\documentclass[11pt,twoside]{article}\makeatletter

\IfFileExists{xcolor.sty}%
  {\RequirePackage{xcolor}}%
  {\RequirePackage{color}}
\usepackage{colortbl}
\usepackage{wrapfig}
\usepackage{ifxetex}
\ifxetex
  \usepackage{fontspec}
  \usepackage{xunicode}
  \catcode`⃥=\active \def⃥{\textbackslash}
  \catcode`❴=\active \def❴{\{}
  \catcode`❵=\active \def❵{\}}
  \def\textJapanese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK JP}}
  \def\textChinese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK SC}}
  \def\textKorean{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK KR}}
  \setmonofont{DejaVu Sans Mono}
  
\else
  \IfFileExists{utf8x.def}%
   {\usepackage[utf8x]{inputenc}
      \PrerenderUnicode{–}
    }%
   {\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}}
  \usepackage[english]{babel}
  \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
  \usepackage{float}
  \usepackage[]{ucs}
  \uc@dclc{8421}{default}{\textbackslash }
  \uc@dclc{10100}{default}{\{}
  \uc@dclc{10101}{default}{\}}
  \uc@dclc{8491}{default}{\AA{}}
  \uc@dclc{8239}{default}{\,}
  \uc@dclc{20154}{default}{ }
  \uc@dclc{10148}{default}{>}
  \def\textschwa{\rotatebox{-90}{e}}
  \def\textJapanese{}
  \def\textChinese{}
  \IfFileExists{tipa.sty}{\usepackage{tipa}}{}
\fi
\def\exampleFont{\ttfamily\small}
\DeclareTextSymbol{\textpi}{OML}{25}
\usepackage{relsize}
\RequirePackage{array}
\def\@testpach{\@chclass
 \ifnum \@lastchclass=6 \@ne \@chnum \@ne \else
  \ifnum \@lastchclass=7 5 \else
   \ifnum \@lastchclass=8 \tw@ \else
    \ifnum \@lastchclass=9 \thr@@
   \else \z@
   \ifnum \@lastchclass = 10 \else
   \edef\@nextchar{\expandafter\string\@nextchar}%
   \@chnum
   \if \@nextchar c\z@ \else
    \if \@nextchar l\@ne \else
     \if \@nextchar r\tw@ \else
   \z@ \@chclass
   \if\@nextchar |\@ne \else
    \if \@nextchar !6 \else
     \if \@nextchar @7 \else
      \if \@nextchar (8 \else
       \if \@nextchar )9 \else
  10
  \@chnum
  \if \@nextchar m\thr@@\else
   \if \@nextchar p4 \else
    \if \@nextchar b5 \else
   \z@ \@chclass \z@ \@preamerr \z@ \fi \fi \fi \fi
   \fi \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi}
\gdef\arraybackslash{\let\\=\@arraycr}
\def\@textsubscript#1{{\m@th\ensuremath{_{\mbox{\fontsize\sf@size\z@#1}}}}}
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\def\abbr{}
\def\corr{}
\def\expan{}
\def\gap{}
\def\orig{}
\def\reg{}
\def\ref{}
\def\sic{}
\def\persName{}\def\name{}
\def\placeName{}
\def\orgName{}
\def\textcal#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Calligraphy}#1}}
\def\textgothic#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Blackletter}#1}}
\def\textlarge#1{{\large #1}}
\def\textoverbar#1{\ensuremath{\overline{#1}}}
\def\textquoted#1{‘#1’}
\def\textsmall#1{{\small #1}}
\def\textsubscript#1{\@textsubscript{\selectfont#1}}
\def\textxi{\ensuremath{\xi}}
\def\titlem{\itshape}
\newenvironment{biblfree}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{bibl}{}{}
\newenvironment{byline}{\vskip6pt\itshape\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{citbibl}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docAuthor}{\ifvmode\vskip4pt\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont\fi\itshape}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docDate}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docImprint}{\vskip 6pt}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docTitle}{\vskip6pt\bfseries\fontsize{22pt}{25pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{msHead}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{msItem}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{rubric}{}{}
\newenvironment{titlePart}{}{\par }

\newcolumntype{L}[1]{){\raggedright\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{C}[1]{){\centering\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{R}[1]{){\raggedleft\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{P}[1]{){\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{B}[1]{){\arraybackslash}b{#1}}
\newcolumntype{M}[1]{){\arraybackslash}m{#1}}
\definecolor{label}{gray}{0.75}
\def\unusedattribute#1{\sout{\textcolor{label}{#1}}}
\DeclareRobustCommand*{\xref}{\hyper@normalise\xref@}
\def\xref@#1#2{\hyper@linkurl{#2}{#1}}
\begingroup
\catcode`\_=\active
\gdef_#1{\ensuremath{\sb{\mathrm{#1}}}}
\endgroup
\mathcode`\_=\string"8000
\catcode`\_=12\relax

\usepackage[a4paper,twoside,lmargin=1in,rmargin=1in,tmargin=1in,bmargin=1in,marginparwidth=0.75in]{geometry}
\usepackage{framed}

\definecolor{shadecolor}{gray}{0.95}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage[normalem]{ulem}
\usepackage{fancyvrb}
\usepackage{fancyhdr}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{marginnote}

\renewcommand{\@cite}[1]{#1}


\renewcommand*{\marginfont}{\itshape\footnotesize}

\def\Gin@extensions{.pdf,.png,.jpg,.mps,.tif}

  \pagestyle{fancy}

\usepackage[pdftitle={Impact of Emotional Stability on Self-efficacy and Organizational Commitments of Employees' at Nepalese Saving \& Credit Co-Operative Societies (SACCOS) Financial Institutions},
 pdfauthor={}]{hyperref}
\hyperbaseurl{}

	 \paperwidth210mm
	 \paperheight297mm
              
\def\@pnumwidth{1.55em}
\def\@tocrmarg {2.55em}
\def\@dotsep{4.5}
\setcounter{tocdepth}{3}
\clubpenalty=8000
\emergencystretch 3em
\hbadness=4000
\hyphenpenalty=400
\pretolerance=750
\tolerance=2000
\vbadness=4000
\widowpenalty=10000

\renewcommand\section{\@startsection {section}{1}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex \@plus -0.5ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large\bfseries}}
\renewcommand\subsection{\@startsection{subsection}{2}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex\@plus -0.5ex \@minus- .2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large}}
\renewcommand\subsubsection{\@startsection{subsubsection}{3}{\z@}%
     {-1.5ex\@plus -0.35ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\large}}
\renewcommand\paragraph{\@startsection{paragraph}{4}{\z@}%
     {-1ex \@plus-0.35ex \@minus -0.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize}}
\renewcommand\subparagraph{\@startsection{subparagraph}{5}{\parindent}%
     {1.5ex \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
     {-1em}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize\bfseries}}


