67-4

43/90

111　organisational units, the question was rephrased as ‘the number of team members (in the same branch or division) you normally work with’.Statistical analysisIn this study, statistical analysis was carried out as follows: Pearson’s correlation analysis was performed to evaluate psychological safety, work resources, and work engagement. This was followed by multiple regression analysis with work engage-ment as the objective variable. Further, we used IBM SPSS 26 for Windows for statistical analysis.Ethical considerationsThis study was approved by the ethics review committee of the Graduate School of Health and Sports Science, Juntendo University, Chiba, Japan (Application Number: 31–56, 2020-65 and 2020–47).Results of the correlation analysis of variablesThe study revealed that the mean score for psychological safety was 4.91 (SD±0.94) and that for work engagement (UWES-9) was 3.43 (SD±1.47). Table 2 summarises the correlation analysis results. There was a significant positive correlation between psychological safety and work engagement (r=.413, p<.01). Among job resource items, psychological safety showed a significant positive correlation with support from colleagues (r=.475, p<.01) and support from superiors (r=.521, p<.01) and a significant but weak positive correla-tion with control over work (r=.336, p<.01), skill utilisation (r=.340, p<.01), job aptitude (r=.301, Table 2　Results of Pearson’s correlation analysis between job resources, psychological safety, and work engagement9Control over work1Skill utilisation2Job aptitude3Rewarding job4Support from colleagues5Support from superiors6Job satisfaction7Psychological safety89Work engagementSD, standard deviation.Note: **p<0.01.Mean7.622.763.093.249.548.692.714.913.43SD2.160.850.780.782.262.400.910.941.47p<.01), rewarding job (r=.271, p<.01), and job satisfaction (r=.397, p<.01). Work engagement showed a significant positive correlation with job aptitude (r=.621, p<.01), rewarding job (r=.652, p<.01), support from superiors (r=.422, p<.01), and job satisfaction (r=.664, p<.01) and a significant but weak positive correlation with control over work (r=.269, p<.01), skill utilisation (r=.362, p<.01), and support from colleagues (r=.372, p<.01).Results of multiple regression analysis with work engagement as the objective variable Table 3 depicts the results of the multiple regres-sion analysis. The analysis was performed using age and gender as adjustment variables. The adjusted R2 coefficient was 0.588 (p<0.001), which indicates that job resources and psychological Table 3　Results of multiple regression analysis with work engagement as the objective variable237845611111　　　　　　1　1.153**.386**.303**Control over workSkill utilisationJob aptitudeRewarding jobSupport from colleaguesSupport from superiorsJob satisfactionPsychological safetyR2adjR2Note: ***p<0.001, **p<0.01.Age and sex were adjusted in the multiple regression analysis..273**.257**.717**.213**.151**.312**.287**.387**.218**.357**.349**.614**.417**.276**.615**.645**.383**.469**.336**.340**.301**.271**.475**.521**.397**.269**.362**.621**.652**.372**.422**.664**.413**Work engagement(β)-0.101＊＊ 0.097＊＊ 0.160＊＊＊ 0.279＊＊＊ 0.064 0.052 0.314＊＊＊ 0.115＊＊ 0.598＊＊＊ 0.588＊＊＊ 363Results