Education Management from Indonesia: The Political Influence of
Regional Heads
RIDWAN RIDWAN1, BUJANG RAHMAN1, HASAN HARIRI1, SUDJARWO SUDJARWO1,
HERDIAN HERDIAN2, RIAS TUSIANAH3, ALBET MAYDIANTORO4, USASTIAWATY C. A.
S. ISNAINY5, M. ARIFKI ZAINARO5, TUBAGUS ALI RACHMAN PUJA KESUMA6, ACHRIL
ZALMANSYAH7
1Doctor of Education Program, Teacher and Training Faculty, Universitas Lampung, Jalan Soemantri
Brodjonegoro No. 1 Bandar Lampung, 35141, INDONESIA
2SMAN 1 Pagelaran Kab. Pringsewu Lampung, INDONESIA
3SMP Negeri 1 Seputih Agung, Central Lampung Regency, INDONESIA
4Department of Economic Education, University of Lampung Bandar, Lampung City, INDONESIA
5Department of Nursing Management, Universitas Malahayati Bandar, Lampung City, INDONESIA
6Department of Social Science, Institute Agama Islam Negeri (IAIN), Metro City, INDONESIA
7Badan Riset dan Inovasi Nasional, Gedung B.J. Habibie, Lt 21 Jl. M.H. Thamrin No 8 Jakarta Pusat,
INDONESIA
Abstract: - The aim of this research is to present an understanding of the effect of political regional heads that
causes anxiety on organizational commitment, the effect of anxiety on self-efficacy, and the effect of anxiety
after there is a mediator of self-efficacy on organizational commitment. The effect of anxiety on self-efficacy
was 1.16%, the effect of anxiety on organizational commitment was 12.1%. After the mediating variable (self-
efficacy) in the second regression the R-Square became 49.8%. Thus Self-Efficacy plays a role in strengthening
organizational commitment on the influence of Anxiety. The author concludes that anxiety affects low self-
efficacy. In other words, self-efficacy is able to fortify the influence of anxiety in this case anxiety due to the
succession of regional heads. Organizational commitment can be increased by the presence of self-efficacy.
Self-efficacy is clearly able to maintain the commitment of the principal even though there are concerns about
the succession of regional heads.
Key-Words: Literature review, the meaning three elements of organizational commitment
Received: July 29, 2021. Revised: January 12, 2022. Accepted: March 11, 2022. Published: March 24, 2022.
1 Introduction
Education is important for all nations and countries
because education is able to improve the quality of
human resources to form independent human
beings and be able to contribute positively.
Therefore, Indonesia has issued policies, one of
which is the decentralization of education.
This decentralization triggered in educational
reforms characterized by the alteration of
administrative power from the central government
to local governments up to the district level, and
schools. The transfer aims to endievour the quality
of education and has changed in how local leaders
practice leadership in educational, including how
headmasters are recruited. This transformation is a
focus to guarantee that the headmasters recruited
can donate to enhancing the quality of schools and
the grade of education in all districts [1].
The quality of education is also very dependent
on the leader of the education unit, namely the
effective principal. At the school stage, the
principal is responsible for establishing school
significance. It is a broadly acknowledged fact that
right headmasters are the cornerstone of grade
schools and that, without the headmasters'
administration struggles to enhance learner
accomplishment, schools will not flourish [2].
The involvement effort aims to ensure that
stakeholders, such as school principals, teachers,
and school committees achieve optimal job
satisfaction. Effective principals and satisfied
principals can contribute significantly to effective
schools, and effective schools are directly
proportional to the creation of quality education [3-
5]. School administration is an essential discussion
of considerable government human resource
quality improvement programs, health, and
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.82
Ridwan Ridwan, Bujang Rahman,
Hasan Hariri, Sudjarwo Sudjarwo,
Herdian Herdian, Rias Tusianah,
Albet Maydiantoro, Usastiawaty C. A. S. Isnainy,
M. Arifki Zainaro, Tubagus Ali Rachman Puja Kesuma,
Achril Zalmansyah
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
938
Volume 19, 2022
economic growth, and also examines ideational and
methodological topics in exploring the influence of
school administration as a mutual cycle [6]. Thus,
the school administration has evolved an essential
site of investigation, and this is reflected by the
increase in policy activities in schools [7, 8].
Effective principals are influenced by many
variables, such as self-efficacy, motivation,
commitment, climate, school culture, political
situation, and many others. The previous research
has not examined self-efficacy, and organizational
commitment when juxtaposed with anxiety,
especially the political succession of regional
heads. In particular, this study examines anxiety
about the principal's organizational commitment
with self-efficacy acting as a moderator. For the
sake of developing and understanding the science
of leadership and educational management, this
research is important.
Self-efficacy is a fundamental segment in
Bandura's social mental idea [9-11]. Social
cognition highlights the involvement and practice
of human mechanisms as a view that individuals
can wield some influence over what they do. Self-
efficacy is seen as a person who is self-arranged,
assertive, self-thoughtful, self-regulating, and
involved in his growth. Individuals can affect their
actions and control their thoughts and emotions.
What he thinks, believes, and feels becomes a
guide for behaving and perceiving reality. Thus
conduct is influenced by the authority and effect
they undergo [10].
Managers with satisfactory self-efficacy are
most likely to succeed in carrying out their duties.
Self-efficacy as an intermediary or predictor has
really shown its efficacy in various studies [12-19].
This investigation explores the function of self-
efficacy as mediating principals in carrying out
leadership on the influence of anxiety on
organizational commitment.
Politics as a living entity also affects various
relationships. A study examining longitudinal
mediation models to answer questions about how
and why insights of corporate politics influence
turnover preferences, and how workers' political
mastery relies on this connection by easing job
pressure. Job pressure mediates the connection
between political insights and the power of shifting
or switching directives, and workers' political
mastery decrease resignation preferences by
attenuating the impact of political insights on
career stress. This investigation donates to the
human resource administration and managerial
psychology writings by describing the mediating
mechanism [20-22].
In line with the many factors that influence the
course of the principal's duties and functions,
research on self-efficacy that moderates the
political anxiety of regional head succession on
organizational commitment is still rare. Therefore,
this research is important especially in the context
of education management in Indonesia.
1.1 Identification of Problems
Principal self-efficacy has received much attention
over the last few decades and has been investigated
in relation to principal behavior. Relatively many
have conducted self-efficacy research within the
framework of relationships. The authors identify
knowledge gaps seen in the earlier investigations
on self-efficacy. In addition, previous research did
not address the subject of self-efficacy and the
influence of anxiety triggered by local politics [23-
27].
Likewise with commitment [27-29], the authors
identify knowledge gaps seen in previous research
on organizational commitment. The previous
research has not or at least not addressed the
subject of organizational commitment research in
the field of education. Recently, it attracted
researchers’ attention in other disciplines of
business [30-32].
Anxiety can damage the building elements that
enable the achievement of educational outputs and
outcomes. There are practical and policy
knowledge gaps in previous research on self-
efficacy, and principals' organizational
commitment. There is a lack of research involving
aspect of anxiety in the previous literature. Anxiety
appears to be under-researched in principal
leadership practice. However, there are very few
practical studies or research in the area of the
effects of anxiety.
Anxiety as a confounding factor is important
and deserves to be investigated in the context of
developing knowledge of aspects that affect self-
efficacy and organizational commitment.
