ergonomi̇ Ergonomi 2651-4877 Sevinç Serpil AYTAÇ 10.33439/ergonomi.1822216 Occupation and Workplace Health and Safety Human Resources and Industrial Relations (Other) İş ve İşyeri Sağlığı ve Güvenliği İnsan Kaynakları ve Endüstriyel İlişkiler (Diğer) İŞYERİ ERGONOMİSİNİN ZİHİNSEL İŞ YÜKÜ VE İŞ PERFORMANSI ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİSİ: AKADEMİSYENLER ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA THE EFFECT OF WORKPLACE ERGONOMICS ON MENTAL WORKLOAD AND JOB PERFORMANCE: A STUDY ON ACADEMICS https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6239-1700 Erkasap Ahmet İSTANBUL GEDİK ÜNİVERSİTESİ 04 15 2026 9 1 37 51 11 12 2025 01 04 2026 Copyright © 2018, Ergonomi 2018 Ergonomi

Bu araştırmanın amacı, işyeri ergonomisinin akademisyenlerin zihinsel iş yükü ve iş performansı üzerindeki etkisini incelemek ve bu ilişkide zihinsel iş yükünün aracı rolünü belirlemektir. Çalışmanın evrenini Türkiye’deki devlet ve vakıf üniversitelerinde görev yapan akademisyenler oluşturmuş, kolayda örnekleme yöntemiyle 389 katılımcıdan çevrim içi anket aracılığıyla veri toplanmıştır. Araştırma modeli, İş Talepleri–Kaynakları Modeli temel alınarak yapılandırılmıştır. İşyeri ergonomisi, zihinsel iş yükü ve iş performansı değişkenler olarak ele alınmıştır. Kullanılan ölçekler daha önce geçerlik-güvenirliği kanıtlanmış bilimsel ölçme araçlarıdır. Elde edilen bulgulara göre ergonomik çalışma koşulları, akademisyenlerin iş performansını anlamlı ve pozitif yönde etkilemektedir. Aynı zamanda ergonomi düzeyinin artmasının zihinsel iş yükünü azalttığı, zihinsel iş yükünün ise performans üzerinde olumsuz etki yarattığı tespit edilmiştir. Aracılık analizi sonucunda zihinsel iş yükünün, ergonomi ile iş performansı arasındaki ilişkide kısmi aracı rol üstlendiği ortaya konmuştur. Bu bulgular, ergonomik iyileştirmenin yalnızca fiziksel konfor sağlamadığını; bilişsel kaynakları koruyarak performansı dolaylı olarak da artırdığını göstermektedir. Araştırma, ergonominin akademik bağlamda stratejik bir iş kaynağı olduğunu vurgulamakta; üniversitelerde ergonomik düzenlemelerin, zihinsel yük yönetimiyle entegre edilmesi gerektiğine yönelik teorik ve pratik öneriler sunmaktadır.

The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of workplace ergonomics on academics' mental workload and job performance and to determine the mediating role of mental workload in this relationship. The study population consisted of academics working at state and foundation universities in Turkey, and data were collected from 389 participants via an online survey using convenience sampling. The research model was structured based on the Job Demands–Resources Model. Workplace ergonomics, mental workload, and job performance were considered as variables. The scales used were scientific measurement tools with previously proven validity and reliability. The findings indicate that ergonomic working conditions have a significant and positive effect on academics' job performance. It was also found that an increase in the level of ergonomics reduces mental workload, while mental workload has a negative impact on performance. The mediation analysis revealed that mental workload plays a partial mediating role in the relationship between ergonomics and job performance. These findings show that ergonomic improvement not only provides physical comfort but also indirectly increases performance by conserving cognitive resources. The research emphasizes that ergonomics is a strategic work resource in an academic context and offers theoretical and practical recommendations for integrating ergonomic arrangements in universities with mental load management.