\def\l@section#1#2{\addpenalty{\@secpenalty} \addvspace{1.0em plus 1pt}
 \@tempdima 1.5em \begingroup
 \parindent \z@ \rightskip \@pnumwidth 
 \parfillskip -\@pnumwidth 
 \bfseries \leavevmode #1\hfil \hbox to\@pnumwidth{\hss #2}\par
 \endgroup}
\def\l@subsection{\@dottedtocline{2}{1.5em}{2.3em}}
\def\l@subsubsection{\@dottedtocline{3}{3.8em}{3.2em}}
\def\l@paragraph{\@dottedtocline{4}{7.0em}{4.1em}}
\def\l@subparagraph{\@dottedtocline{5}{10em}{5em}}
\@ifundefined{c@section}{\newcounter{section}}{}
\@ifundefined{c@chapter}{\newcounter{chapter}}{}
\newif\if@mainmatter 
\@mainmattertrue
\def\chaptername{Chapter}
\def\frontmatter{%
  \pagenumbering{roman}
  \def\thechapter{\@roman\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\roman{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@roman\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\roman{section}}
  \def\@chapapp{}%
}
\def\mainmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \def\thechapter{\@arabic\c@chapter}
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \pagenumbering{arabic}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{6}
  \def\@chapapp{\chaptername}%
  \def\theHchapter{\arabic{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@arabic\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\arabic{section}}
}
\def\backmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{2}
  \def\@chapapp{\appendixname}%
  \def\thechapter{\@Alph\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\Alph{chapter}}
  \appendix
}
\newenvironment{bibitemlist}[1]{%
   \list{\@biblabel{\@arabic\c@enumiv}}%
       {\settowidth\labelwidth{\@biblabel{#1}}%
        \leftmargin\labelwidth
        \advance\leftmargin\labelsep
        \@openbib@code
        \usecounter{enumiv}%
        \let\p@enumiv\@empty
        \renewcommand\theenumiv{\@arabic\c@enumiv}%
	}%
  \sloppy
  \clubpenalty4000
  \@clubpenalty \clubpenalty
  \widowpenalty4000%
  \sfcode`\.\@m}%
  {\def\@noitemerr
    {\@latex@warning{Empty `bibitemlist' environment}}%
    \endlist}

\def\tableofcontents{\section*{\contentsname}\@starttoc{toc}}
\parskip0pt
\parindent1em
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\newenvironment{reflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\itshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{sansreflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\upshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{specHead}[2]%
 {\vspace{20pt}\hrule\vspace{10pt}%
  \phantomsection\label{#1}\markright{#2}%

  \pdfbookmark[2]{#2}{#1}%
  \hspace{-0.75in}{\bfseries\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont#2}%
  }{}
      \def\TheFullDate{2019-01-15 (revised: 15 January 2019)}
\def\TheID{\makeatother }
\def\TheDate{2019-01-15}
\title{Impact of Emotional Stability on Self-efficacy and Organizational Commitments of Employees' at Nepalese Saving \& Credit Co-Operative Societies (SACCOS) Financial Institutions}
\author{}\makeatletter 
\makeatletter
\newcommand*{\cleartoleftpage}{%
  \clearpage
    \if@twoside
    \ifodd\c@page
      \hbox{}\newpage
      \if@twocolumn
        \hbox{}\newpage
      \fi
    \fi
  \fi
}
\makeatother
\makeatletter
\thispagestyle{empty}
\markright{\@title}\markboth{\@title}{\@author}
\renewcommand\small{\@setfontsize\small{9pt}{11pt}\abovedisplayskip 8.5\p@ plus3\p@ minus4\p@
\belowdisplayskip \abovedisplayskip
\abovedisplayshortskip \z@ plus2\p@
\belowdisplayshortskip 4\p@ plus2\p@ minus2\p@
\def\@listi{\leftmargin\leftmargini
               \topsep 2\p@ plus1\p@ minus1\p@
               \parsep 2\p@ plus\p@ minus\p@
               \itemsep 1pt}
}
\makeatother
\fvset{frame=single,numberblanklines=false,xleftmargin=5mm,xrightmargin=5mm}
\fancyhf{} 
\setlength{\headheight}{14pt}
\fancyhead[LE]{\bfseries\leftmark} 
\fancyhead[RO]{\bfseries\rightmark} 
\fancyfoot[RO]{}
\fancyfoot[CO]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[LO]{\TheID}
\fancyfoot[LE]{}
\fancyfoot[CE]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[RE]{\TheID}
\hypersetup{citebordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,linkbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,urlbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,bookmarksnumbered=true}
\fancypagestyle{plain}{\fancyhead{}\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}}

\date{}
\usepackage{authblk}

\providecommand{\keywords}[1]
{
\footnotesize
  \textbf{\textit{Index terms---}} #1
}

\usepackage{graphicx,xcolor}
\definecolor{GJBlue}{HTML}{273B81}
\definecolor{GJLightBlue}{HTML}{0A9DD9}
\definecolor{GJMediumGrey}{HTML}{6D6E70}
\definecolor{GJLightGrey}{HTML}{929497} 

\renewenvironment{abstract}{%
   \setlength{\parindent}{0pt}\raggedright
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
   \textcolor{GJBlue}{\large\bfseries\abstractname\space}
}{%   
   \vskip8pt
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
}

\usepackage[absolute,overlay]{textpos}

\makeatother 
      \usepackage{lineno}
      \linenumbers
      
\begin{document}

             \author[1]{Dess Mardan  Basnet}

             \author[2]{Prof. Dr. Mahima  Birla}

             \author[3]{Prof. Dr. Murari Prasad  Regmi}

             \affil[1]{  Pacific Academy of Higher Education and Research University}

\renewcommand\Authands{ and }

\date{\small \em Received: 9 December 2018 Accepted: 1 January 2019 Published: 15 January 2019}

\maketitle


\begin{abstract}
        


This study empirically investigated the impact of emotional stability on self-efficacy and organizational commitment of Saving and Credit Co-operative (SACCOS) employees of Kathmandu. The total sample consisted of 400 employees (Males=152 & Females=248). The samples obtained from 112 SACCOS. This research focused on emotional stability trait of International Personality Item Pool (IPIP) originally developed by Goldberg (1992). This analytical research examined the Co-operative employees? emotional instability by using the Mini IPIP five-factor model of Donnellan, Oswald, Baird, & Lucas (2006). The result of this study reported that the Mean score (8.76) of females excelled the Mean score (0.07) of males. The previous research found that female employees? Mean score of emotional stability was significantly lesser than the male counterpart (Basnet & Regmi, 2018:36) and the other standardize scales used to report the results.