Investigation of this issue is important because self-
efficacy can be influenced by many things whereas
self-efficacy can be strengthened or undermined by
anxiety factors. Furthermore, previous theoretical
research has focused mainly on purely
psychological studies, health and very little
practical research has been done in the aspect of
anxiety in the field of education implementation
and management, while education is a determining
factor for the success and progress of a nation in
the future.
This research is important because not many
have investigated self-efficacy as a moderator in a
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.82
Ridwan Ridwan, Bujang Rahman,
Hasan Hariri, Sudjarwo Sudjarwo,
Herdian Herdian, Rias Tusianah,
Albet Maydiantoro, Usastiawaty C. A. S. Isnainy,
M. Arifki Zainaro, Tubagus Ali Rachman Puja Kesuma,
Achril Zalmansyah
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
939
Volume 19, 2022
framework of thought with the variable Anxiety on
the principal's organizational commitment,
especially in the context of education where the
data were taken in the province of Lampung
Indonesis.
1.2 Formulation of the Problem
The results of research examining self-efficacy
as a predictor were statistically significant
predictors of various variables. To answer the
formulation of the problem, this research is guided
by the following research questions:
1. Is there any effect of anxiety on self-efficacy?
2. Is there any effect of anxiety on organizational
commitment?
3. How is the effect of self-efficacy moderating
anxiety on organizational commitment?
2 Literature Review
2.1 Principal's Commitment
Principal loyalty can be conceptualized in various
forms. In research, it directs to the type of
administrative loyalty typically employed in the
school significance and school administration
investigation writings [33, 34]. Morrow has
determined more than 25 kinds of
conceptualization and measurement of
organizational loyalty used by investigators [35,
36]. It is presented by Mowday, Steers [29] and
Mowday, Porter [37] remarkably nicely made and
has been frequently operated in studies in different
settings [34]. They use the attitude-behavior
contradiction to conceptualize organizational
loyalty.
Loyalty is an attitude focused on the strategy
that individuals use to feel about their affinity with
the association, whereas behavioral loyalty is
affected by the strategy by which individuals
evolve closed into a certain organization and how
they deal with these matters. They believe
organizational commitment is a comparative power
of personal label and involvement in a certain
organization.
Commitment is an important loyalty to the
teaching profession, principals, and an important
component for efficiency and effectiveness as well
as for all organizations. The concept of
commitment has been the priority of investigation
for several years, especially among sociologists
regarding individual and group behavior in
phenomena such as religion, power, job
recruitment, political behavior, and bureaucratic
behavior [38-40]. Operationally, commitment is an
exchange phenomenon [41]. For example, people
tend to stay committed as long as they feel the
associated positive benefits that are reluctant to go
away [42, 43].
In the organizational context, commitment is
characterized by strong confidence in the ideals of
the organization, a readiness to accomplish
additional work for the association, and loyalty in
continuing to serve the organization [37]. Loyalty
thus becomes the bond that holds workers
connected to the organization. Such commitment is
called affective commitment. Meyer and Allen
assert three forms of commitment: (a) affective
commitment, strongly related to workers' emotive
linkage, marker with, and devotion to the
organization; (b) continuance commitment,
referring to worker presence, implementation, and
corporate citizenship manners, and their financial
rewards; and (c) normative commitment, referring
to workers' emotions of moral duty to the
association [44, 45]. They argue that this form of
commitment should be viewed psychologically and
that employees need to cooperate with their
employers.
2.2 Self-efficacy
Self-efficacy is characterized as confidence in an
individual's capacity to accomplish specific
objectives founded on his actions [46]. Therefore,
self-efficacy is founded on an individual's views
and expectations concerning the expected result.
Bandura examines the outcomes of diverse
investigations that emphasize the effect of self-
efficacy on an implementation actually in fairly
homogeneous groups. Nevertheless, it is essential
to mention that self-efficacy does not evolve in
emptiness and that views are shaped by context and
dynamic and physiological facets [46].
In schooling, the notion of headmaster's self-
efficacy was invented by Amor, Conroy-Oseguera
[47] and additionally heightened by Ashton and
Webb [48], Berman [49], and Gibson and Dembo
[50]. The other significant papers include Denham
and Michael [51], Soodak, Podell [52], and
Woolfolk and Hoy [53]. Referring to Bandura, if an
individual's self-efficacy, for instance, a teacher, is
a mixture of general administration self-efficacy
and individual leadership self-efficacy, the
principal's self-efficacy is a mixture of general and
personal leadership self-efficacy [54]. General
leadership self-efficacy guides to the broad concept
that leadership affects and directs followers to
victory despite the impact of different forces, such
as family, socioeconomic status, and other
environmental aspects. Individual administration
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.82
Ridwan Ridwan, Bujang Rahman,
Hasan Hariri, Sudjarwo Sudjarwo,
Herdian Herdian, Rias Tusianah,
Albet Maydiantoro, Usastiawaty C. A. S. Isnainy,
M. Arifki Zainaro, Tubagus Ali Rachman Puja Kesuma,
Achril Zalmansyah
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
940
Volume 19, 2022
self-efficacy directs to the principal's confidence in
his or her capacity to affect others.
2.3 Principal's Self-Efficacy
The headmaster's feeling of certainty is an appraisal
of his capacity to formulate certain actions to yield
the expected results in the school he rules [55]. It is
the headmaster's self-perceived ability to complete
the cognitive and behavioral operations required to
handle company strategies with respect to objective
accomplishment [56]. Self-efficacy contains an
influential consequence on objective setting,
aspiration level, struggle, adaptability, and
endurance [57, 58]. These views affect the growth
of useful administration techniques, and the
masterful undertaking of those techniques [56].
Self-confidence is an aspect of the social mental
approach [9, 57, 59]. The primary effect on self-
confidence is considered to be the investigation of
attribution and understanding of the four bases of
belief knowledge including mastery knowledge,
physiological arousal, representative experience,
and verbal persuasion. Self-efficacy relies on
context; yet, individuals do not discover it to be
equally practical in all circumstances. Principals
may discern confidence to direct in specific
contexts, but this feeling of belief may or may not
be transmitted to other contexts, relying on the
sensed resemblance of the assignment.
Accordingly, in constructing an efficacy appraisal,
it is essential to assess the pieces of the assignment
at hand. In addition, it is crucial to consider one's
resilience and deficiencies in relation to the
prerequisites of the task [2, 60].
In exploring the assignment, the comparative
significance of the characteristics that cause it
tricky to direct or serve as a restriction in a
conveyed context rather than by estimating the
available resources that encourage leadership. In
estimating self-perception of competence,
principals reckon personal capabilities such as
skills, understanding, techniques, or qualities traits
that are balanced against individual shortcomings
or commitments in a certain school surrounding.
The interchange between these two elements
guides an examination of self-efficacy for
administration in a certain school context.
The intention of leadership is to promote the
accomplishment of grouping objectives by
installing and strengthening an atmosphere that
sustains school performance. Flourishing
leadership concerns utilizing sociable consequence
strategies to handle, direct, and encourage the
efforts of others. It demands ongoing assignment
fulfillment struggles, influential duty techniques,
and the cunning application of a broad spectrum of
notion, technical, and interpersonal skills [56]. A
robust insight of belief is demanded to preserve a
constructive focus of engagement and the
endurance of struggle demanded to achieve
organizational objectives [61]. Leadership self-
efficacy has been associated with forming a guide
and attaining follower loyalty and overwhelming
hindrances to alter [62].