 İşyeri Ergonomisi Zihinsel İş Yükü İş Performansı Akademisyenler Workplace Ergonomics Mental Workload Work Performance Academics Akca, M., Yavuz, M., ve Küçükoğlu, M. T. (2020). Zihinsel İş Yükünün ölçümü: CARMeN-Q ölçeğinin Türkçe’ye uyarlaması. Journal of Yaşar University, 15(60), 675–691. https://doi.org/10.19168/jyasar.708357 Aksüt, G., Alakaş, H. M., ve Eren, T. (2022). Determining Ergonomic Risks Arising from the Use of Information Technologies in the Covid-19 Environment. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 39(8), 1582–1593. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2022.2062856 Akyürek, G., Üstün, B. (2021). Akademik Personelin Ofislerindeki Ergonomik Düzenlemeye Göre Ağrı, Stres ve Fiziksel Aktivite Düzeylerinin Karşılaştırılması. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 12(3), 386–394. https://doi.org/10.22312/sdusbed.1005156 Arefian, S., Laybidi, M. I., Vahedi, M., Melloh, M., ve Mokhtarinia, H. R. (2025). Impact of mental and physical workload on work function in office workers with musculoskeletal disorders. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 26(1), 867. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-025-09147-0 Bakker, A. B., ve Demerouti, E. (2017). Job demands–resources theory: Taking stock and looking forward. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22(3), 273–285. https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000056 Boksem, M. A. S., ve Tops, M. (2008). Mental fatigue: Costs and benefits. Brain Research Reviews, 59(1), 125–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresrev.2008.07.001 Borman, W. C., ve Motowidlo, S. J. (1993). Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance. In N. Schmitt ve W. C. Borman (Eds.), Personnel selection in organizations (pp. 71–98). Jossey-Bass. Campbell, J. P. (2012). Behavior, performance, and effectiveness in the workplace. In S. W. J. Kozlowski (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of organizational psychology (pp. 316–346). Oxford University Press. Chambel, M. J., ve Curral, L. (2005). Stress in Academic life: Work characteristics as predictors of student well‐being and performance. Applied Psychology, 54(1), 135–147. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2005.00200.x Creswell, J. W., ve Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE. Cristancho, A. N., Barrera, A. A., ve Castellanos-Domínguez, Y. Z. (2022). Musculoskeletal disorders in university professors who telework due to COVID-19 pandemic. Universidad Y Salud, 24(Supl 1), 301–307. https://doi.org/10.22267/rus.222403.2860 Çalişkan, A., ve Köroğlu, E. Ö. (2022). Job Performance, Task Performance, Contextual Performance: Development And Valıdatıon Of A New Scale. Uluslararası İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 8(2), 180–201. https://doi.org/10.29131/uiibd.1201880 Çelik, M., Ay, G., Bayazıt, M. (2023). Akademisyenlerin i̇ş yükü algısının i̇ş doyumu üzerine etkisi. İş Ve İnsan Dergisi, 10(2), 67–79. https://doi.org/10.18394/iid.1260593 De Croon, E., Sluiter, J., Kuijer, P. P., Frings-Dresen, M. (2004). The effect of office concepts on worker health and performance: a systematic review of the literature. Ergonomics, 48(2), 119–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130512331319409 Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., ve Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The Job Demands–Resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 499–512. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.499 Doğan, S. E., ve Altınbaş, Y. (2024). The Relatıonshıp Between Ergonomıcs Level, Job And Lıfe Satısfactıon Of Healthcare Workers In Turkey. Ergonomi, 7(3), 227–235. https://doi.org/10.33439/ergonomi.1514689 Dul, J., ve Neumann, W. P. (2009). Ergonomics contributions to company strategies. Applied Ergonomics, 40(4), 745–752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2008.07.001 Emeç, Ş., ve Akkaya, G. (2018). Sağlık Sektöründe Zihinsel İş Yükü Değerlendirmesi Ve Bir Uygulama. Ergonomi, 1(3), 156–162. https://doi.org/10.33439/ergonomi.470474 Gün G. (2017). Ergonomi ve iş tatmini ilişkisi (Tekstil işletmelerinde bir uygulama). Akademik Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi. 6(61): 249-70. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., ve Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Pearson. Halbesleben, J. R. B., ve Buckley, M. R. (2004). Burnout in organizational life. Journal of Management, 30(6), 859–879. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jm.2004.06.004 Hart, S. G., ve Staveland, L. E. (1988). Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In Advances in psychology (pp. 139–183). https://doi.org/10.1016/s0166-4115(08)62386-9 Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. The Guilford Press. Ingelsrud, M. H., Bernstrøm, V. H., ve Nilsen, W. (2025). Remote work and the psychosocial work environment: the role of contact. Nordic Journal of Working Life Studies. https://doi.org/10.18291/njwls.157873 International Ergonomics Association. (2021). What is Ergonomics? https://iea.cc/what-is-ergonomics/ International Labour Organization. (2022). Ergonomics and occupational safety report. ILO Publications. Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. Prentice-Hall. Karagöz, Y. (2017). SPSS ve AMOS Uygulamalı Nitel-Nicel-Karma Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri. Nobel. Karwowski, W., ve Marras, W. S. (2021). The occupational ergonomics handbook (3rd ed.). CRC Press. Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). The Guilford Press. McCallum, F. (2020). The Changing Nature of Teachers’ Work and Its Impact on Wellbeing. In Critical Perspectives on Teaching, Learning and Leadership (pp. 17–44). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6667-7_2 McKeown, C. (2017). Ergonomic Workplace Design For Health, Wellness, and Productivity. Ergonomics, 60(11), 1598–1599. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2017.1331565 Robertson, M. M., Ciriello, V. M., ve Garabet, A. M. (2012). Office Ergonomics Training and a Sit-stand Workstation: Effects on musculoskeletal and visual symptoms and performance of office workers. Applied Ergonomics, 44(1), 73–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2012.05.001 Rubio-Valdehita, S., López-Núñez, M., López-Higes, R., ve Díaz-Ramiro, E. (2017). Development of the CarMen-Q Questionnaire for mental workload assessment. Psicothema, 4(29), 570–576. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2017.151 Schaufeli, W. B., ve Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job Demands, Job Resources, and Their Relationship With Burnout and Engagement: A Multi‐Sample Study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(3), 293–315. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.248 Schlund, S., Kamusella, C., Knott, V., Löffler, T., Engel, L., Fischer, C., Rupprecht, P., Bengler, K., Bullinger-Hoffmann, A., Kaiser, A., ve Kögel, A. (2022). Digital ergonomics and digital work planning in university education: experiences from Germany and Austria. Zeitschrift Für Arbeitswissenschaft, 76(4), 510–524. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41449-022-00333-7 Sirajudeen, M. S., Alaidarous, M., Waly, M., ve Alqahtani, M. (2018). Work-related musculoskeletal disorders among faculty members of college of Applied Medical Sciences, Majmaah University, Saudi Arabia: A cross-sectional study. PubMed, 12(4), 18–25. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30022899 Tavakol, M., ve Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53–55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd Uddin, S., Asif, M., Rajput, H. İ., Chughtai, M. R. B., Khan, M. A., Badar, H., ve Pasha, S. (2019). Prevalence of Work Related Musculoskeletal Disorders among College Teachers of Karachi. Online Türk Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 4(3), 339–349. https://doi.org/10.26453/otjhs.472850 Van der Doef, M., ve Maes, S. (1999). The Job Demand-Control(-Support) model and psychological well-being: A review. Work ve Stress, 13(2), 87–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/026783799296084 Wang, P., Fang, W., ve Guo, B. (2019). A measure of Mental Workload During Multitasking: Using Performance-Based Timed Petri Nets. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 75, 102877. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2019.102877 Wickens, C. D. (2008). Multiple Resources And Mental Workload. Human Factors, 50(3), 449–455. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872008X288394 Wilson, J. R. (2014). Fundamentals of systems ergonomics/human factors. Applied Ergonomics, 45(1), 5–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2013.03.021 Xie, B., ve Salvendy, G. (2000). Review and reappraisal of modelling and predicting mental workload in single- and multi-task environments. Work ve Stress, 14(1), 74–99. https://doi.org/10.1080/026783700417249 Živadinović, K, N. (2004). Utvrđivanje osnovnih karakteristika proizvoda primjenom faktorske analize [Defining the basic product attributes using the factor analysis]. Ekonomski pregled, 55, 952–966.