.org/10.1108/0960452111110026110.1108/09604521111100261Search in Google Scholar

Smith, P. C., Kendall, L. M., & Hulin, C. L. (1969). The measurement of satisfaction in work and retirement. Chicago: Rand McNally.Search in Google Scholar

Sonnentag, S. (2003). Recovery, Work Engagement, and Proactive Behavior: A New Look at the Interface Between Nonwork and Work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(3), 518–528.10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.518Search in Google Scholar

Sora, B., & Vera, M. (2020). Emotional Dissonance in the Spanish Services Sector: The Role of Support in the Workplace. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 23. https://doi.org/10.1017/SJP.2020.2910.1017/SJP.2020.29Search in Google Scholar

Spector, P. E. (1996). Industrial and organizational psychology: Research and practice. New York: John Wiley.Search in Google Scholar

Swancott, L. J., & Davis, S. K. (2022). Service with a smile? Engagement is a better predictor of job satisfaction than emotional intelligence. Current Psychology, 0123456789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-02818-410.1007/s12144-022-02818-4Search in Google Scholar

Totterdell, P., & Holman, D. (2003). Emotion Regulation in Customer Service Roles: Testing a Model of Emotional Labor. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 8(1), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.8.1.5510.1037/1076-8998.8.1.55Search in Google Scholar

Tschan, F., Rochat, S., & Zapf, D. (2005). It’s not only clients: Studying emotion work with clients and co-workers with an event-sampling approach. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 78(2), 195–220. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317905X3966610.1348/096317905X39666Search in Google Scholar

Van den Broeck, A., De Cuyper, N., De Witte, H., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2010). Not all job demands are equal: Differentiating job hindrances and job challenges in the Job Demands–Resources model. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 19(6), 735–759. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432090322383910.1080/13594320903223839Search in Google Scholar

Wang, C. J. (2019). From emotional labor to customer loyalty in hospitality: A three-level investigation with the JD-R model and COR theory. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31(9), 3742–3760. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-01-2019-0072/FULL/XML10.1108/IJCHM-01-2019-0072Search in Google Scholar

Wang, G., Seibert, S., & Boles, T. L. (2011). Chapter 1 Synthesizing What We Know and Looking Ahead: A Meta-Analytical Review of 30 Years of Emotional Labor Research. In W. J. Härtel, C.E.J., Ashkanasy, N.M. and Zerbe (Ed.), What Have We Learned? Ten Years On Research on Emotion in Organizations, (Vol. 7) (pp. 15–43). Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley.10.1108/S1746-9791(2011)0000007006Search in Google Scholar

Wang, Q. P., BeomCheol Kim, P., & Milne, S. (2017). Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) and Its Work Outcomes: The Moderating Role of Gender. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 26(2), 125–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2016.118598910.1080/19368623.2016.1185989Search in Google Scholar

Warr, P., & Inceoglu, I. (2012). Job engagement, job satisfaction, and contrasting associations with person-job fit. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 17(2), 129–138. https://doi.org/10.1037/a002685910.1037/a0026859Search in Google Scholar

Xanthopoulou, D., Bakker, A. B., & Fischbach, A. (2013). Work engagement among employees facing emotional demands: The role of personal resources. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 12(2), 74–84. https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a00008510.1027/1866-5888/a000085Search in Google Scholar

Xu, S., Cao, Z. C., & Huo, Y. (2020). Antecedents and outcomes of emotional labour in hospitality and tourism: A meta-analysis. Tourism Management, 79, 104099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2020.10409910.1016/j.tourman.2020.104099Search in Google Scholar

Yang, Y., & Chan, A. (2010). A hierarchical approach to measure service performance in the resort hotels’s service encounters. Journal of Tourism, Hospitality & Culinary Arts, 2(1).Search in Google Scholar

Yavas, U., & Babakus, E. (2005). Dimensions of hotel choice criteria: Congruence between business and leisure travelers. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 24(3), 359–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2004.09.00310.1016/j.ijhm.2004.09.003Search in Google Scholar

Yeh, C. M. (2013). Tourism involvement, work engagement and job satisfaction among frontline hotel employees. Annals of Tourism Research, 42, 214–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ANNALS.2013.02.00210.1016/j.annals.2013.02.002Search in Google Scholar

Zapf, D. (2002). Emotion work and psychological well-being A review of the literature and some conceptual considerations. Human Resource Management Review, 12, 237–268.10.1016/S1053-4822(02)00048-7Search in Google Scholar

Zapf, D., Kern, M., Tschan, F., Holman, D., & Semmer, N. K. (2021). Emotion Work: A Work Psychology Perspective. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational, 8, 139–172. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012420-06245110.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012420-062451Search in Google Scholar

Zapf, D., Vogt, C., Seifert, C., Mertini, H., & Isic, A. (1999). Emotion Work as a Source of Stress: The Concept and Development of an Instrument. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8(3), 371–400. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594329939823010.1080/135943299398230Search in Google Scholar

Zhong, L., Verma, R., Wei, W., Morrsion, A. M., & Yang, L. (2022). Multi-stakeholder perspectives on the impacts of service robots in urban hotel rooms. Technology in Society, 68, 101846. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.10184610.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101846Search in Google Scholar

Zito, M., Emanuel, F., Molino, M., Cortese, C. G., Ghislieri, C., & Colombo, L. (2018). Turnover intentions in a call center: The role of emotional dissonance, job resources, and job satisfaction. PloS One, 13(2), e0192126. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.019212610.1371/journal.pone.0192126Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2023-03-17

Published in Print: 2023-03-13

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/tw-2022-0022

Keywords for this article

emotion-rule dissonance; job satisfaction; work engagement; hotel segment; resort hotel; urban hotel

Creative Commons

BY 4.0