Sense of self-efficacy forces the manager's
analytical technique and ensuing organizational
undertaking in the unreal organizational
circumstances [61]. Leadership self-efficacy is
extremely connected to performance evaluation by
factual watchers in leadership simulations and
leadership ratings by coworkers and supervisors,
and subordinate performance capacities [63, 64]. A
leader's self-confidence was also discovered to
mediate worker meeting with their job [65].
Worker engagement happens when workers are
cognitively warned and/or emotionally linked to
others to discover significance in their profession.
Although practical investigations of principals'
sense of confidence are rare, the outcomes are
fascinating. Self-confidence thoughts are
outstanding predictors of personal conduct.
Principals with a robust insight into self-efficacy
are revealed to be persistent in chasing their
objectives, better adaptable, and better willing to
adopt approaches to meet contextual
circumstances. They regard and accept change as a
process that takes time. They are reliable in their
struggles to attain their objectives, but they will
also make endeavors in strategies that don't work
[66]. Encountered with difficulties, high-efficiency
principals do not analyze their incapability to solve
troubles instantly as a failure. They modify their
individual expectations to fit the circumstances,
usually stay confident and relaxed, and preserve
their feeling of humor, even in difficult situations.
Principals with more elevated self-efficacy are
better possible to utilize internally founded
individual powers, such as professionals,
information, and considerations when dragging out
their functions [67].
2.4 Anxiety
Anxiety is defined as a state of restlessness and fear
caused by the anticipation of something
threatening. Excessive anxiety can lead to poor
performance [68]. Anxiety is a relatively complex
concept that involves one's feelings about one's
abilities and the judgment one has to face in a
situation that can result in high levels of anxiety.
High anxiety can cause stress in a person and this
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.82
Ridwan Ridwan, Bujang Rahman,
Hasan Hariri, Sudjarwo Sudjarwo,
Herdian Herdian, Rias Tusianah,
Albet Maydiantoro, Usastiawaty C. A. S. Isnainy,
M. Arifki Zainaro, Tubagus Ali Rachman Puja Kesuma,
Achril Zalmansyah
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
941
Volume 19, 2022
stress varies. Most of it comes from feelings such
as tension and pressure on something that is
complex and involves psychological aspects.
Anxiety can have severe negative effects if a
person does not know how to effectively deal with
these feelings. It can cause such stress that one's
ability to lead a normal life can be severely
impaired [69].
In most districts in Indonesia, the principal's
anxiety is real and really overshadows the
principals. The change of principals will certainly
cause various polemics among current principals
and prospective principals who have attended
training to become school principals. The reason is
the shift of principals more likely to be based on
the preferences of the regional head.
3 Method
3.1 Kinds and Research Approach
This investigation is a descriptive type of
confirmation, employing the survey. The
approaches used to collect data by taking data
directly in the research area to describe past data
and field conditions before carrying out further
research. While the survey is the approach used to
obtain data from certain natural places, the
researchers treat the data collection with
questionnaires [70]. Particularly, these researchers
clarify the effect of anxiety caused by political
local tensions on self-efficacy and its subsequent
impact on the principal's organizational
commitment. The populations in this study were
high school teachers from Pesawaran Regency,
Lampung Province. The sample in this study
amounted to 140 teachers. The authors
distributeded questionnaires or questionnaires
electronically via Google Form.
3.2 Test Instrument Requirements
The research instrument used is a questionnaire
sheet. Based on quantitative research, the data in
this study must be converted into numbers by
scoring. This questionnaire uses several alternative
answer choices so that respondents simply put a
check mark on the available answers.
a) Instrument Reliability Test
The outcomes of the computation of the
reliability of the variables of anxiety, self-efficacy,
and organizational commitment respectively are
reliability statistics cronbach's alpha 0.957, with
overall anxiety items in the range of 0.946 to 0.975.
Overall cronbach's alpha is > from 0.005. The
reliability of the self-efficacy variable is reliability
statistics cronbach's alpha 0.935 with overall self-
efficacy items in the range of 0.928 to 0.941.
Overall cronbach's alpha is > from 0.005.
Calculation of the organizational commitment
variable has reliability statistics cronbach's alpha at
0.844, with overall anxiety items in the range of
0.721 to 0.809. Overall cronbach's alpha is > from
0.005.
b) Instrument Validity Test
The outcomes of the computation of the validity
of the anxiety variable in the Pearson Correlation
range of 165 to 0.930 > 0.005. The validity of self-
efficacy is in the range of Pearson Correlation
0.149 to 0.863 > 0.005, and the validity of
organizational commitment ranges from Pearson
Correlation 0.13 to 0.733 > 0.005.
4 Results and Discussion
4.1 Results
As the author describes in chapters one to three, it
is implied that this research is a confirmatory study,
not an exploratory one. This research is intended to
seek confirmation of the construct that was built
through the stages of theoretical studies that have
been built in the previous chapter. In this chapter,
the author presents the results and discussion. The
presentation was preceded by the author presenting
the following results.
4.1.1 Parametric Test
As usual quantitative research, the author
presents a number of tests which include data
parametric tests which include tests of normality,
linearity, and freedom of observation (classical
assumption test). After performing parametric
testing of the data, the authors present a regression
assumption test which includes the VIF (varian
inflation factor) test and the Eigen Value and
Condition Index tests.
1) Classic Assumption Test
At this stage, SPSS software is not
operationalized, but only a way of reading the
classic assumption test from SPSS output, as
shown in the output file.
2) Multicollinearity
The outcomes of the multicollinearity
examination can be seen in the coefficients table
for the last two columns.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.82
Ridwan Ridwan, Bujang Rahman,
Hasan Hariri, Sudjarwo Sudjarwo,
Herdian Herdian, Rias Tusianah,
Albet Maydiantoro, Usastiawaty C. A. S. Isnainy,
M. Arifki Zainaro, Tubagus Ali Rachman Puja Kesuma,
Achril Zalmansyah
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
942
Volume 19, 2022
Table 1. Coefficientsa
Source: Data results, 2021
The VIF matters for the anxiety and self-
efficacy variables are both 1.017, while the
Tolerance is 0.984. Because the VIF value of the
two variables is not greater than 10 or 5, it can be
said that there is no multicollinearity in the two
independent variables.
Based on the classical assumptions of linear
regression with Ordinary Least Square (OLS), a
good linear regression model is one that is free
from multicollinearity. Accordingly, the above
model is free from multicollinearity.
3) Autocorrelation
The estimate the linear regression model is
time-series data, so it is required to keep an
assumption test that is free from autocorrelation.
The outcomes of the autocorrelation examination
can be seen in the Model Summaryb table, the last
column.
Table 2. Model Summaryb
Model Summaryb
Model
R
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
Durbin-Watson
1
,707a
,492
4,426
1,867
a. Predictors: (Constant), Self-Efficacy, Anxiety
b. Dependent Variable: Organizational Commitment
Source: Data results, 2021
The value listed Durbin-Watson on the SPSS
output is called the calculated DW. This number
will be compared with the acceptance or rejection
criteria that will be made with the dL and dU
values determined based on the number of
independent variables in the regression model (k)
and the number of samples (n). The values of dL
and dU can be seen in Table DW with a
significance level (error) of 5% (α = 0.05).