\end{abstract}


\keywords{emotional instability, self-efficacy, affective, continuance, normative commitment, }

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1cm,1cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\LARGE Global Journals \LaTeX\ JournalKaleidoscope\texttrademark}
\end{textblock*}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1.4cm,1.5cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\footnotesize \\ Artificial Intelligence formulated this projection for compatibility purposes from the original article published at Global Journals. However, this technology is currently in beta. \emph{Therefore, kindly ignore odd layouts, missed formulae, text, tables, or figures.}}
\end{textblock*}


\let\tabcellsep& 	 	 		 
\section[{Introduction}]{Introduction}\par
The personality has central role in this research. In this study, full efforts have been made to clarify the important of personality traits relationships with organizational commitments and self-efficacy of the employees. The personality traits are the consistent traits of an individual which makes him or her different from other individuals. and Continuance) considers a significant indicator of job attitude and degree to which a worker indentifies with the organization and wants to continue actively participating. Employees with high level of commitment are linked with high levels of individual performance in the organization. According to Park \hyperref[b29]{Rainey (2007)} describes that a high level of commitment among the workforce is more likely to produce social capital that help in creating, retaining and transferring knowledge within an organization and lure other employees in the marketplace to be a part of the organization.\par
A self-efficacy belief has proved to be important predictors of organizational goal.  {\ref Bandura(1997)} said that knowledge and cognitive skills are necessary but not sufficient. Various studies explained the significant role played by Self-efficacy as an important antecedent in the formation of entrepreneurial intentions  {\ref (Wilson, Kickul, \& Marlino,2007)}.\par
The historical background of the Co-operative is one of the leading financial enterprises that have the highest employee and membership's turnover rates in the world. In the present scenarios of the Co-operative world that one in every six people on the planet is cooperators (https://www.ica.coop/en/what-cooperative-0).The Co-operatives are a people-centered enterprise which is owned and run by its members to realize their common goals. The incomes of the cooperatives are either reinvested in the enterprises, or they returned to the members according to their transaction volume. The ethical phenomenon of the Co-operative is to generate small capital for improving people's lives by searching for means of production and efficient exchanges base on cooperation. The contribution of the Co-operative sectors' job employment based on data strives from 156 Organization commitment (Affective, Normative Keywords: emotional stability, self-efficacy, affective, ersonality always refers to the individual differences in characteristic patterns of thinking, feeling and behaving. A galaxy of personality traits is needed for success in the context of job. The traits are self-awareness, resilience, motivation, interpersonal sensitivity, influence, decisiveness and integrity. Traits are comparatively stable individual differences in thoughts, feelings and behaviors \hyperref[b10]{(Church, 2000)}. P countries; the update estimate shows that job employment in or within the scope of Co-operative concerns at least 279.4 Million people across the globe which contributes to 9.46 percent of the World employee population (CICOPA, 2017). There are over 34,512 primary cooperatives and 69 cooperatives networks (Statistics of Co-operative, 2017). There are total 13,578 SACCOs throughout the nationwide and 2997 SACCOs are running in Kathmandu district (Source: Statistics of Co-operative, 2017).\par
Thirty Five Thousand Four Hundred and Forty Seven Co-operative employees are directly working at SACCOS (Source: Statistics of Co-operative, 2017) in nationwide. In the Global report (2014) of CICOPA claims that the first step is clarifying the quantitative importance of cooperatives focusing on the development of conceptual tools to understand the various aspects. The Nepal government introduces a revised Cooperative Act, 2017 to structure cooperative business at a larger playing field of investment and business opportunity in the country. ILO Nepal Director, Richard Howard (2018) has claimed in the 2 nd Cooperative Congress in Nepal that there is a big gap in Nepal's labor market which has directly hit productivity and job create at the grassroots level while at the same time respecting and promoting global labor market standards underlying the role of cooperatives to achieve UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).The scope of the Cooperative is pioneering since 1844 to date. ICA report that the impact of Cooperative generates partial or full-time employment for at least 280 million individuals worldwide which almost cover 10\% of the entire employed population (https://www.ica.coop/ en/the-alliance/about-us).\par
The importance of the Co-operative movement shows that there are more appropriate studies regarding behavioral science to improve Co-operative employees' work performance. The study of personality traits, selfefficacy, and organizational commitment are helpful to generalize the problems of the existing employee's behavior and working environment of SACCOS for the long-term improvement of organization for increasing the productivity, retention and efficiency of the employees. There is not specific researches have conducted on cooperative employees related to this field of personality traits, self-efficacy and organizational commitment of Co-operative in Nepal.\par
Therefore, the proposed research, aims to discover the impact of emotional instability on selfefficacy and organizational commitment and attempt to fill the gain the literature pertaining to antecedent of organizational commitment. 
\section[{II.}]{II.}\par
Review of Literature \hyperref[b28]{Norman (1963)} first developed "Five Factor Theory" which is called "Big Five." In recent years the Five-Factor Model has been the most popular personality theory in psychology  {\ref (McCrae \&Costa, 1997}. The International Personality Item Pool-Five-Factor Model (IPIP-FFM; \hyperref[b19]{Goldberg, 1999)}, Big Five Inventory (BFI; John\& Srivastava, 1999), etc. have been widely applied in research and practice. This present study observed the psychometric properties of a short measure of the Big Five Factors of personality traits, the Mini-IPIP Scale \hyperref[b14]{(Donnellan, Oswald, Baird, \& Lucas, 2006)}. The Big Five model of personality theory consisted of five relatively independent dimensions which provided a meaningful categorization for reflecting the individual differences.  {\ref Goldberg (1990)} has explained in the following paragraphs. 1. Extraversion: This dimension is defined as the person's interest for the outer world which included some characteristics like loving people, looking for friendliness, being self-confident or assertive, energetic, and thinking always is effective to the situation even in the unfriendly environment. McCrae (1987) defined neuroticism or emotional instability as trait consisted of anxiety, affective instability, worry, tension, and self-pity, it was easy to understand that lower score of emotional stability predicted more intense subjective stress response, i.e., the individual with larger positive effect helped to decrease stress and lower feeling of control on stressful tasks.  {\ref (Bibbey, Carroll, Roseboom, Phillips, de Rooij, 2013;} {\ref Mc Ewen,1999} {\ref \& Suls,2001)} showed that the individual with higher emotional instability might experiences a higher level of chronic stress lead to lower the control in the autonomic nervous system. Regmi's (1982) study showed the personality structure of Nepalese Gurungs was pioneer research in Nepal. The Big Five Personality traits used to describe Nepalese civil servant personality (Subedi \& Regmi, 2015). Subedi (2017) explained that the trait of emotional stability in the big five personality dimension, the significant differences were obtained between the two ranks of officer levels (M = 61.33, SD = 9.787) and for non-officer level (M = 69.99, SD = 12.170), t (298) = 6.79, p ? .001. The conclusion came out that emotional stability level of non-officers was higher than that of the officers.\par
