• unlimited access with print and download
    $ 37 00
  • read full document, no print or download, expires after 72 hours
    $ 4 99
More info
Unlimited access including download and printing, plus availability for reading and annotating in your in your Udini library.
  • Access to this article in your Udini library for 72 hours from purchase.
  • The article will not be available for download or print.
  • Upgrade to the full version of this document at a reduced price.
  • Your trial access payment is credited when purchasing the full version.
Buy
Continue searching

The impact of trust in confidant on the relationship between self-disclosure and job satisfaction among pastoral leaders in the Church of God of Prophecy in the United States

ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 2009
Dissertation
Author: Louis Feldon Morgan
Abstract:
This quantitative research study examined how pastoral leaders' trust in a confidant impacts their perceived self-disclosure and job satisfaction. An 84-item questionnaire, based on a review of related literature and comprised of validated research scales, including the Revised Self-Disclosure Scale (Wheeless, 1976), a slightly modified version of Robinson's (1996) seven-item trust scale, and the Job Satisfaction Survey (Spector, 1985), was utilized to collect data among pastoral leaders in the Church of God of Prophecy (COGOP) within the continental United States. Two hundred forty six participants returned completed questionnaires from which multiple regression analyses were performed to determine if trust in confidant impacted job satisfaction more than the impact of self-disclosure on job satisfaction among COGOP pastoral leaders. Separate analyses were conducted, including one for the Job Satisfaction Survey and one for each of the satisfaction dimensions within the scale: (a) pay, (b) promotion, (c) supervision, (d) benefits, (e) rewards, (f) operating procedures, (g) nature of work, and (h) communication. Findings suggest COGOP pastoral leaders' trust in a confidant does not have a greater positive influence on the relationship between their self-disclosure and job satisfaction more than the influence of self-disclosure without trust. A discussion about the research findings and their practical application for COGOP pastoral leaders is included as well as potential study limitations and possible future research related to this topic.

Table of Contents Abstract .................................................................................................................... iii Dedication ................................................................................................................ iv Acknowledgements .................................................................................................... v List of Tables ............................................................................................................. x List of Figures .......................................................................................................... xi Chapter 1 – Introduction ............................................................................................ 1 Statement of the Problem .................................................................................... 1 Purpose of the Study ........................................................................................... 4 Objectives ........................................................................................................... 4 Significance of the Study .................................................................................... 5 Scope of the Study .............................................................................................. 5 Definitions of Terms ........................................................................................... 6 Organization of Study ......................................................................................... 8 Summary ........................................................................................................... 10 Chapter 2 – Literature Review ................................................................................. 11 Theoretical Foundation ..................................................................................... 11 Leader Self-Disclosure .............................................................................. 12 Leader Trust in Confidant .......................................................................... 16 Job Satisfaction .......................................................................................... 25 Summary ........................................................................................................... 33 Research Question ............................................................................................ 33 Research Hypotheses ........................................................................................ 33 Chapter 3 – Method .................................................................................................. 36 Variables ........................................................................................................... 36 Participants ........................................................................................................ 37 Sample Design ........................................................................................... 37 Ethical Considerations ............................................................................... 39 Procedures ......................................................................................................... 40 Data Collection ................................................................................................. 40 Instrumentation ................................................................................................. 41

Impact of Trust Between Pastoral Leaders’ Self-Disclosure and Job Satisfaction viii