The Durbin-Watson table shows that k=1
(independent variable 1) and n=140 (number of
samples 140) the value of dL = 1.7095 and the
value of dU = 1.7382 so that criteria can be
determined whether or not autocorrelation occurs.
Because the values of dL and dU are in the range of
1.539 to 2.481, there is no autocracy. Or, the
calculated DW value of 1.867 is greater than 1.539
and smaller than 2.481, which means that it is in an
area where there is no autocorrelation.
4) Heteroscedasticity
Heteroscedasticity testing is done by
completing a scatterplot between the residuals and
the predictive score of the standardized dependent
variable. The outcomes of the heteroscedasticity
trial can be seen in the Scatterplot image, as shown
below:
Coefficientsa
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t
Sig.
Collinearity
Statistics
B
Std. Error
Beta
Tolerance
VIF
1
(Constant)
5,432
2,862
1,898
,060
Anxiety
,172
,034
,308
5,051
,000
,984
1,017
Self-
Efficacy
,388
,035
,677
11,102
,000
,984
1,017
a. Dependent Variable: Organizational Commitment
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.82
Ridwan Ridwan, Bujang Rahman,
Hasan Hariri, Sudjarwo Sudjarwo,
Herdian Herdian, Rias Tusianah,
Albet Maydiantoro, Usastiawaty C. A. S. Isnainy,
M. Arifki Zainaro, Tubagus Ali Rachman Puja Kesuma,
Achril Zalmansyah
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
943
Volume 19, 2022
Fig. 1: Scatterplot Diagram
From the image, it can be seen that the point
distribution does not compose a certain pattern, so
it can be inferred that there is no heteroscedasticity
or in other words, homoscedasticity occurs. The
classical assumption about heteroscedasticity in
this model is fulfilled, which is free from
heteroscedasticity.
5) Normality
The outcomes of the normality test can be seen
from the Normal P-P Plot image below. It should
be reminded that the normality assumption directed
to in the classical assumption of the OLS approach
is the residual (data) created by a normally
distributed linear regression model, not the
independent variable or the dependent variable.
The criteria for a residual (data) are normally
distributed or not with the Normal P-P Plot
approach. This can be accomplished by examining
the distribution of the points in the image. If the
distribution of these points is close to a straight line
(diagonal) then it is said that the residual (data) is
normally distributed, but if the distribution of the
points is away from the line then it is not normally
distributed.
Fig. 2: Histogram Diagram
The histogram graph is said to be normal if
the data distribution is bell-shaped, neither skewed
to the left nor skewed to the right. The histogram
graph above composes a bell and is relatively not
skewed to the right or left so that the histogram
graph is reported normal.
Fig. 3: P-Plot Diagrams
The dispersal of points from the Normal P-P
Plot image above is relatively close to a straight
line, so it can be inferred that the residual (data) is
normally dispersed. These outcomes are in line
with the classical assumptions of linear regression
with the OLS approach.
4.1.2 Freedom of Observation
The author said that the questionnaire was
delivered to the respondents via Google form. The
use of Google forms is the right choice with the
consideration that data collection is carried out
during the Covid-19 pandemic. However, the
advantage is that respondents do not cooperate in
filling out the questionnaire. This can be achieved
because the questionnaire is able to reach directly
to the respondent personally and the filling out by
the respondent is free from influence from any
party, especially demographic data is made unable
to detect confidential data.
4.1.3 Model Feasibility Test
In the following, a feasibility test of the model
which includes the F and t-test models is presented
sequentially.
1) Model Reliability Test (F Test)
The measure trustworthiness test or what is
better popularly referred to as the F test (some
name it a simultaneous measure test) is the initial
phase of specifying the calculated regression
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.82
Ridwan Ridwan, Bujang Rahman,
Hasan Hariri, Sudjarwo Sudjarwo,
Herdian Herdian, Rias Tusianah,
Albet Maydiantoro, Usastiawaty C. A. S. Isnainy,
M. Arifki Zainaro, Tubagus Ali Rachman Puja Kesuma,
Achril Zalmansyah
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
944
Volume 19, 2022
measure whether it is feasible or not. Appropriate
means the calculated model is viable to be utilized
to clarify the effect of independent variables on the
dependent variables. The name of this test is the F
test because it follows the F distribution that test
criteria are like One Way Anova.
If the calculated F probability value (SPSS
output is shown in the sig. column) is less than the
error rate (alpha) of 0.05 (which has been
determined) then it can be stated that the estimated
regression model is attainable, whereas if the
calculated F probability value is bigger from an
error rate of 0.05, it can be said that the estimated
regression model is not attainable.
The outcomes of the F test can be noticed in the
ANOVA table below. The calculated F probability
value is seen in the last column (sig.).
Table 3. ANOVAa
ANOVAa
Model
Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
1
Regression
2676,356
2
1338,178
68,319
,000b
Residual
2683,437
137
19,587
Total
5359,793
139
a. Dependent Variable: Organization Commitment
b. Predictors: (Constant), Self-Efficacy, Anxiety
Source: Data results, 2021
The calculated F probability value (sig.) in
table 3 is 0.000 less than the 0.05 significance
level, so it can be inferred that the estimated linear
regression model is attainable to employ to present
the effect of Anxiety and Self-Efficacy on the
dependent variable of Organizational Commitment.
2) Regression Coefficient Test (t Test)
The t-test in multiple linear regressions is planned
to test whether the parameters (regression
coefficients and constants) that are predicted to
estimate the multiple linear regression equation are
the correct parameters or not. The right implication
is that the parameter is able to define the behavior
of the independent variable in affecting the
dependent variable. Parameters estimated in linear
regression include intercept (constant) and slope
(coefficient in the linear equation). In this section,
the t-test is focused on the slope parameter
(regression coefficient) only. So the t-test in
question is the regression coefficient test. The test
results can be seen in the Coefficients table as
shown in the figure below:
Table 4. Coefficientsa
Coefficientsa
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t
Sig.
Collinearity Statistics
B
Std. Error
Beta
Tolerance
VIF
1
(Constant)
5,432
2,862
1,898
,060
Anxiety
,172
,034
,308
5,051
,000
,984
1,017
Self-Efficacy
,388
,035
,677
11,102
,000
,984
1,017
a. Dependent Variable: Organization Commitment
Source: Data results, 2021
Like the F test, if the probability value of t count
(SPSS output is shown in the sig. column) is less
than the error rate (alpha) of 0.05 (which has been
determined) then it can be declared that the
independent variable (from the t count) has a
powerful influence on the dependent variable,
whereas if the probability value of t count is greater
than the error rate of 0.05 then it can be declared
that the independent variable has no important
effect on the dependent variable.
The probability value of t calculation of the
anxiety -independent variable- is 0.000 which is
less than 0.05 so that the anxiety - independent
variable has a powerful impact on the dependent
variable of organizational commitment at alpha 5%
or in other words, anxiety has a powerful effect on
Organizational Commitment at the 95% confidence
level. Also, the influence of the independent
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.82
Ridwan Ridwan, Bujang Rahman,
Hasan Hariri, Sudjarwo Sudjarwo,
Herdian Herdian, Rias Tusianah,
Albet Maydiantoro, Usastiawaty C. A. S. Isnainy,
M. Arifki Zainaro, Tubagus Ali Rachman Puja Kesuma,
Achril Zalmansyah
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
945
Volume 19, 2022
variable on self-efficacy on the dependent variable
of organizational commitment, because the
probability value of t count (0.000) which is
smaller than 0.05 so it can be said that the
independent variable of self-efficacy has a
significant effect on the dependent variable of
organizational commitment at alpha 5% or in other
words, anxiety about self-efficacy owns a
significant impact on organizational commitment at
the 95% confidence level.