In the human resource management area, organizational commitment widely studied topic but also posed a bottom-line in organizational psychology due to its link with many worker related behaviors and attitudes and many situational level's variables strongly and influence the organization like absenteeism (Somers, 1995), organizational citizenship behavior(Zayas et al.,2015) and turnover  {\ref (Jaros, 1997;} {\ref Jehanzeb et al.,2013)}. Hackney (2012) and  {\ref Meyer et al., (1997)} defined that multiple descriptions of organizational commitment proposed that all consider commitments as a psychological state that described an employee's prolonged relationship with their organization and a tendency to continue in the further relationship with the same organization. Allen and  {\ref Meyer (1996)} defined organizational commitment as a psychological link between employees and organization that made it less likely that some of the employees voluntarily left the organization. Meyer\& Allen (1991) developed a threedimensional model encompassing affective, continuance, and normative commitments. In 1997, they further added the emotional affection concept to an organization. The three component model to characterize an individual's psychological attachment to the organization into their workplace behavior. The affective commitment based on emotional tied of the employee developed with the organization, thus continuance commitment reflected commitment based on the perceived costs, both economic and social, of leaving the organization and normative commitment reflected commitment based on perceived obligations towards the organization. The three components reviewed as employees' will to work cordially in an organization because they want to; they need to; or they ought to be busy respectively (Allen and  {\ref Meyer, 1996)}.This model widely popular and use to predict the employees' efficiency and outcomes respectively like turnover, attitude, job performance, absenteeism and tardiness of various working groups which were practiced and reported by \hyperref[b27]{(Meyer and Allen, 1991;} {\ref Meyer et al.,2002)}. According to  {\ref (Gautam, 2004;} {\ref Koirala, 1989} {\ref , \& Upadhyay, 1981)} found that the Nepalese employees commonly observed dissatisfaction in the workplace. \hyperref[b0]{Agrawal (1977)} revealed that in public sector employees were more committed than private sectors employees due to job security in the government sector. \hyperref[b30]{Pradhan (1999)} found in his study that the similar work climate in the private and public sector about Nepalese job holders. According to Shrestha(2015) that the female employees of Nepalese financial institution did not show significant differences in commitments between married and single employee. She further added that the mean score of single employee commitment level was higher than the married employee.\par
referred to people's judgments of the capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of performances. Some researchers found that people with high levels of selfefficacy believe in resolving mathematical problems, create a strong commitment to purpose and refer to failure to incomplete knowledge (Williams and Williams 2010). \hyperref[b22]{Henson and Chambers (2002)} claimed that a low correlation between personality types and self-efficacy. Schunk (2012) viewed that self-efficacy related to decision making towards a specific task, and best to learn while being actively involved in the challenging task.\par
It expected that employees scoring high in neuroticism showed higher continuance commitment. Past studies showed that neurotics highly motivated by and strongly attracted to hygiene factors, such as job security, benefits, pay and work conditions  {\ref (Furnham et al., 1999)}. \hyperref[b4]{Basnet and Regmi(2018)} found that female employee emotional instability showed higher than male so this report supported that the female employees \hyperref[b2]{Bandura (1977)} viewed that people with experience feelings from body and how they perceived emotional arousal influence the beliefs of the efficacy. So, the mastery experiences were the most influencing sources of efficacy which provided authentic evidence to make the success of the vigorous belief in one's personality. It noted that an individual seemed to be the ease with the task at hand, they felt capable and have higher beliefs of self-efficacy.\par
According to Bandura(1986), self-efficacy population is higher than the male employees in the Cooperative sector. These employees remained with their organizations because of the "side bets" they invested in the organization (Becker, 1960), which included remuneration, specificity of skills, work security, and work friends; this additionally served as the fundamental reason for continue employment. Hence, it expected that there was a positive relationship between neuroticism trait and continuance commitment.\par
Bhandari, P \& Kim, M. (2016) study found that the working conditions, culture, and economic background and health-promoting behaviors enhanced the self-efficacy of target populations of Nepalese migrant workers.\par
The previous study on emotional stability found that female employees mean score of emotional stability found significantly lesser than the male counterpart  {\ref (Basnet, 2018:36)}. 
\section[{III.}]{III.} 
\section[{Objectives}]{Objectives}\par
The general objective of this study is to find the effect and relationships on emotional stability, selfefficacy and organizational commitment of Saving and Credit Co-operative's employees.\par
The specific objectives of this study were as follow:\par
? To find out the differences in self-efficacy between Co-operative employees of Metropolitan City, Village Development Committee (VDC) and Municipality.\par
? To study the relationship between the self-efficacy and organizational commitment of under-graduate and graduate employees of the Co-operatives. ? To find the correlation between Self-efficacy and Commitments of Adult and Senior Adult Employees of SACCOS. ? To find any differences in Emotional Stability between male and female employees of SACCOS. ? To find the impact of Emotional Stability on Selfefficacy, Affective, Continuance and Normative Commitment of SACCOS Employees.\par
IV. 
\section[{Research Questions}]{Research Questions}\par
1. Is emotional stability factor effect on self-efficacy and organizational commitments of SACCOS employees?\par