Wheeless’ (1976) Revised Self-Disclosure Scale ...................................... 42 Robinson’s (1996) Trust Scale .................................................................. 43 Spector’s (1985) Job Satisfaction Survey .................................................. 44 Demographic Control Variables ................................................................ 45 Data Analysis .................................................................................................... 46 Multiple Regression Analysis .................................................................... 46 Controlling for Internal Validity ................................................................ 46 Chapter 4 – Results .................................................................................................. 48 Data Analyses Preparation ................................................................................ 48 Response Rate ............................................................................................ 48 Converting Data for SPSS ......................................................................... 49 Dummy Coding for Control Variables ...................................................... 49 Reverse Coding and Reliability Analyses ................................................. 51 Computing New Variables ........................................................................ 51 Multicollinearity Concerns ........................................................................ 52 Multiple Regression Analyses .......................................................................... 52 Job Satisfaction Total Score ...................................................................... 54 Job Satisfaction – Pay (JS1) ...................................................................... 61 Job Satisfaction – Promotion (JS2) ............................................................ 67 Job Satisfaction – Supervision (JS3) ......................................................... 73 Job Satisfaction – Benefits (JS4) ............................................................... 80 Job Satisfaction – Rewards (JS5) .............................................................. 86 Job Satisfaction – Operating Procedures (JS6) .......................................... 92 Job Satisfaction – Work Itself (JS7) .......................................................... 98 Job Satisfaction – Communication (JS8) ................................................. 105 Chapter 5 – Discussion .......................................................................................... 112 Results of Study .............................................................................................. 112 Job Satisfaction – Pay (JS1) .................................................................... 112 Job Satisfaction – Promotion (JS2) .......................................................... 113 Job Satisfaction – Supervision (JS3) ....................................................... 113 Job Satisfaction – Benefits (JS4) ............................................................. 114

Impact of Trust Between Pastoral Leaders’ Self-Disclosure and Job Satisfaction ix

Job Satisfaction – Rewards (JS5) ............................................................ 114 Job Satisfaction – Operating Procedures (JS6) ........................................ 115 Job Satisfaction – Work Itself (JS7) ........................................................ 115 Job Satisfaction – Communication (JS8) ................................................. 116 Job Satisfaction Total Score .................................................................... 116 Overall Research Conclusions ................................................................. 117 Practical Application of Research Conclusions ....................................... 118 Limitations and Future Research .................................................................... 122 Limitations ............................................................................................... 122 Future Research ....................................................................................... 123 References .............................................................................................................. 126 Appendix A – Confidentiality Agreement Form ................................................... 142 Appendix B – Letter to COGOP State/Regional Overseers ................................... 143 Appendix C – English Questionnaire Cover Letter ............................................... 145 Appendix D – English Questionnaire .................................................................... 147 Appendix E – Spanish Questionnaire Cover Letter ............................................... 153 Appendix F – Spanish Questionnaire ..................................................................... 155 Appendix G – Human Subject Research Review Form ......................................... 161

Impact of Trust Between Pastoral Leaders’ Self-Disclosure and Job Satisfaction x

List of Tables Table 1: Demographic Control Variables ................................................................ 50 Table 2: Regression Results for Job Satisfaction and Self-Disclosure Total ........... 59 Table 3: Regression Results for Job Satisfaction and Self-Disclosure Factors ....... 60 Table 4: Regression Results for JS1 and Self-Disclosure Total .............................. 65 Table 5: Regression Results for JS1 and Self-Disclosure Factors ........................... 66 Table 6: Regression Results for JS2 and Self-Disclosure Total .............................. 71 Table 7: Regression Results for JS2 and Self-Disclosure Factors ........................... 72 Table 8: Regression Results for JS3 and Self-Disclosure Total .............................. 78 Table 9: Regression Results for JS3 and Self-Disclosure Factors ........................... 79 Table 10: Regression Results for JS4 and Self-Disclosure Total ............................ 84 Table 11: Regression Results for JS4 and Self-Disclosure Factors ......................... 85 Table 12: Regression Results for JS5 and Self-Disclosure Total ............................ 90 Table 13: Regression Results for JS5 and Self-Disclosure Factors ......................... 91 Table 14: Regression Results for JS6 and Self-Disclosure Total ............................ 96 Table 15: Regression Results for JS6 and Self-Disclosure Factors ......................... 97 Table 16: Regression Results for JS7 and Self-Disclosure Total .......................... 103 Table 17: Regression Results for JS7 and Self-Disclosure Factors ....................... 104 Table 18: Regression Results for JS8 and Self-Disclosure Total .......................... 110 Table 19: Regression Results for JS8 and Self-Disclosure Factors ....................... 111 Table 20: Impact of Trust on Self-Disclosure Predictor Contribution ................... 125

Impact of Trust Between Pastoral Leaders’ Self-Disclosure and Job Satisfaction xi

List of Figures Figure 1: Research hypotheses. ................................................................................ 35 Figure 2: Regression blocks for total score of self-disclosure. ................................ 53 Figure 3: Regression blocks for factors of self-disclosure. ...................................... 54