3) Coefficient of Determination
The coefficient of determination clarifies the
variation in the influence of the independent
variables on the dependent variable. Or it can also
be declared as the ratio of the effect of all
independent variables on the dependent variable.
The value of the coefficient of determination can be
measured by the value of R-Square or Adjusted R-
Square. R-Square is used when there is only 1
independent variable (commonly called Simple
Linear Regression), while Adjusted R-Square is
used when there is more than one independent
variable. In calculating the value of the coefficient
of determination, the authors choose to use an R-
Square than an Adjusted R-Square, even though the
independent variable is more than one.
Table 5. Model Summaryb
Model Summaryb
Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the Estimate
Durbin-Watson
1
,707a
,499
,492
4,426
1,867
a. Predictors: (Constant), Self-Efficacy, Anxiety
b. Dependent Variable: Organization Commitment
Source: Data results, 2021
The R-Square value of 0.499 indicates that the
ratio of the effect of the Self-Efficacy and Anxiety
variables on the organizational commitment
variable is 49.9%. This means that self-efficacy and
anxiety have a proportion of influence on
organizational commitment of 4.99% while the
remaining 50.1% (100% - 49.9%) is influenced by
other variables that are not in this linear regression
model.
4.1.4 Regression Test with Moderating
Variables Model I
1) The Effect of Anxiety on Organizational
Commitment
We begin to present the method of the
calculation. The method used is the enter method
(Variables Entered/Removeda) with organizational
commitment as the dependent variable.
Table 6. Model Summary
Model Summary
Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the Estimate
1
,221a
,049
,042
6,078
a. Predictors: (Constant), Anxiety
Source: Data results, 2021
In table 5 the Summary R Square model is 0.049 or
4.9%. In other words, anxiety affects organizational
commitment by 49% and 95.1% is influenced by
other factors.
2) The Effect of Anxiety on Self-Efficacy
The following presents the results of the
calculation of the anxiety variable on self-efficacy.
The method used is the enter method (Variables
Entered/Removeda) with self-efficacy as the
dependent variable.
Tabel 7. Model Summary
Model Summary
Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the Estimate
1
,128a
,016
,009
10,780
a. Predictors: (Constant), Anxiety
Source: Data results, 2021
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.82
Ridwan Ridwan, Bujang Rahman,
Hasan Hariri, Sudjarwo Sudjarwo,
Herdian Herdian, Rias Tusianah,
Albet Maydiantoro, Usastiawaty C. A. S. Isnainy,
M. Arifki Zainaro, Tubagus Ali Rachman Puja Kesuma,
Achril Zalmansyah
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
946
Volume 19, 2022
In table 5 the Summary R Square model is
0.016 or 1.16%. In other words, anxiety affects
self-efficacy by 1.16% and 98.84% is influenced by
other factors.
3) Regression Test with Moderating Variable
II
The following presents the results of the regression
calculation with self-efficacy as a moderating
variable. The method used is the enter method
(Variables Entered / Removeda) with
Organizational Commitment as the dependent
variable.
Tabel 8. Model Summary
Model Summary
Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the Estimate
1
,707a
,499
,492
4,426
a. Predictors: (Constant), Self-Efficacy, Anxiety
Source: Data results, 2021
As shown in Table 8, R Square= 0.49.9 or
49.9% after the moderating variable (Self-Efficacy)
in the second regression the R Square value
became 50.1%. Thus Self-Efficacy plays a role in
strengthening Organizational Commitment on the
influence of Anxiety.
4.2 Discussion
Regarding research questions 1 Is there any
effect of Anxiety on Self-Efficacy?
As the results of the calculation of the effect shown
by the R Square model summary table is 0.016 or
1.16%. This means that Anxiety affects Self-
Efficacy by 1.16% and 98.84% is influenced by
other factors.
The findings of this calculation are in line with
those presented about Self-efficacy by Albert
Bandura. Self-efficacy is an important factor in
Bandura's social cognitive theory [9-11]. Social
cognition states that the involvement and training
of human actors as an idea that anyone is able to
apply various influences on what is done.
Self-efficacy is understood that the person has
the ability in terms of self-organization, proactive,
self-reflection, self-regulation, and care in self-
growth. Individuals can influence their activities
and maintain the skills to manage their view
patterns and emotions. What individuals think,
believe, and feel becomes a compass for activity.
His perception of reality, and thus behavior, is
influenced by the control and influence he
encounters throughout his life [10].
Regarding self-efficacy and anxiety, followers,
especially leaders in an institution armed with self-
efficacy, are better able to overcome the effects of
anxiety. Leaders with good self-efficacy are most
likely to succeed in carrying out their duties. Self-
efficacy as a mediator or predictor has really shown
its efficacy in various studies [12-19].
This study states that principals who are
equipped with self-efficacy are competent to deal
with the pressure of anxiety due to the dynamics of
the succession of regional heads. Principals who
have strong self-efficacy are still able to maintain
their quality to continue to lead their schools. Thus,
all programs are maintained continuity. The
principal is still able to maintain the school's
performance well without any decrease in
performance, especially turmoil even though he is
under pressure which causes anxiety in the
principal.
The results of this study are also directly
proportional to the paper that researches and
explores self-efficacy with the earlier empirical
investigation to discover and comprehend the
aspects that influence strengthen and weaken self-
efficacy. This discussion has two judgments, i.e.
(1) factors such as feelings of fair treatment, well-
organized activities, programs designed according
to participants' attributes, pressure on a manageable
level of thought, reasonable loads, sense of hope,
and experience, and right conduct can boost self-
efficacy, (2) conversely, feelings of discrimination,
many difficult problems to overcome, lack of
support, and a burdensome environment can
damage self-efficacy [71]. Anxiety due to
succession of regional head elections did affect
self-efficacy but only 1.16%.
Regarding research question 2 is there any
influence of Anxiety on Organizational
Commitment?
In table 8 the Summary R Square model is 0.049 or
4.9%. In other words, Anxiety affects
Organizational Commitment by 4.9% and 95.1% is
influenced by other factors.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.82
Ridwan Ridwan, Bujang Rahman,
Hasan Hariri, Sudjarwo Sudjarwo,
Herdian Herdian, Rias Tusianah,
Albet Maydiantoro, Usastiawaty C. A. S. Isnainy,
M. Arifki Zainaro, Tubagus Ali Rachman Puja Kesuma,
Achril Zalmansyah
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
947
Volume 19, 2022
Commitment is important for all professions
including professions and positions such as
teachers, principals, and commitment is also an
important component for efficiency and
effectiveness for all organizations. The concept of
commitment has been the focus of research for
several years, especially among sociologists
regarding individual and group behavior in
phenomena such as religion, power, job
recruitment, political behavior, and bureaucratic
behavior [38-40]. Operationally, commitment is an
exchange phenomenon [41]. For example, people
tend to stay committed as long as they feel the
associated positive benefits that are reluctant to go
away [42, 43].
