Date Presented 04/04/2025
The purpose of this cross-sectional survey research was to describe workplace isolation and loneliness among school-based OTPs (SBOTPs). Understanding isolation and loneliness at work is foundational for supporting the well-being of SBOTPs.
Primary Author and Speaker: Megan E. Ziff
Additional Authors and Speakers: Amy Carroll
Contributing Authors: Catherine Verrier Piersol
PURPOSE: Describe workplace isolation and loneliness in SBOTPs (school-based occupational therapy practitioners). Research Questions: 1) What is the relationship between isolation and loneliness in SBOTPs? 2) What is the relationship between indirect time and isolation and loneliness? 3) Is there a difference in isolation and loneliness between contracted and directly employed SBOTPs? Workplace isolation and loneliness impact wellbeing and work performance (Sahai et al., 2020). SBOTPs report feeling isolated (Stephenson, 2019) but this had not been formally studied to date.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey of SBOTPs working in service delivery in the United States. Recruitment: professional networks and social media.
METHOD: Instruments: Workplace Isolation Scale (WIS; Marshall et al., 2007) and an adapted version of UCLA Loneliness Scale (Ozcelik & Barsade, 2018). Data were also collected for the following: indirect time at work and employment type (contracted or employed). Analysis: Descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation coefficient, and t-tests.
RESULT: Scores on the WIS (M = 4.96, SD = 1.21) and UCLA Loneliness Scale (M = 2.35, SD = .87) trend toward participants not experiencing isolation nor loneliness at work with more isolation from organization than colleagues (t(186) = 16.82, p <.001). Isolation and loneliness were strongly correlated (r = .87) with a difference (p <0.05) in isolation and loneliness between contracted (M = 4.58, SD = 1.17 and M = 2.60, SD = .81, respectively) and directly employed (M = 5.06, SD = 1.20 and M = 2.29, SD = .87, respectively) SBOTPs. There was no relationship between indirect time and isolation (r = .02, p = .42) nor loneliness (r = −.03, p = .35).
CONCLUSION: In contrast to recent literature, results suggest SBOTPs trend away from workplace isolation and loneliness, though contracted SBOTPs seem at risk.
IMPACT: This first focused inquiry on isolation and loneliness in SBOTPs invites further study of this topic and of ways to mediate risk for contractors.
References
Marshall, G. W., Michaels, C. E., & Mulki, J. P. (2007). Workplace isolation: Exploring the construct and its measurement. Psychology & Marketing, 24(3), 195–223. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.20158
Ozcelik, H., & Barsade, S. G. (2018). No employee an island: Workplace loneliness and job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 61(6), 2343–2366. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2015.1066
Sahai, S., Ciby, M. A., & Kahwaji, A. T. (2020). Workplace isolation: a systematic review and synthesis. International Journal of Management (IJM), 11(12), 2745–2758. https://doi.org/10.34218/IJM.11.12.2020.257
Stephenson, P. (2019). Building resilience and minimizing burnout in school-based practice. Journal of Occupational Therapy, Schools, & Early Intervention, 12(3), 354–364. https://doi.org/10.1080/19411243.2019.1590754