2. Is there any significant relationship between selfefficacy and organizational commitments of Undergraduate and Graduate Employees working in the area of SACCOS? 3. Is there any relationship between self-efficacy and organizational commitments of Adult and Senior Adult employees working in the area of SACCOS? 4. Is the emotional stability found differences in male and female employees of SACCOS? 5. Is Self-efficacy found differences working in the area of Metropolitan City, Village Development Committee and Municipality of SACCOS?\par
V. 
\section[{Hypotheses}]{Hypotheses}\par
The following null hypotheses were tested during this research:\par
Hypothesis -1 There will be no impact of emotional stability on self-efficacy and organizational commitment of SACCOS employees. 
\section[{Hypothesis -2}]{Hypothesis -2}\par
There will be no significant relationship between self-efficacy and organizational commitment of Undergraduate and Graduate employees of the SACCOS. 
\section[{Hypothesis -3}]{Hypothesis -3}\par
There will be no relationship between Selfefficacy and Organizational Commitments of Adult and Senior Adult Employees of SACCOS. 
\section[{Hypothesis -4}]{Hypothesis -4}\par
There will be no gender (Male/Female) differences in Emotional Stability of SACCOS Employees. 
\section[{Hypothesis -5}]{Hypothesis -5}\par
There will be no differences among Self-efficacy of Metropolitan City, VDC \&Municipality employees of Co-operatives. 
\section[{VI.}]{VI.} 
\section[{Method a) Participants}]{Method a) Participants}\par
This study group was comprised of N= 400 as a sample size from SACCOS employees has taken for adult (296) and senior adult(104) employees of selected Saving and Credit Co-operatives Ltd (SACCOS) of Kathmandu Metropolitan City(KMC), Municipality, and Village Development Committee of Kathmandu district only. The age group of this study was 18 to 75 years. There were 248 (62\%) females and 152(38\%) male employees' samples. Likewise, there were 256 (64\%) under-graduate and 144(36\%) graduate employees in the total samples. Participants were from all the three hierarchical levels, junior level management, middlelevel management, and senior level management but the researchers categorized for the available employees into two levels like an adult and senior adult. There was  
\section[{b) Procedure}]{b) Procedure}\par
The researchers requested the head of the SACCOS Office related to their study by the written letter of researchers explained the importance of participation along with recommendation letter of Division Co-operative Office Kathmandu district and recommendation letter of National Co-operative Development Board, Government of Nepal after the consent received by the authority, researchers requested to the HR Manager or Managing Director of selected SACCOS to provide their employees including him or her (Head of the organization) to provide seat in a room and to distribute questionnaire package to each subject and they were instructed by the researchers to fill-up the questionnaire. The average time taken by the respondents in filling the set of questionnaire package was within 15 to 20 minutes. Participants assured regarding the anonymity and confidentiality of their responses. Survey questionnaires were administered among 425 respondents as about 25 subjects' responses was not satisfactory and some of the items omitted. Finally, researchers worked out with 400 subjects to complete this research. 
\section[{c) Measures}]{c) Measures}\par
The following tools used in this research. 
\section[{Tool -1: Mini International Personality Item Pool (IPIP):}]{Tool -1: Mini International Personality Item Pool (IPIP):}\par
The present study examined the psychometric properties of a short questionnaire of the Big Five Factors of Personality, the Mini-IPIP Scale (Donnellan, Oswald, Baird, \& Lucas, 2006).The Mini-IPIP Scale developed and based on the 50-item IPIP-FFM \hyperref[b19]{(Goldberg, 1999)}. This scale consisted of 20 items which measured Big Five Personality traits of Neuroticism, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Intellect. Out of 20 items, 11 were scored reversely. There were five 4-items' subscales, corresponding to each of the five major constructs of personality trait. Each statement was describing behavior of the employee (e.g."Have frequent mood swings"). \hyperref[b14]{Donnellan, et al., ( 2006)} items were responded to 5 -point Likert-type scale ranging from 1-(Strongly Disagree) to 5 ( Strongly Agree) used this research. The researchers removed 1 item from emotional stability (Neuroticism) (e.g.,"Am relaxed most of the time"). The Mini-IPIP has shown good test-retest reliability, convergent, discriminate and criterion-related validities in the previous researches \hyperref[b14]{(Donnellan et, al., 2006;} {\ref Cooper, et al., 2010)}. The items independently translated and adapted into Nepali with a two-stage process of translation and back translated by  {\ref (Basnet, Regmi, \& Birla, 2018)}. One of the translators (Regmi) was highly qualified experts in personality researches. The Cronbach's Alpha was found 0.1160 in this study. 
\section[{Tools -2: General Self-efficacy (GSE):}]{Tools -2: General Self-efficacy (GSE):}\par
This scale developed by Schwarzer, Jerusalem, 1995. The GSE was used to measure Self-efficacy. It consisted of ten items designed to construct the perception of self-efficacy. The GSE scale responded to the ten questions made on a 4-point scale (1= Not at all true, 2= Hardly true, 3= moderately true, and 4= exactly true) with a final composite score ranging from 10 -40. Reliability of the scale on Cronbach's Alpha: ranged from 0.76 to 0.90, with the majority in the high 0.80 in the previous studies of the self-efficacy (Shwarzer, Jerusalem, Schwarzer, \& Jerusalem, 2013). The Cronbach's Alpha was found 0.80 for this study. 
\section[{Tool -3: Organizational Commitment (OC):}]{Tool -3: Organizational Commitment (OC):}\par
This commitment Scale developed by \hyperref[b27]{Meyer and Allen (1991)}. This questionnaire has 24 items and 5points Likert-scale ranging from very inaccurate to very accurate. The standardized Cronbach's Alpha reported by this scale developers for affective, continuance and normative commitments were 0.87, 0.75 and 0.79 respectively \hyperref[b27]{(Meyer \&Allen, 1991)}. The Cronbach's Alphas were between 0.712, 0.677 and 0.623 respectively. So the researchers removed three items from normative commitment. As the pilot study of this research found some items of the normative commitment have not shown effective responses by the respondents due to the less meaningfulness of some questions to Nepalese culture, and due to a different culture of work environment in comparison to Nepalese work settings. There were four reverse items in affective, two reverse items in continuance and three reverse items on normative commitment, and high scores reflected higher levels of organizational commitment of employees.\par
The scales translated in Nepali version and back-translated in the English for parallel version were accomplished independently by two professors and, then the equivalence was established  {\ref (Brislin, 1997)}. Nepali translation was further simplified by the third author finally.\par
no specific department, and its employees had chose as the subjects.  Here the Cronbach Alpha is very low. This scale has only four items, and an item was removed to increase the reliability (?=0.116). In the previous study \hyperref[b5]{(Basnet, 2018)} has also shown low alpha (?=23.2\%) value. The original scale of Emotional Stability consisted of 20 items. 