In the organizational context, commitment is
characterized by a strong belief in the objectives of
the organization, a readiness to do additional work
for the institution, and loyalty in continuing to
serve the organization [37]. Loyalty thus becomes
the "glue" that keeps workers attached to the
organization. Such commitment is called affective
commitment. Meyer and Allen assert that there are
three forms of commitment: (a) affective
commitment, strongly related to employees'
emotional connection, identification with, and
attachment to the organization; (b) continuance
commitment, referring to worker attendance,
performance, and corporate citizenship conduct, as
well as their financial rewards; and (c) normative
commitment, referring to workers' feelings of
moral obligation to the organization [44, 45]. They
argue that this form of commitment should be
viewed psychologically and that employees need to
work closely with their employers.
Organizational commitment is affected more
than self-efficacy directly. There is a gap of 10.94
points of direct influence between organizational
commitment and self-efficacy due to the influence
of anxiety. In this case, it is anxiety due to the
succession politics of regional heads over the
leadership of school principals in Pesawaran
Regency.
The results of this study are in line with the
investigation of a meta-analysis that seeks to
specify the outcome of three features of Allen and
Meyer's corporate loyalty: affective commitment,
normative commitment, and continuance
commitment. This study strives to decide the
highest average score and effect of the three
elements of Allen and Meyer's organizational
commitment: Affective Commitment (AC),
Normative Commitment (NC), and Continuance
Commitment (CC). The authors, in this research,
use the Sturgess interpretation to determine the
average score with Very Low, Low, Fairly Low,
Fairly High, High, and Very High. It was found
that the highest average score of the three
components of organizational commitment was
affective commitment (0.704), followed by
normative commitment (0.681), and the last one
was continuance commitment (0.855). The authors
of the research draw the conclusion that an
individual primarily desires to be beneficial to
others. Then, he will be able to put aside individual
interests for the sake of shared interests so that he
dares to hook himself to contracts, regulations, and
standards for the sake of reciprocal survival (NC).
As a consequence of desiring to be beneficial to
others and controlling the bravery to determine to
attach together in the rules, he will dare to put aside
his transactional personal interests which are
centered on personal interests or benefits (CC). The
mean of consecutive scoring says that AC is the
largest among all, NC is less than AC, and CC is
the least, which suggests that a manager should be
able to create and maintain AC as the first priority,
followed by NC. If an administrator has been able
to create and maintain Affective Commitment and
Normative Commitment, meaning he is able to
construct and maintain Continuance Commitment
automatically [72]. Nevertheless, with a
psychological condition filled with anxiety that
comes from the influence of the succession of
regional heads, commitment is disturbed and the
focus of the principal's service is not focused.
Regarding question 3 is how does Self-Efficacy
Moderate Anxiety affect Organizational
Commitment?
As shown in Table 8 Summary Model R Square is
0.49.9 or 4.99% after the moderating variable (self-
efficacy) in the second regression the R Square
value becomes 50.1%. Thus self-efficacy plays a
role in strengthening organizational commitment to
the influence of anxiety.
The principal's anxiety is real and completely
overshadows the principals. An example is a news
report reporting the anxiety. The replacement
and/or rotation of the principal by the regional head
often cause unrest and anxiety.
There are different perceptions from the
government and school principals. Local
governments, of course, put forward the existing
legal and regulatory foundations. Meanwhile, the
principal considers that not everything is in
accordance with the actual regulations. Of course
there is always room for debate and the pros and
cons of this.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.82
Ridwan Ridwan, Bujang Rahman,
Hasan Hariri, Sudjarwo Sudjarwo,
Herdian Herdian, Rias Tusianah,
Albet Maydiantoro, Usastiawaty C. A. S. Isnainy,
M. Arifki Zainaro, Tubagus Ali Rachman Puja Kesuma,
Achril Zalmansyah
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
948
Volume 19, 2022
However, with the presence of a self-efficacy
variable as a shield against anxiety, organizational
commitment can be increased. This shows that self-
efficacy is important. The principal's sense of
confidence is an assessment of his ability to
formulate certain actions to produce the desired
results in the school he leads [55]. It is the
principal's self-perceived ability to achieve the
mental and behavioral operations required to
control group operations in relation to objective
accomplishment [56]. Self-efficacy has a
substantial effect on objective setting, aspiration
level, effort, adaptability, and persistence [57, 58].
These thoughts affect the development of
operational leadership tactics and the masterful
undertaking of those strategies [56].
Self-confidence is an element of social
cognitive theory [9, 57, 59]. The major effect on
self-confidence is considered to be an examination
of the attributions and interpretations of four
sources of thought informationmastery
experience, physiological arousal, expected
experience, and verbal persuasion. Self-confidence
depends on context; however, people don't find it to
be equally effective for all situations. Principals
may feel confident to lead in certain contexts, but
this sense of confidence may or may not be
transferred to other contexts, depending on the
perceived similarity of the task. Accordingly, in
creating an efficacy appraisal, it is necessary to
regard the components of the task at hand. In
addition, it is required to evaluate one's powers and
weaknesses in relation to the prerequisites of the
task [2, 60].
The objective of leadership is to promote the
attainment of group objectives by setting and
sustaining an environment that reinforces
institution execution. Triumphant leadership
concerns employing social effect methods to
handle, direct, and encourage the efforts of others.
It requires constant task-directed struggle, practical
task strategies, and the artful application of a broad
range of notional, technical, and interpersonal
mastery [56]. A strong sense of confidence is
required to maintain a productive focus of attention
and the persistence of struggle required to succeed
at corporate objectives [61]. Leadership self-
efficacy has been associated with setting a compass
and attaining follower loyalty, as well as in
handling barriers to change [62].
This finding is also in line with the literature
review article which seeks to look at the variables
that influence, are influenced, and intervened by
leadership practices. This discussion concludes
that: 1) Self-efficacy can involve variables such as
emotional fatigue, job happiness, normative
commitment, and includes motivation not to resign.
2) Self-efficacy can fluctuate, influenced by
experience, which at that time can also be
influenced by the opinions of others. Therefore, a
leader is responsible for the development and
growth of job satisfaction and teacher self-efficacy.
3) Self-efficacy can be a mediator for the growth
and development of other variables. The
psychological atmosphere felt at that time also
increased other variables. The self-efficacy variable
is also able to select the progress and
accomplishment of other variables [73].
5 Conclusions
The purpose of this study was to understand the
effect of anxiety on organizational commitment,
the effect of anxiety on self-efficacy, and the effect
of anxiety after moderating self-efficacy on
organizational commitment. Anxiety affects
organizational commitment by 4.9% and 95.1% is
influenced by other factors. Anxiety affects self-
efficacy by 1.16% and 98.84% is influenced by
other factors. After the moderating variable (Self-
Efficacy) in the second regression the R Square
value became 50.1%. Thus Self-Efficacy plays a
role in strengthening Organizational Commitment
on the influence of Anxiety. Thus Self-Efficacy
plays a role in strengthening Organizational
Commitment on the influence of Anxiety. The
author concludes that anxiety affects low self-
efficacy. In other words, self-efficacy is able to
fortify the influence of anxiety in this case the
succession anxiety of regional heads.
Organizational commitment can be increased by
the presence of self-efficacy. Real self-efficacy is
capable of maintaining the principal's commitment
even though there are concerns about the
succession of regional heads.
Implication
The author proposes the implication that in the
appointment of principals it is necessary to include
aspects of self-efficacy because good self-efficacy
can increase the principal's organizational
commitment.
