High levels of burnout among early-career board-certified behavior analysts with low collegial support in the work environment

Figures & data

Table 1. Sociodemographic and job-related characteristics of participants (n = 183).

Characteristic	Categories	n (%)
Gender	Female	167 (91)
	Male	16 (9)
Age	18–24	20 (11)
	25–34	100 (55)
	35–44	44 (24)
	45–54	14 (8)
	55–64	5 (3)
Location	North America	106 (58)
	South America	1 (1)
	Europe	72 (39)
	Africa	2 (1)
	Asia	1 (1)
	Oceania	1 (1)
Education	Below high school	4 (2)
	High school diploma	9 (5)
	Bachelor’s degree	48 (26)
	Master’s degree	108 (59)
	Doctorate	14 (8)
Employment *	Self-employed	69 (33)
	Employed under contract	120 (66)
Setting *	ABA clinic or center	74 (40)
	School, other	46 (25)
	Center, other	33 (18)
	Home-based	80 (44)
	Other	22 (12)
Experience (years)	<1	11 (6)
	1–2	26 (14)
	3–5	59 (32)
	6–10	43 (24)
	11–15	23 (13)
	> 20	10 (6)
	N/A or unknown	11 (6)
Salary range (€)	< 12,000	16 (9)
	12,000–18,000	15 (8)
	18,000–24,999	24 (13)
	25,000–34,999	35 (19)
	35,000–44,999	20 (11)
	45,000–54,999	14 (8)
	55,000–64,999	13 (7)
	65,000–74,999	16 (9)
	75,000–84,999	10 (5)
	> 85,000	11 (6)
	N/A or unknown	9 (5)
Satisfied with salary	Yes	69 (38)
	No	114 (62)
Certification and supervision
Certification attained *	RBT®	28 (16)
	BCaBA®	12 (7)
	BCBA®	52 (29)
	BCBA-D®	13 (7)
	Student	85 (41)
Supervision	Works under a BCaBA®	3 (2)
	Works under a BCBA®	120 (66)
	Works under a BCBA-D®	25 (14)
	Does not work under a supervisor	34 (19)
	N/A or unknown	1 (1)
Supervision frequency	Daily	5 (3)
	Weekly	35 (19)
	Bi-weekly	42 (23)
	Once per month	39 (21)
	Once every few months	16 (9)
	Never	43 (23)
	N/A or unknown	3 (2)
Supervision format	Face to face	120 (66)
	Long distance	30 (16)
	N/A or unknown	33 (18)
Certified professionals in the team	Works alone	39 (21)
	1–3	68 (37)
	4–5	33 (18)
	6–10	10 (5)
	> 10	29 (16)
	N/A or unknown	4 (2)
Work environment
Gets along with coworkers	Always	57 (31)
	Most of the time	106 (58)
	Sometimes	13 (7)
	Rarely	1 (1)
	Work alone	6 (3)
Staff meetings	Daily	6 (3)
	Weekly	43 (23)
	Bi-weekly	25 (14)
	Once per month	61 (33)
	Once every few months	33 (18)
	Never	15 (8)
Staff training opportunities	Yes	111 (61)
	No	72 (39)
Staff training required	Yes	81 (45)
	No	47 (26)
	N/A or unknown	55 (30)
Paid staff training	Yes	83 (44)
	No	50 (26)
	N/A or unknown	55 (30)
Team building activities	Daily	2 (1)
	Bi-weekly	6 (3)
	Once per month	20 (11)
	Once every few months	69 (38)
	Never	82 (45)
	N/A or unknown	4 (2)
Satisfied with work conditions	Yes	94 (51)
	No	85 (46)
	N/A or unknown	4 (2)
Number of clients	1	4 (2)
	2–5	53 (29)
	5–10	57 (31)
	> 10	69 (38)
Role in client’s programing	Supervise	49 (27)
	Implement	51 (28)
	Supervise and implement	79 (43)
	N/A or unknown	4 (2)
Clients age (years) *	0–3	34 (19)
	3–5	67 (37)
	6–12	130 (71)
	13–18	68 (37)
	19–29	32 (17)
	30–69	15 (8)
Client’s challenging behavior	Daily	111 (61)
	Weekly	47 (26)
	Bi-weekly	9 (5)
	Once per month	4 (2)
	Once every few months	8 (4)
	Never	1 (1)
	N/A or unknown	3 (2)
Clients ability	Fast learners	3 (2)
	Slow and fast learners	152 (83)
	Slow learners	28 (15)

Characteristics with an asterisk allowed multiple answers. N/A: non-applicable.

Figure 1. Score distribution in the Maslach burnout inventory domains and the job satisfaction survey (n = 183). DP = Depersonalization; EE = Emotional exhaustion, JS = Job satisfaction; PA = Personal accomplishment.

Table 2. Binary logistic models for certified and uncertified participants (n = 183).

	Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS)^a		Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI)^b
	OR [95% CI]	p value	OR [95% CI]	p value
BCBA®, BCaBA®
Age	-	-	0.50 [0.25, 0.98]	0.042
Social support	0.49 [0.28, 0.86]	0.013	0.65 [0.44, 0.97]	0.035
Student, RBT®
Age	-	-	-	-
Social support	-	-	-	-
Supervision^c	-	-	1.50 [1.02, 2.19]	0.040
All
Social support	0.71 [0.54, 0.94]	0.035	-	-

Non-significant predictors omitted. Income, frequency of problem behavior, weekly work hours, and work setting were included in the model.

^aIndividuals with scores in the JSS within the dissatisfaction range were considered cases.

^bIndividuals with scores within the burnout range in any of the three domains of the MBI were considered cases.

^cFrequency of supervision sessions over a 6-point scale where one denoted daily supervision sessions and six denoted complete lack of supervision.