Impact of Trust Between Pastoral Leaders’ Self-Disclosure and Job Satisfaction 1

Chapter 1 – Introduction Many organizational leaders have reported experiences of loneliness and isolation (H. B. London & Wiseman, 2003; Ragsdale, 1978; Sulkowicz, 2004). The demands of decision making, conflict resolution, and the pressures to perform and be viewed as a professional can be draining on leaders (Brooke & Price, 1989; Dewe, 1989; Farrell & Stamm, 1988; Jain, Lall, McLaughlin, & Johnson, 1996; Levitt, 2000; McBurney, 1977; Tett & Meyer, 1993; Ulstein, 1993). Studies have suggested individuals in occupations requiring a great amount of caregiving need someone in whom they can confide and share their own frustrations and personal needs (H. B. London & Wiseman, 1993; Lutzer, 1998; McBurney, 1977; Melander & Eppley, 2002; Rediger, 1982, 1997; Sandford, 1987; Sanford, 1982; Ulstein, 1993; Wimberly, 1997). This seems to be especially true among leaders in a pastoral context (Craig, 1991; Greenfield, 2001; Jud, Mills, & Burch, 1970; Oswald, 1991b). In light of this reported research, this proposed study seeks to determine how pastoral leaders’ trust in a confidant impacts their perceived self- disclosure and job satisfaction. In addition, this study focuses on leaders within a pastoral context in the United States who are serving in the Church of God of Prophecy (COGOP), a Christian, Protestant, Pentecostal denomination established in 1886 and composed of diverse pastoral leaders including various ethnicities and both male and female pastors. The organization operates according to an Episcopal- style governing structure (as opposed to a congregational structure) which provides opportunities for leaders to communicate with their superiors (COGOP, 2006; Phillips, 1998). Statement of the Problem Pastoral leaders provide a unique level of influence to individuals. Oswald (1991a) explained pastors are able to influence individuals concerning their whole life (work, family, spiritually, etc.), while most leaders are limited to influencing only one or two areas of a person’s life. Individuals may choose to either accept or reject the advice of pastoral leaders, but the opportunity for influence and access still exists. According to Oswald (1991a), “There is no other role in society that has

Impact of Trust Between Pastoral Leaders’ Self-Disclosure and Job Satisfaction 2

that kind of access or authority” (p. 9). However, such level of influence brings with it the taxing responsibility for pastors to be available to individuals 24 hours, 7 days each week. Sandford (1987) suggested such continual caregiving can create exhaustion that leads to a host of other problems. Combined with research findings suggesting some pastors are dissatisfied and lonely (H. B. London & Wiseman, 1993; McMillan, 2004), the need is evident for pastoral leaders to find ways to help alleviate their stress before crumbling under the strain of their work. According to a 1991 survey of pastors conducted by Fuller Institute of Church Growth, (a) 50% feel unable to meet job demands, (b) 90% believe they do not have sufficient training to deal with the demands of ministry, (c) 70% perceive their self-esteem to be lower now than when they began pastoring, (d) 37% confessed to having had inappropriate sexual behavior with another person while pastoring, and (e) 70% do not have a close friend (H. B. London & Wiseman, 1993). In addition, McMillan (2004) reported the findings from a 2002 survey of more than 2,000 Church of God (Cleveland, TN) pastoral leaders using the U.S. Congregational Life Survey (Woolever & Bruce, 2001), a study which has been replicated in other Pentecostal and Protestant denominations. According to McMillan, Church of God pastoral leaders, in comparison to other Pentecostals and Protestants participating in the aforementioned survey, report (a) lower levels of job satisfaction, (b) higher levels of congregational conflict, (c) less connection to and support of peers through formal or informal networks, (d) higher levels of loneliness and isolation in their work, (e) higher levels of depression and stress, and (f) slightly higher consideration of leaving the pastorate for other forms of ministry. Because the Church of God and COGOP share a common heritage, have a similar organizational structure, and have appealed largely to the same demographic within the United States, it seems plausible that similar perceptions may exist among COGOP pastoral leaders. It should be noted the researcher, who is a member of the Church of God (Cleveland, TN), has chosen to conduct this study outside of his denominational affiliation in an effort to avoid possible research bias. Therefore, the COGOP has been selected for this study.