Limitations
This study only involved 140 respondents from
high school teachers in Pesawaran Regency, for
this reason, research with a wider sample and area
is needed.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.82
Ridwan Ridwan, Bujang Rahman,
Hasan Hariri, Sudjarwo Sudjarwo,
Herdian Herdian, Rias Tusianah,
Albet Maydiantoro, Usastiawaty C. A. S. Isnainy,
M. Arifki Zainaro, Tubagus Ali Rachman Puja Kesuma,
Achril Zalmansyah
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
949
Volume 19, 2022
References:
[1] Sumintono, B., et al., The role of districts in
supporting school leaders’ instructional
leadership: a view and experience from a
developing country. Journal of Educational
Administration, 2019.
[2] Tschannen Moran, M. and C.R. Gareis,
Principals' sense of efficacy. Journal of
Educational administration, 2004.
[3] Hariri, H., CORRIGENDUM Principalship in
an Indonesian school context: can principal
decision-making styles significantly predict
teacher job satisfaction? School Leadership
& Management, 2013. 33(5): p. 529-529.
[4] Hariri, H., R. Monypenny, and M. Prideaux,
Principalship in an Indonesian school
context: can principal decision-making styles
significantly predict teacher job satisfaction?
School Leadership & Management, 2012.
32(5): p. 453-471.
[5] Hariri, H., R. Monypenny, and M. Prideaux,
Teacher-perceived principal leadership
styles, decision-making styles and job
satisfaction: how congruent are data from
Indonesia with the Anglophile and Western
literature? School Leadership &
Management, 2016. 36(1): p. 41-62.
[6] Hallinger, P. and R.H. Heck, Conceptual and
methodological issues in studying school
leadership effects as a reciprocal process.
School Effectiveness and School
Improvement, 2011. 22(2): p. 149-173.
[7] Mertkan, S., Leadership support through
public—private partnerships’: Views of
school leaders. Educational Management
Administration & Leadership, 2011. 39(2): p.
156-171.
[8] Mertkan, S., Tensions in leadership
development: head teachers' experience in
North Cyprus. School leadership and
management, 2011. 31(1): p. 79-90.
[9] Bandura, A., Self-efficacy: toward a unifying
theory of behavioral change. Psychological
review, 1977. 84(2): p. 191.
[10] Bandura, A., Fearful expectations and
avoidant actions as coeffects of perceived
self-inefficacy. 1986.
[11] Bandura, A., Self-efficacy. The Corsini
encyclopedia of psychology, 2010: p. 1-3.
[12] Prochaska, J.O., et al., Attendance and
outcome in a work site weight control
program: Processes and stages of change as
process and predictor variables. Addictive
behaviors, 1992. 17(1): p. 35-45.
[13] Prochaska, J.O., C.C. DiClemente, and J.C.
Norcross, In search of the structure of
change, in Self change. 1992, Springer. p.
87-114.
[14] Jennings, M.B., Factors that influence
outcomes from aural rehabilitation of older
adults: The role of perceived self-efficacy.
2008: ProQuest.
[15] Paulsen, A.M. and N.E. Betz, Basic
confidence predictors of career decision-
making self-efficacy. The Career
Development Quarterly, 2004. 52(4): p. 354-
362.
[16] Jorde-Bloom, P., Self-efficacy expectations
as a predictor of computer use: A look at
early childhood administrators. Computers
in the Schools, 1988. 5(1-2): p. 45-64.
[17] Kopp, M., R. Schwarzer, and M. Jerusalem,
Hungarian questionnaire in psychometric
scales for cross-cultural self-efficacy
research. Zentrale Universitats Druckerei der
FU Berlin, 1993.
[18] Lee, K.-H. and J.-S. Song, The effect of
emotional intelligence on self-efficacy and
job stress of nurses-mediating role of self-
efficacy. Journal of Korean academy of
nursing administration, 2010. 16(1): p. 17-25.
[19] Klassen, R.M., E.L. Usher, and M. Bong,
Teachers’ collective efficacy, job
satisfaction, and job stress in cross-cultural
context. The Journal of Experimental
Education, 2010. 78(4): p. 464-486.
[20] Kacmar, K.M., et al., An examination of the
perceptions of organizational politics model:
Replication and extension. Human relations,
1999. 52(3): p. 383-416.
[21] Federici, R.A. and E.M. Skaalvik, Principal
self-efficacy: Relations with burnout, job
satisfaction and motivation to quit. Social
Psychology of Education, 2012. 15(3): p.
295-320.
[22] Federici, R.A. and E.M. Skaalvik, Teacher
and principal self-efficacy: Relations with
autonomy and emotional exhaustion. 2012.
[23] Zhang, J., H. Yin, and T. Wang, Exploring
the effects of professional learning
communities on teachers self-efficacy and
job satisfaction in Shanghai, China.
Educational Studies, 2020: p. 1-18.
[24] Baker, R., et al., The benefits and caveats of
using clickstream data to understand student
self-regulatory behaviors: opening the black
box of learning processes. International
Journal of Educational Technology in Higher
Education, 2020. 17: p. 1-24.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.82
Ridwan Ridwan, Bujang Rahman,
Hasan Hariri, Sudjarwo Sudjarwo,
Herdian Herdian, Rias Tusianah,
Albet Maydiantoro, Usastiawaty C. A. S. Isnainy,
M. Arifki Zainaro, Tubagus Ali Rachman Puja Kesuma,
Achril Zalmansyah
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
950
Volume 19, 2022
[25] Jacobson, R.P., D. Kang, and J. Houck, Do
patients judge success of treatment and
patient acceptable symptom state based on
current self-reported health status? Medical
Research Archives, 2020. 8(8).
[26] Wang, Y.-S., et al., The Self-Efficacy of
Preservice Physical Education Teachers in
Disabilities Education in China.
Sustainability, 2020. 12(18): p. 7283.
[27] Rahman, N.M.A., M.A. Alias, and S.
Maulan, Revisiting the Relationship between
Organisational Commitment and
Professional Commitment: A Case Study of
Academicians in a Private Educational
Institution. Malaysian Management Journal,
2020. 10(1&2): p. 1-17.
[28] Meyer, J.P., et al., Affective, continuance,
and normative commitment to the
organization: A meta-analysis of
antecedents, correlates, and consequences.
Journal of vocational behavior, 2002. 61(1):
p. 20-52.
[29] Mowday, R.T., R.M. Steers, and L.W. Porter,
The measurement of organizational
commitment. Journal of vocational behavior,
1979. 14(2): p. 224-247.
[30] Nguyen, T.V.N., T. Quang, and C.H. Dinh,
Factors Affecting Employees’ Organizational
Commitment in Foreign Direct Investment
Enterprises. Journal of Asian Finance,
Economics and Business, 2020. 7(10): p.
413-421.
[31] Nurtjahjono, G.E., The Effect of Job
Characteristic, Person-Job Fit,
Organizational Commitment on Employee
Performance (Study of East Java BPJS
Employees). JPAS (Journal of Public
Administration Studies), 2020. 5(1): p. 5-7.
[32] Triwahyuni, R. and V.M. Ekowati, The Effect
of Employee Satisfaction on Employees
Performance Trhough Organizational
Commitment. Management and Economics
Journal (MEC-J), 2017. 1(1).
[33] Cheng, Y.-C., The Relationship of Job
Attitudes and Organizational Commitment to
Different Aspects of Organizational
Environment. 1990.
[34] Yuen, B. and Y. Cheng, A contingency study
of principal's leadership behavior and
teachers' organizational commitment.