\section[{Data Analysis}]{Data Analysis} 
\section[{Hypothesis-1}]{Hypothesis-1}\par
There will be no impact of emotional stability on self-efficacy and organizational commitment of SACCOS employees.\par
The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, a non-parametric approach is used for checking the normality tests of dependent variables are Self-efficacy, Affective, Continuance\& Normative commitments and Emotional Stability as an independent variable. The above table demonstrates that all the variables deviate from normality since their p-values are less than 5\% level of significance. This test suggests the use of a non-parametric approach for further analysis. The table \hyperref[tab_5]{II} shows the Median Regression Model because it performs by considering emotional stability as an independent variable and each of four variables: Self-efficacy, Affective, Continuance, and Normative as a dependent variable. The above table -II shows the further finding the result in separate Median Regression Models of four dependent variables. The Self-efficacy decreases significantly by 0.50 units on its median point when emotional instability score increases by 1 unit. The Affective commitment significantly decreases by 0.40 units on its median value when emotional instability increased by 1 unit. The Normative commitment decreases significantly by 0.25 units on its median when emotional instability increases by 1 unit.\par
Likewise, the impact of Emotional Stability on Continuance commitment is not significant, so it decreases by -4.44 * E-16 units on the median when emotional instability increases by 1 unit. The overall performance of the organization affects by the increasing unstable emotional stability of employees which adversely impacts on employees' commitments and self-efficacy. 
\section[{Hypothesis-2}]{Hypothesis-2}\par
There will be no significant relationship between self-efficacy and organizational commitment of Undergraduate and Graduate employees of the SACCOS. a. Educational Level = Under-graduate\par
The above table 5(A) exhibits the result of Spearman's rho correlation because the differences measure in Median test shows that the Under-graduate employees, there is significant positive and linear correlation between Self-efficacy and Affective(r=0.262, p<0.01) as well as Normative commitment(r=0.346, p<0.01). Likewise, the Under-graduate employees of SACCOS, there is a very low insignificant positive and linear correlation exhibits between Self-efficacy and Continuance Commitment(r=0.031, p <0.05). The affective and normative commitment of the Undergraduate SACCOS employees shows positive relationship with self-efficacy.  {\ref (Meyer et al.1991}) stated that it helps to create the higher level of emotional attachments to continue their service at the same organization in the long time. According to Progress Report of \hyperref[b5]{Basnet (2018)} explains that the mechanism of self-efficacy is significant to increase commitment to the job and the organization because self-efficacy increases employees' satisfaction, engagement, and work performance. He further adds that the affective and normative commitment helps to increase employees' their self-efficacy which determines organizational success or failure as well as effectiveness and performance. Chi, Yeh\&Choum (2013) describes that self-efficacy is one of the primary constructs of commitment. The Table \hyperref[tab_6]{5}(B) exhibits that the Graduate level employees' Self-efficacy is significantly positive and linear correlation with Affective(r=0.255, p<0.01) and Normative Commitment(r=0.220, p<0.01). Likewise, there is no significant and negative correlation between Self-efficacy and Continuance Commitment (r=-0.03, p>0.05) of Graduate level employees of SACCOS. Graduate Level employees' self -efficacy negatively correlates with continuance commitment. It proves that graduate level employees are not more concerned to use their energy, knowledge, and commitment to accomplish their assign tasks.\par
In conclusion, the result of Spearman's rho correlation shows that the Under-graduate\& Graduate level of SACCOS employees have similar but in the Graduate level of SACCOS employees' finds insignificant negative relationship between Self-efficacy and Continuance commitment. The SACCOS employees showed moderate self-efficacy level situated between 3 and 4 points Likert type scale. 
\section[{Hypothesis -3}]{Hypothesis -3}\par
There will be no relationship between Selfefficacy and Organizational Commitment of Adult and Senior Adult Employees of SACCOS. 
\section[{Table 6 (A): The result of the correlation between Self-efficacy and Organizational Commitments of Adult}]{Table 6 (A): The result of the correlation between Self-efficacy and Organizational Commitments of Adult}\par
Employees of SACCOS\par
The Table \hyperref[tab_9]{6}(A) shows that the Adult employees' Self-efficacy is significant, positive and linear correlation with Affective (r=0.262, p<0.01) and Normative (r=0.340, p<0.01) commitment and there is no significant linear correlation between Self-efficacy and Continuance commitment(r=0.024, p>0.05) of Adult employees of SACCOS. The test proved that the Affective and Normative commitments have significant relationships with Self-efficacy. In conclusion, the Continuance commitment does not show any relationships with Self-efficacy. 
\section[{Scale}]{Scale}\par
Self  The above table 6(B) shows that the senior adult employees' Self-efficacy shows a significant positive and correlation with the Affective (r=0.216, p<0.5) commitment and thus, the Normative commitment (r=0.165, p> 0.05) has no significant correlation with the Self-efficacy. Likewise, there is a negative correlation between Self-efficacy and Continuance commitment (r=0.-0.044, p>0.05). Senor adult employees' Affective commitment has significant relationship with Self-efficacy only. In conclusion, the Normative and Continuance commitment do not have any relationship with Self-efficacy and further analysis of senior adult employees' continuance commitment has a negative relationship with Self-efficacy. 
\section[{Hypothesis -4}]{Hypothesis -4}\par
There will be no gender differences in the Emotional Stability of SACCOS Employees. The Mann-Whitney U test table-7(A) shows that there is a significant difference on Median distribution of Emotional stability (Z= -2.157, p< 0.05) between Male and female.\par
The table -7 (B) shows the Median (or Mean) values demonstrates that there is more emotional instability in female than male Nepalese employees of SACCOS. The previous research on emotional stability (or neuroticism) found that the female employees mean score was higher than the male counterpart (Basnet\& Regmi, 2018:36). The SACCOS female employees have a little higher degree of negative emotions, anxiety, vulnerability, immoderation, anger than the male counterpart. The female employees have emotional instable personality trait and the fluctuation of emotion (low balance of emotion).\par
McCrae \& Costa Jr. (2010) did not find the expected Mean and also lower levels of emotional stability in Spanish female adults.  
\section[{Report}]{Report} 
\section[{9}]{9}\par
Hypothesis -5\par
There will be no differences among Self-efficacy of Metropolitan City, VDC \&Municipality employees of Cooperatives.  
\section[{Discussion and Conclusion}]{Discussion and Conclusion}\par