Impact of Trust Between Pastoral Leaders’ Self-Disclosure and Job Satisfaction 3

McMillian’s (2004) report of Church of God pastoral leaders noting low job satisfaction and higher consideration of leaving the pastorate is congruent with other organizational studies suggesting individuals’ perceived low job satisfaction results in higher rates of turnover and stress (Barling, Wade, & Fullagar, 1990; Brooke & Price, 1989; Carsten & Spector, 1987; Eby & Buch, 1999; Farrell & Stamm, 1988; Hackman & Oldham, 1975, 1976; Kemery, Bedeian, Mossholder, & Touliatos, 1985; Kemery, Mossholder, & Bedeian, 1987; Kim, 2002; Pierce, Rubenfeld, & Morgan, 1991; Spector, 1985; Tett & Meyer, 1993). Similarly, studies among other caregiving jobs, specifically nurses, have reported a lack of support leads to higher stress levels and low job satisfaction (Dewe, 1989; Jain et al., 1996; Norbeck, 1985; Packard & Motowidlo, 1987). This suggests caregivers may have higher job satisfaction if they perceive to have some means of support such as someone in whom they can confide. Maslow’s (1954) hierarchy of human needs emphasizes the importance of individuals having such support, particularly the feeling that they belong and are loved as well as possess positive personal esteem. Oswald (1991a) and Melander and Eppley (2002) suggested leaders, particularly those in caregiving vocations, are likely to experience increased self-esteem as a result of a sense of belonging. And, early researchers proposed self-disclosure is an important element in one’s search for better psychological adjustment (Bugental, Tannenbaum, & Bobele, 1965; Culbert, 1968; Vosen, 1966). In addition, other researchers also recommended leaders find someone with whom they can reveal their struggles in an atmosphere of acceptance and confidentiality to help alleviate their job frustration and burnout (Corcoran, 1988; Faulkner, 1981; Lutzer, 1998; McBurney, 1977; McIntosh & Rima, 1997; Oswald, 1991b; Rediger, 1982; Sanford, 1982; Sulkowicz, 2004). Corcoran revealed the willingness of individuals to self-disclose problems with counselors when confidentiality is assured, while Jourard (1971b) agreed trust in a confidant is imperative for effective self-disclosure to occur. Therefore, a link seems plausible among one’s level of self-disclosure in a confidant whom he or she trusts and his or her job satisfaction.

Impact of Trust Between Pastoral Leaders’ Self-Disclosure and Job Satisfaction 4

Purpose of the Study This study seeks to examine how pastoral leaders’ trust in a confidant impacts their perceived self-disclosure with that confidant and their perceived job satisfaction, specifically within the COGOP. In addition, the findings from this study may be helpful to the COGOP and perhaps other denominations in understanding the effect, if any, self-disclosure has on pastoral leaders, possibly providing a platform for helpful disclosure among clergy if deemed necessary. Specifically, this study seeks to determine if there is a link between a lack of confidant trust, low self-disclosure, and low job satisfaction among COGOP pastoral leaders within the continental United States. The researcher has a personal interest in this topic as well as a desire to provide the COGOP with information concerning perceptions among its pastoral leaders. Although personally not a member of the COGOP, the researcher’s denominational preference shares a common heritage with the COGOP, and the researcher has ancestors who were pioneering ministers within the COGOP. The researcher also has a deep appreciation for the international ministry of the COGOP. Further, the COGOP pastoral leader composition offers diversity in ethnicity and gender that provides data from various perspectives. Objectives This quantitative study seeks to provide useful information to 1. Contribute to the body of knowledge about pastoral leaders in the COGOP in the United States; 2. Serve the COGOP with a better understanding of the impact of self- disclosure with trusted confidants among its pastoral leaders in the United States; 3. Serve the broader Christian, Protestant, and Pentecostal Church with a better understanding of pastoral leaders’ trust in confidant, self- disclosure, and job satisfaction;

