Impact of work pressure, job characteristics, and personality on job-related well-being in Dutch judges: A conceptual model

OBJECTIVE: This study examines the robustness of a conceptual model, testing the influences of work pressure and other factors on job-related mental health outcomes in Dutch judges, providing insights for the judiciary, and bringing together organizational psychology and judicial well-being research.

HYPOTHESES: We predicted (a) that the conceptual model fits the data well and is robust and (b) that an increase in the job demands, work pressure, and work-home interference would be associated with more burnout; an increase in the job resources, autonomy, and social support would be associated with more work engagement and job satisfaction; higher neuroticism would be related to more burnout and to more workaholism; and higher extraversion would be related to more work engagement.

METHOD: Dutch judges ( N = 257; 165 females [64%]; mean age: 51 years old, range = 34-67 years old, SD = 7.90) completed questionnaires.

RESULTS: (a) After modifications, the conceptual model was robust. (b) An increase in job demands (work pressure and work-home interference) was associated with more burnout (β = .20 and .23). Autonomy was not significantly associated with work engagement and job satisfaction (β = <.01 and .07). An increase in the job resource social support was positively associated with heightened work engagement and job satisfaction (β = .22 and .27). Higher neuroticism related to more burnout and workaholism (β = .17 and .19), whereas higher extraversion was related to more work engagement (β = .20 and .12). All results mentioned here reflect small to medium effect sizes.

CONCLUSIONS: Both job characteristics and personality factors influence burnout, work engagement, and job satisfaction. Implications for judges include vigilance regarding high work pressure and recognizing influences on mental health. Courts can play an important role in implementing strategies to reduce work pressure and in facilitating adequate job resources to improve judges' mental well-being. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).