The relation between leadership styles in higher education institutions and academic staff’s job satisfaction: A meta-analysis study

verifiedmedium profile · Frontiers in Psychology · 2022

Kasalak, Gamze; Güneri, Beysun; Ehtiyar, Vesile Ruya; Apaydin, Çiğdem; Türker, Gulay Özaltın

10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1038824 · CrossRef: verified

How this was studied

paradigm: positivistpurpose: explanatory causaldesign: meta analytic synthesisidentification: nonetime: cross sectionaldata: quantitative survey

A meta-analytic synthesis — it pools many primary studies rather than running a single design, so there is no single-study diagram.

analysis: meta analysis · validity (validity): internal unclear · external addressed · construct addressed · statistical addressed · classifier confidence 0.8

What this article reports

The findings we extracted from this work, normalized into Principia’s relationship form (X → Y). Each feeds the synthesized models below.

transformational leadershipjob satisfaction

r = 0.569 · k=19 · grade B · unverified

Models this article informs

The meta-analytic priors this article contributes evidence to — its place in the broader synthesis.

In the authors’ words

The article’s own abstract.

In this study, it is aimed to examine the relationship between leadership in higher education institutions [HEIs] and academic staff's job satisfaction, which is formed by combining different leadership styles in higher education institutions, using the meta-analysis method based on correlational research. For this purpose, it was investigated whether there was a significant difference between the effect sizes of the studies investigating the relationship between leadership in HEIs and academic staff's job satisfaction between the years 2010-2022, according to the moderator variables (leadership styles, continent, culture, and Human Development Index [HDI]). A total of 57 research data, including sample size and Pearson correlation coefficient data, were evaluated within the scope of the research. Correlational studies were calculated according to the random effect model in terms of effect direction and overall effect size; The estimated effect size value was found to be 0.374. This value shows that the overall effect size of the relationship between leadership in HEIs and academic staff's job satisfaction is positive and moderate. However, there is no significant difference between the effect sizes of the research examining the relationship between leadership styles in HEIs and academic staff's job satisfaction, according to continent, culture and HDI moderator variables.

What the literature says about it

Attributed, open-access quotes from other works that cite this article, plus the citation-graph verdict tally. Corroborations and disputes, in one place — the honest-broker view.

0 supporting

No open-access quotations have been captured yet.

Assembled from Principia’s registry — bibliographic record, extracted effect sizes, the models they inform, and open-access citing literature.