Impact of Trust Between Pastoral Leaders’ Self-Disclosure and Job Satisfaction 5

4. Determine if certain variables and/or combinations of variables might contribute to the prevention of certain positive or negative pastoral satisfaction contexts; 5. Specifically inform the development of future methods for educating and training COGOP pastoral leaders in the United States concerning trust in confidant, self-disclosure, and job satisfaction; and 6. Add to the body of knowledge concerning leader self-disclosure in a trusted confidant in a religious context (i.e., the COGOP) in the United States. Significance of the Study This study is significant to the field of leadership because the literature related to pastoral leaders has been limited. In addition, there is a need for further, current studies focusing on leader self-disclosure. This study, therefore, seeks to understand the impact of self-disclosure among pastoral leaders within the COGOP in the United States as moderated by trust in a confidant and the possible relationships to pastoral leaders’ perceived job satisfaction and other variables (i.e., choice of confidant, age, gender, ethnicity, etc.). In addition, the findings from this study add to the body of literature on leadership and self-disclosure, as well as inform the COGOP about its pastoral leaders in the United States. Scope of the Study This study is quantitative in nature and utilizes a sample of pastoral leaders located in the continental United States, per approval of each state/regional overseer who must provide the researchers with a mailing list of pastoral leaders within his jurisdiction. The unit of analysis involves individual ministers from the COGOP. Each pastoral leader in the COGOP in the continental United States was mailed a questionnaire comprised of three validated instruments including (a) the 31-item Revised Self-Disclosure Scale by Wheeless (1976) to measure level of self-disclosure, (b) a slightly modified version of Robinson’s (1996) seven-item trust scale to measure trust in confidants, and (c) the Spector (1985) Job Satisfaction Survey.

Impact of Trust Between Pastoral Leaders’ Self-Disclosure and Job Satisfaction 6

Since interest was limited to this particular group of people, the sample (comprised of those returning completed questionnaires) was used to make inferences about population characteristics for the COGOP in the United States. This study is limited in its scope of research to a specific denomination and demographic. Therefore, it provides an opportunity to extend the current body of knowledge concerning self-disclosure in trusted confidants among pastoral leaders, specifically to clergy within the COGOP in the United States. Definitions of Terms For this research study, it is important to provide operational constructs. Terms and their definitions important to this study include the following: Baptistic – Baptistic refers to a congregational government structure in which each local congregation establishes its own policies and government structure. In this study, this is differentiated from the Episcopal-style of church government in which a centralized, hierarchical structure of chief ministers supervise the work of other ministry leaders and outline the policies for local congregations. COGOP – The COGOP is an international Christian denomination of almost 1 million members with international offices in Cleveland, Tennessee. A distinctive doctrine of the denomination emphasizes the Pentecostal experience of speaking in tongues as the Holy Spirit gives the utterance in accordance with Acts 2:4. Confidant – A confidant is an individual to whom a pastoral leader discloses information concerning the pastoral leader’s personal and work-related issues. Confidant is divided into six categories for which the pastoral leader self- reported the person in whom he or she is most comfortable to confide: (a) spouse, (b) denominational superior, (c) pastoral leader in the COGOP, (d) pastoral leader in another denomination other than the COGOP, (e) professional counselor, or (f) personal friend. Episcopal – Although a denomination within the United States closely aligned with the Church of England (or Anglican tradition) bears this name, for this

Impact of Trust Between Pastoral Leaders’ Self-Disclosure and Job Satisfaction 7

study, Episcopal refers to a form of church government in which a centralized, hierarchical structure of chief ministers supervise the work of other ministry leaders and outline the policies for local congregations. Opposite of this form of government is the congregational government structure in which each local congregation establishes its own policies and government structure. Ethnicity – Ethnicity is the self-reported race/ethnic background of the pastoral leader. It was divided into four categories: (a) Hispanic, (b) Black, (c) White, or (d) other. Job satisfaction – Using Spector’s definition as explained by Mulki, Jaramillo, and Locander (2006), this study defines job satisfaction as “an attitude reflecting how well people like or dislike their job” (p. 20). Leadership – This study utilizes Northouse’s (2004) definition of leadership as “a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal” (p. 3). Pastoral leader – A pastoral leader is an individual, male or female, who serves in the leadership role as the lead pastor of a congregation and, as a result, influences the congregation in attaining a desired goal. Pentecostal – A pentecostal is an individual affiliated with a movement within Christianity emphasizing the operation of New Testament spiritual gifts (1 Cor 12), particularly the belief in the baptism of the Holy Spirit accompanied by speaking in other or unknown languages (as experienced by the early followers of Christ in Acts 2). While Pentecostals vary in doctrinal beliefs and worship practices, the COGOP is considered a Classical Pentecostal movement since its doctrinal beliefs and worship style continue to reflect those of its beginning in the United States at the turn of the 20th Century. Self-disclosure – Self-disclosure is sharing personal information about one’s self with another in an exchange relationship in such a way that it makes one vulnerable to the other. Trust – Trust is a willingness to be vulnerable to others. Specifically, it is “a psychological state comprising the intention to accept vulnerability based upon