The purpose of this study is to examine the impact and relationships on emotional stability, selfefficacy and organizational commitments of SACCOS employees in Kathmandu district in the geographical areas of Kathmandu Metropolitan City, Municipality and Village Development Committee. The study proved that higher the emotional instability impact the lower efficacy and commitment of the SACCOS employees.\par
The individual personality plays a pivotal role as well as their family background; caste and so on are affected to the behavior of the employees. The graduate-level employees influenced their favorable education, experiences and entrepreneurship oriented bosom friends.\par
The employees with a higher level self-efficacy demonstrates a higher level of task effort; increase persistence, maximize interest, and higher tolerance for the difficult task was related to affective, normative and continuance commitment. In this research, the undergraduate level of employees' Self-efficacy has shown very low correlation with continuance commitment. Likewise, this study showed that graduate level SACCOS's employees' Self-efficacy has a negative correlation with continuance commitment. It indicated that graduate level employees did not like to invest their energy, skills, and capacity to perform the job excellently. According to \hyperref[b27]{Meyer and Allen (1991)} justified that finding of this study reported that individuals were much conscious of the cost of leaving in their existing working organization which derived them to continue their works and lead them not to leave the organization. This statement proved the graduate level employees of SACCOS were not more interested in continuance commitment in their existing job due to the negative correlation with self-efficacy. The internal factors of graduate level employee liked outside alternative job opportunity, high level of their own education, unstructured organizational atmosphere, their competency, benefits, security of a job, SACCOS's rules and regulation toward the employee's recruitment policy. The adult employees' self-efficacy positively correlated with Affective \&Normative commitment and incredibly low self-efficacy with the Continuance commitment.\par
The study showed that the decreased emotional stability of female employees' emotional well-being comparatively vulnerable than male employees. It showed that female employees had a high degree of a negative tendency than male employees and display ineffective coping mechanisms, and brought a hostile attitude, as well as they, were self-blaming in nature. Thus, this tendency has a negative impact on their productivity of the organization. Rothmann\& Coetzer (2003) said that emotional stability trait recognized as an important predictor of job performance. Likewise (Lee, Dougherty \&Turban, 2000) further added that it has a key role in maintaining conducive workplace social interactions. (Cutterbuck \&Lane, 2004) described that the nature of ability of employees' low scored on emotional stability caused lack of the ability to find constructive solutions to the problem and their behavior seem to be indecisive.\par
There was no significant difference in selfefficacy of SACCOS employees working in the different geographical areas like Metropolitan City, Village Development Committee and Municipality of Kathmandu district. The different areas of SACCOS employees exhibited similar behaviors', beliefs, capabilities, and emotional reactions. This result explored that the self-efficacy was a construct which was understood to affect in all areas of an individual's life (public and private sectors, as well as emotional and psychological processes) as emphasized by \hyperref[b9]{Chiou \& Wan (2007)} and Tillema et al.  {\ref ( 2001)}.\par
IX. 
\section[{Limitation}]{Limitation}\par
This survey research was conducted on a limited sample size within Kathmandu district. Cooperative business has a large area in nationwide but the researchers' only covered a district with a nature Cooperative like Saving and Credit Co-operative (SACCOS). However, no studies have been found among personality traits organizational commitments, and self-efficacy of Nepalese Co-operative employees. The majority of the Co-operatives are not operating with organizational structure, norms, values, and principles of Co-operatives. This research helps for shedding light into the field of further studies of this area. This study did not considerably match to an equal number of a male and female employee during the questionnaire survey. The total numbers of Kathmandu SACCOS female's employees are comparatively higher than the male employees M/F: 5947/5978(Statistic of Co-operative, 2016/2017). The limitation of this study may have some biases by the respondents during the filling-up the questionnaire set because the pattern of the questionnaires is psychometric so they felt uneasy and unable to understand the way to respond effectively. 
\section[{X. Recommendation and Suggestions}]{X. Recommendation and Suggestions}\par
The study found more emotional instability among female employees. Therefore, the concerned authorities should identify the problems for their career resilience and psychosocial mentoring on female employees. According to Costa \&McCrae (1992a); and  {\ref Goldberg (1993)} stressed that low emotional stability proposed about an individual's regular effort with the feelings of uncertainty and self-consciousness, so such people were prone to minor mental disturbances. The analyses proved that individuals with high emotional stability are better able to handle novel situations more effectively and respond to uncertainty with a better performance with patience. Furthermore, such individuals displayed flexible verbal and nonverbal behaviors (Anget al.,2006) while dealing with others. We, therefore, expected that emotional stability were strongly related to self-efficacy and total commitments of the employees. This research would have more effective, if the researchers included at least N=1000 sample size with full IPIP 100 items to generalize the study.  \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{1} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.6375\textwidth}P{0.01574074074074074\textwidth}P{0.07476851851851851\textwidth}P{0.04722222222222222\textwidth}P{0.07476851851851851\textwidth}}
Mean\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep Std. Deviation\tabcellsep N of Items\tabcellsep Cronbach's Alpha\\
32.28\tabcellsep 400\tabcellsep 4.990\tabcellsep 10\tabcellsep .80\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{The above table-1 exhibits, the mean (32.68), and SD (4.990) score and the reliability test (0.80) of Self-}\\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{efficacy. Cronbach's Alpha value is very high.}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_1}Table 1 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{2} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.396908315565032\textwidth}P{0.007249466950959488\textwidth}P{0.03805970149253731\textwidth}P{0.31716417910447764\textwidth}P{0.03624733475479744\textwidth}P{0.054371002132196165\textwidth}}
Scales\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep Mean\tabcellsep Standard Deviation(SD)\tabcellsep Number of Items\tabcellsep Cronbach's Alpha\\
