Table 3:

Distribution of the Respondents with respect to their education (N= 622)

Education Level Frequency Percentage Cumulative Percentage

Bachelors 264 42.4 42.4

Masters 349 56.1 98.5

100
PhD 9 1.5

Table 3 demonstrates demographic characteristics of survey participants in terms of their

educational level. It is evident from Table 3 that 42.4% (264) of the respondents possessed
the bachelor degree, 56.1% (349) participants hold the masters degree whereas only 1.5% (9)
of the respondents got their PhD degree. Analysis further implies that majority of participants
hold masters degree.

Table 6
Descriptive Statistics of All Variables (N= 311)
Variables Mean S.D Skewness Kurtosis

Surface Acting 2.35 1.00 .90 -.51

Deep Acting 3.37 1.15 -.57 -1.18

Display of Genuine Emotion 3.57 1.00 -.71 -.58

Leaders’ Job Satisfaction 3.45 1.25 -.65 -1.20

Leaders’ Emotional Exhaustion 2.61 1.17 .31 -1.38

Emotional Intelligence 2.65 1.38 .41 -1.63

Followers’ Job Satisfaction 3.43 1.27 -.65 -1.20

Table 6 presents the descriptive statistics of the study variables. It shows the mean values,
standard deviations of all under study variables with acceptable range of skewness and
kurtosis. Mean values of surface acting, deep acting and display of genuine emotions are
2.35, 3.37, 3.57 respectively. Table 6 also demonstrates skewness and kurtosis values which
are in acceptable range. Normality was examined through skewness, kurtosis and histograms
(Munro, 2005). Scores all constructs were normally distributed because the values for
skewness and kurtosis between -2 to +2 are acceptable to prove the normal distribution.

Table 7:
Alpha Reliability Coefficients of All Scales (N= 311 )
Variables No. of Items Alpha Coefficient

Surface Acting 7 0.86

Deep Acting 4 0.88

Display of Genuine Emotion 8 0.88

Leaders’ Emotional Exhaustion 6 0.89

Leaders’ Job Satisfaction 3 0.92

Emotional Intelligence 16 0.89

Perceived Transformational Leadership 20 0.92

Followers’ Emotional Engagement 4 0.93

Followers’ Job Satisfaction 3 0.92

Reliability implies inter-item consistency of scale. Reliability of instruments assessed by

calculating the alpha coefficients and inter-item correlation of under study variables. Table 7
indicates the reliability analysis by using Cronbach’s alpha coefficients. Data of this study
yields the coefficient alpha value are ……..
Table 8:
Correlation Matrix

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 Surface Acting 1
2 Deep Acting -.252** 1
3 Display of Genuine Emotion -.279** .664** 1
4 Leaders’ Emotional Exhaustion .570** -.364 **
-.390** 1
5 Leaders’ Job Satisfaction -.530** .500 **
.537 **
-.681** 1
6 Emotional Intelligence -.103 .289 **
.223 **
-.146 .365**
**
1
7 Followers’ Job Satisfaction -.531** .502 **
.548 ** **
-.540 .582 **
.375** .588**

Table 8 signifies the correlation between under study variables. This correlation matrix
identifies that surface acting has highly significant positive correlation with leaders’
emotional exhaustion (r=0.57, p<.05). In addition correlation matrix indicates that display of
genuine emotions has significant negative correlation with leaders’ emotional exhaustion (r=
-0.39, p<.05).