Impact of Trust Between Pastoral Leaders’ Self-Disclosure and Job Satisfaction 8

positive expectations of the intentions or behavior of another” (Rousseau, Sitkin, Burt, & Camerer, 1998, p. 395). Organization of Study The organization selected for data collection was the COGOP, a Classical Pentecostal denomination with international offices in Cleveland, Tennessee. The COGOP allows for diversity in the sample population. For example, the COGOP in the United States is composed of male and female pastors of diverse ethnicities including Caucasians, African-Americans, and Hispanics. Such diversity should strengthen the findings and make them more generalizable to other organizations with similar demographics and structures. The COGOP is an historic Pentecostal denomination in the United States that traces its origin to a small congregation organized in 1886 in the Appalachian Mountains region of eastern Tennessee (Conn, 1996; Phillips, 1998; Spurling, 1920; Tomlinson, 1913). Initially established as the Christian Union, the church originally embraced a baptistic-style structure emphasizing local church government (Conn; Phillips). Numerous Christian Union congregations were organized nearby in eastern Tennessee and western North Carolina, each operating independently of one another (McCauley, 1995; Spurling). However, by 1906, leaders had emerged and desired greater cooperation and fellowship among the various congregations, resulting in the formation of a general assembly to provide oversight and governing structure to the churches (Conn; Davidson, 1973; Phillips; Tomlinson). Shortly thereafter, the organization adopted the name Church of God and was established in Cleveland, Tennessee which would serve as the headquarters for the emerging denomination (Conn; Davidson; Phillips; Tomlinson). According to Phillips (1998) and Robins (2004), whose scholarly work on COGOP history examines its governing structure, the years 1909 to 1921 were pivotal in transforming the Baptistic-style movement into an Episcopal-style structure of government. This was initiated with the election of A. J. Tomlinson to lead the denomination as its general overseer in 1909 (Robins). Tomlinson (a)

Impact of Trust Between Pastoral Leaders’ Self-Disclosure and Job Satisfaction 9

encouraged the organization’s adoption of formal church teachings in 1910, (b) appointed leaders to oversee congregations in seven states in 1911, and (c) appointed a council of 12 elders in 1917 to assist in overseeing the organization’s general administration (Conn, 1996; Phillips; Robins). By 1921, the organization adopted a constitution which ultimately contributed to a conflict between the 12 elders and Tomlinson concerning who held official decision-making authority (Conn; Davidson, 1973; Phillips). Following an internal power dispute, Tomlinson was removed as general overseer of the Church of God by the 12 elders, and the denomination divided with a portion of its membership remaining with Tomlinson and organizing into a new body in 1923. Following an ensuing legal battle over who held rightful ownership of the name Church of God, the group led by Tomlinson would eventually become known as the COGOP (Conn; Davidson; Phillips). In August 2006, the COGOP listed an international membership of 940,854 in 132 nations. Technically, the COGOP adheres to an Episcopal-style structure, including (a) centralized government, (b) denominational ownership of local church property, and (c) appointment of pastors to local churches (COGOP, 2006). The COGOP structure continues to lean heavily upon its centralized system for connecting with its constituency and conducting its ministerial efforts. The governing structure of the COGOP includes an International General Overseer who is assisted by seven General Presbyters, each of whom is responsible for the denomination’s ministries within a specific geographic region of the world. For example, the North American General Presbyter supervises the COGOP ministries within the United States and Canada and communicates directly with the 28 North American Overseers, each of whom are responsible for supervising the pastors and ministers, churches, and other denominational ministries within their given region. In some regions, district overseers are also appointed by the state/territorial overseers to assist them with the general ministry in their respective areas (COGOP, 2006).