Educational Research Journal, 1991. 6: p. 53-
62.
[35] Morrow, P.C. and J.C. McElroy, On
assessing measures of work commitment.
Journal of Occupational Behaviour, 1986.
7(2): p. 139-145.
[36] Morrow, P.C., Concept redundancy in
organizational research: The case of work
commitment. Academy of management
Review, 1983. 8(3): p. 486-500.
[37] Mowday, R.T., L.W. Porter, and R. Steers,
Organizational linkages: The psychology of
commitment, absenteeism, and turnover.
1982, San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
[38] Becker, H.S., Notes on the concept of
commitment. American journal of Sociology,
1960. 66(1): p. 32-40.
[39] Reyes, P., School Cultures: Organizational
Value Orientation and Commitment AU -
Shaw, Jim. The Journal of Educational
Research, 1992. 85(5): p. 295-302.
[40] Reyes, P. and H.-S. Shin, Teacher
commitment and job satisfaction: A causal
analysis. Journal of school leadership, 1995.
5(1): p. 22-39.
[41] Hrebiniak, L.G. and J.A. Alutto, Personal
and role-related factors in the development
of organizational commitment.
Administrative science quarterly, 1972: p.
555-573.
[42] Nir, A.E., School-based management and its
effect on teacher commitment. International
Journal of Leadership in Education, 2002.
5(4): p. 323-341.
[43] Nir, A., School Health and Its Relation to
Teacher Commitment. Planning and
Changing, 2002. 33: p. 106-26.
[44] Allen, N.J. and J.P. Meyer, Affective,
continuance, and normative commitment to
the organization: An examination of
construct validity. Journal of vocational
behavior, 1996. 49(3): p. 252-276.
[45] Meyer, J.P. and N.J. Allen, Commitment in
the workplace: Theory, research, and
application. 1997: Sage.
[46] Bandura, A., Much ado over a faulty
conception of perceived selfefficacy
grounded in faulty experimentation. Journal
of Social and Clinical Psychology, 2007.
26(6): p. 641-658.
[47] Amor, D., et al., Analysis of the school
preferred reading programs in selected Los
Angeles minority schools. Santa Monica:
Rand Corporation, 1976.
[48] Ashton, P.T. and R.B. Webb, Making a
difference: Teachers' sense of efficacy and
student achievement. 1986: Longman
Publishing Group.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.82
Ridwan Ridwan, Bujang Rahman,
Hasan Hariri, Sudjarwo Sudjarwo,
Herdian Herdian, Rias Tusianah,
Albet Maydiantoro, Usastiawaty C. A. S. Isnainy,
M. Arifki Zainaro, Tubagus Ali Rachman Puja Kesuma,
Achril Zalmansyah
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
951
Volume 19, 2022
[49] Berman, P., Federal Programs Supporting
Educational Change, Vol. VII: Factors
Affecting Implementation and Continuation.
1977.
[50] Gibson, S. and M.H. Dembo, Teacher
efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of
educational psychology, 1984. 76(4): p. 569.
[51] Denham, C.H. and J.J. Michael, Teacher
Sense of Efficacy: A Definition of the
Construct and a Model for Further Research.
Educational Research Quarterly, 1981. 6(1):
p. 39-63.
[52] Soodak, L.C., D.M. Podell, and L.R.
Lehman, Teacher, student, and school
attributes as predictors of teachers'
responses to inclusion. The Journal of
Special Education, 1998. 31(4): p. 480-497.
[53] Woolfolk, A.E. and W.K. Hoy, Prospective
teachers' sense of efficacy and beliefs about
control. Journal of educational Psychology,
1990. 82(1): p. 81.
[54] Bandura, A. and E.A. Locke, Negative self-
efficacy and goal effects revisited. Journal of
applied psychology, 2003. 88(1): p. 87.
[55] Bandura, A., Social Learning Theory.
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1977a.
[56] McCormick, M.J., Self-efficacy and
leadership effectiveness: Applying social
cognitive theory to leadership. Journal of
Leadership Studies, 2001. 8(1): p. 22-33.
[57] Bandura, A., Social foundations of thought
and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1986.
1986: p. 23-28.
[58] Gist, M.E. and T.R. Mitchell, Self-efficacy: A
theoretical analysis of its determinants and
malleability. Academy of Management
review, 1992. 17(2): p. 183-211.
[59] Bandura, A., W. Freeman, and R. Lightsey,
Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. 1999,
Springer.
[60] Tschannen-Moran, M., A.W. Hoy, and W.K.
Hoy, Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and
measure. Review of educational research,
1998. 68(2): p. 202-248.
[61] Wood, R. and A. Bandura, Social cognitive
theory of organizational management.
Academy of management Review, 1989.
14(3): p. 361-384.
[62] Paglis, L.L. and S.G. Green, Leadership self-
efficacy and managers' motivation for
leading change. Journal of Organizational
Behavior: The International Journal of
Industrial, Occupational and Organizational
Psychology and Behavior, 2002. 23(2): p.
215-235.
[63] Chemers, M.M., Leadership research and
theory: A functional integration. Group
Dynamics: Theory, research, and practice,
2000. 4(1): p. 27.
[64] Chemers, M.M., L.-t. Hu, and B.F. Garcia,
Academic self-efficacy and first year college
student performance and adjustment. Journal
of Educational psychology, 2001. 93(1): p.
55.
[65] Luthans, F. and S.J. Peterson, Employee
engagement and manager self-efficacy. The
Journal of Management Development, 2002.
21(5): p. 376-387.
[66] Osterman, K. and S. Sullivan, New principals
in an urban bureaucracy: A sense of efficacy.
Journal of School Leadership, 1996. 6(6): p.
661-690.
[67] Lyons, C.A. and M.J. Murphy, Principal
Self-Efficacy and the Use of Power. 1994.
[68] Scovel, T., Psycholinguistics: Introductory
Perspectives. 1980, JSTOR.
[69] Fontana, D. and R. Abouserie, Stress levels,
gender and personality factors in teachers.
British Journal of Educational Psychology,
1993. 63(2): p. 261-270.
[70] Sugiyono, Metodologi Penelitian Pendidikan
[Educational Research Methodology].
Alfabeta, 2009.
[71] Tusianah, R., et al., An Integrative Review of
Self-efficacy: What Factors Enhance and
Impair It? WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on
BUSINESS and ECONOMICS, 2021. 18: p.
1057-1072.
[72] Maydiantoro, A., et al., A Literature Review
of the Three Elements of Organizational
Commitment: The Meaning of the
Contribution Score Average. WSEAS
TRANSACTIONS ON BUSINESS AND
ECONOMICS, 2021. 18: p. 679-689.
[73] Kesuma, T.A.R.P. and R. Ridwan, Influence
and Influenced Between Self-Efficacy and
Principal Leadership: A Systematic Review.
Internasional Journal of
EducationTechnologies, 2021. 15.
Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
(Attribution 4.0 International, CC BY 4.0)
This article is published under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.e
n_US
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.82
Ridwan Ridwan, Bujang Rahman,
Hasan Hariri, Sudjarwo Sudjarwo,
Herdian Herdian, Rias Tusianah,
Albet Maydiantoro, Usastiawaty C. A. S. Isnainy,
M. Arifki Zainaro, Tubagus Ali Rachman Puja Kesuma,
Achril Zalmansyah
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
952
Volume 19, 2022