Impact of Trust Between Pastoral Leaders’ Self-Disclosure and Job Satisfaction 10

Summary This quantitative research study sought to determine how pastoral leaders’ perceived job satisfaction is impacted by their perceived self-disclosure in a confidant whom they can trust. Using validated scales compiled into a questionnaire, data were collected from diverse leaders within a pastoral context in the United States who are serving in the COGOP which has a governing structure that provides opportunities for leaders to communicate with their superiors (COGOP, 2006; Phillips, 1998). The remainder of this study follows a uniform structure. The second chapter provides a review of literature that examines the historical and theoretical foundations of self-disclosure, specifically in a religious context. The third chapter provides an explanation of the proposed research study’s research procedures, selection of instrumentation, designation of variables, the hypotheses, and a plan for analysis. The fourth chapter outlines the data analyses process and research findings. The fifth chapter discusses the results, study limitations, and offers suggestions for future research studies related to this topic.

Impact of Trust Between Pastoral Leaders’ Self-Disclosure and Job Satisfaction 11

Chapter 2 – Literature Review Recent articles have highlighted the need for leaders to have someone in whom they can confide (Davis, Schoorman, Mayer, & Tan, 2000; Harter, Schmidt, & Hayes, 2002; Kim, 2002; Parker, 2002; Rusaw, 2000; Sulkowicz, 2004). In addition, researchers have noted the importance of confidants for leaders within a pastoral context (Alcorn, 1996; Faulkner, 1981; Greenfield, 2001; Hands & Fehr, 1993; Hoge & Wenger, 2005; H. B. London & Wiseman, 1993; Oswald, 1991a, 1991b; Ragsdale, 1978; C. W. Stewart, 1974). H. B. London and Wiseman referenced a 1991 survey of pastors by the Fuller Institute of Church Growth suggesting 70% of pastors feel they do not have someone they consider to be a close friend. Hoge and Wenger, who surveyed pastors in five denominations including the Assemblies of God, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), and the United Methodist Church, highlighted how feelings of loneliness and isolation contribute to pastoral leaders’ job frustrations, including leaving local ministry. In addition, Hoge and Wenger found 75% of pastoral leaders who leave the ministry because of sexual misconduct attribute their behavior to poor choices resulting from feelings of isolation, loneliness, and other factors of job dissatisfaction. Therefore, a pastoral leader’s willingness to trust a confidant and disclose personal information seems vital to helping him or her combat loneliness and isolation and find satisfaction in his or her job. Theoretical Foundation Building on literature in the leadership field that suggests isolation and loneliness among leaders contribute to their burnout, job dissatisfaction, moral problems (especially for those seeking to fill their loneliness with inappropriate actions), and thoughts about changing jobs (i.e., Hunt, Hinkle, & Maloney, 1990; Ragsdale, 1978; Ulstein, 1993), it seems plausible for leaders to understand the need for building relationships and finding someone in whom they can confide. Specifically, it seems plausible a relationship exists between a leader’s self-

Full document contains 175 pages
Abstract: This quantitative research study examined how pastoral leaders' trust in a confidant impacts their perceived self-disclosure and job satisfaction. An 84-item questionnaire, based on a review of related literature and comprised of validated research scales, including the Revised Self-Disclosure Scale (Wheeless, 1976), a slightly modified version of Robinson's (1996) seven-item trust scale, and the Job Satisfaction Survey (Spector, 1985), was utilized to collect data among pastoral leaders in the Church of God of Prophecy (COGOP) within the continental United States. Two hundred forty six participants returned completed questionnaires from which multiple regression analyses were performed to determine if trust in confidant impacted job satisfaction more than the impact of self-disclosure on job satisfaction among COGOP pastoral leaders. Separate analyses were conducted, including one for the Job Satisfaction Survey and one for each of the satisfaction dimensions within the scale: (a) pay, (b) promotion, (c) supervision, (d) benefits, (e) rewards, (f) operating procedures, (g) nature of work, and (h) communication. Findings suggest COGOP pastoral leaders' trust in a confidant does not have a greater positive influence on the relationship between their self-disclosure and job satisfaction more than the influence of self-disclosure without trust. A discussion about the research findings and their practical application for COGOP pastoral leaders is included as well as potential study limitations and possible future research related to this topic.