Organizational Commitment 1) Affective 2) Continuance 3) Normative\tabcellsep 400\tabcellsep 28.78 21.82 17.10\tabcellsep 4.552 5.240 3.724\tabcellsep 7 7 5\tabcellsep .712 .677 .623\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{The above Table-2 exhibits, the Mean scores}\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{Affective, Continuance and Normative Commitments}\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{(28.78),(21.82),(17.10), SD(4.552),(5.240),(3.724) and}\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{respectively. Here Cronbach Alpha values are higher in}\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{Cronbach's Alpha scores (0.712),(0.677),(0.623) of}\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{all three scales in this research.}\tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_2}Table 2 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{3} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.6251121076233184\textwidth}P{0.015246636771300448\textwidth}P{0.07242152466367713\textwidth}P{0.06098654708520179\textwidth}P{0.07623318385650224\textwidth}}
Mean\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep Std. Deviation\tabcellsep Number of Items\tabcellsep Cronbach's Alpha\\
10.50\tabcellsep 400\tabcellsep 2.029\tabcellsep 3\tabcellsep .116\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{The above Table -3 shows, the Mean (10.50),}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{SD (2.O29) scores and the reliability test of emotional}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{stability personality has 0.116 alpha values accordingly.}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_3}Table 3 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{I} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.43749999999999994\textwidth}P{0.2125\textwidth}P{0.19999999999999998\textwidth}}
Variables\tabcellsep Statistic\tabcellsep P-Value\\
Affective\tabcellsep 2.290\tabcellsep 0.000\\
Self-efficacy\tabcellsep 2.001\tabcellsep 0.001\\
Normative\tabcellsep 1.368\tabcellsep 0.047\\
Continuance\tabcellsep 1.559\tabcellsep 0.015\\
Emotional stability\tabcellsep 1.788\tabcellsep 0.003\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_4}Table I}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{II} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.32965779467680606\textwidth}P{0.12927756653992395\textwidth}P{0.06463878326996197\textwidth}P{0.08726235741444867\textwidth}P{0.10665399239543726\textwidth}P{0.13250950570342204\textwidth}}
Dependent variables\tabcellsep Beta Coefficient\tabcellsep T\tabcellsep P-value\tabcellsep Pseudo R2(Squre)\tabcellsep Min sum of deviations\\
Self-Efficacy\tabcellsep -0.50\tabcellsep -4.30\tabcellsep 0.000\tabcellsep 0.024\tabcellsep 1544\\
Affective\tabcellsep -0.40\tabcellsep -3.81\tabcellsep 0.000\tabcellsep 0.024\tabcellsep 1412.2\\
Normative\tabcellsep -0.25\tabcellsep -2.72\tabcellsep 0.007\tabcellsep 0.0187\tabcellsep 1180.4\\
Continuance\tabcellsep -4.44E-16\tabcellsep 0.00\tabcellsep 0.196\tabcellsep 0\tabcellsep 1584\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{Independent variable: Emotional stability}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_5}Table II}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{5} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.19767441860465115\textwidth}P{0.2569767441860465\textwidth}P{0.100484496124031\textwidth}P{0.09883720930232558\textwidth}P{0.09718992248062015\textwidth}P{0.09883720930232558\textwidth}}
Scale\tabcellsep \tabcellsep Self efficacy\tabcellsep Affective\tabcellsep Continuance\tabcellsep Normative\\
\tabcellsep Correlation Coefficient\tabcellsep 1.000\tabcellsep .262 **\tabcellsep .031\tabcellsep .346 **\\
Self-efficacy\tabcellsep Sig. (2-tailed)\tabcellsep .\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .625\tabcellsep .000\\
\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep 256\tabcellsep 256\tabcellsep 256\tabcellsep 256\\
\tabcellsep Correlation Coefficient\tabcellsep .262 **\tabcellsep 1.000\tabcellsep .165 **\tabcellsep .426 **\\
Affective\tabcellsep Sig. (2-tailed)\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .\tabcellsep .008\tabcellsep .000\\
Spearman's\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep 256\tabcellsep 256\tabcellsep 256\tabcellsep 256\\
rho\tabcellsep Correlation Coefficient\tabcellsep .031\tabcellsep .165 **\tabcellsep 1.000\tabcellsep .334 **\\
Continuance\tabcellsep Sig. (2-tailed)\tabcellsep .625\tabcellsep .008\tabcellsep .\tabcellsep .000\\
\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep 256\tabcellsep 256\tabcellsep 256\tabcellsep 256\\
\tabcellsep Correlation Coefficient\tabcellsep .346 **\tabcellsep .426 **\tabcellsep .334 **\tabcellsep 1.000\\
Normative\tabcellsep Sig. (2-tailed)\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .\\
\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep 256\tabcellsep 256\tabcellsep 256\tabcellsep 256\\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_6}Table 5 (}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{5} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.2960199004975125\textwidth}P{0.2199004975124378\textwidth}P{0.13250414593698176\textwidth}P{0.06766169154228856\textwidth}P{0.06343283582089551\textwidth}P{0.07048092868988391\textwidth}}
Scale\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{4}{l}{Self-efficacy Affective Continuance Normative}\\
\tabcellsep Correlation Coefficient\tabcellsep 1.000\tabcellsep .255 **\tabcellsep -.030\tabcellsep .220 **\\
Self-efficacy\tabcellsep Sig. (2-tailed)\tabcellsep .\tabcellsep .002\tabcellsep .725\tabcellsep .008\\
\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep 144\tabcellsep 144\tabcellsep 144\tabcellsep 144\\
\tabcellsep Correlation Coefficient\tabcellsep .255 **\tabcellsep 1.000\tabcellsep .163\tabcellsep .410 **\\
Affective\tabcellsep Sig. (2-tailed)\tabcellsep .002\tabcellsep .\tabcellsep .051\tabcellsep .000\\
Spearman's\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep 144\tabcellsep 144\tabcellsep 144\tabcellsep 144\\
rho\tabcellsep Correlation Coefficient\tabcellsep -.030\tabcellsep .163\tabcellsep 1.000\tabcellsep .204 *\\
Continuance\tabcellsep Sig. (2-tailed)\tabcellsep .725\tabcellsep .051\tabcellsep .\tabcellsep .014\\
\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep 144\tabcellsep 144\tabcellsep 144\tabcellsep 144\\
\tabcellsep Correlation Coefficient\tabcellsep .220 **\tabcellsep .410 **\tabcellsep .204 *\tabcellsep 1.000\\
Normative\tabcellsep Sig. (2-tailed)\tabcellsep .008\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .014\tabcellsep .\\
\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep 144\tabcellsep 144\tabcellsep 144\tabcellsep 144\\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{a. Educational Level = Graduate}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_7}Table 5 (}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.3790895061728395\textwidth}P{0.08919753086419753\textwidth}P{0.09444444444444444\textwidth}P{0.09313271604938271\textwidth}P{0.12330246913580246\textwidth}P{0.07083333333333333\textwidth}}
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep Year 2019\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep ( A )\\
Spearman's rho **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Self-efficacy Correlation Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Affective Correlation Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Continuance Correlation Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N Normative Correlation Coefficient Sig. (2-tailed) N\tabcellsep efficacy 1.000 . 296 .262 ** .000 296 .024 .676 296 .340 ** .000 296\tabcellsep Affective .262 ** .000 296 1.000 . 296 .155 ** .007 296 .426 ** .000 296\tabcellsep Continuance .024 .676 296 .155 ** .007 296 1.000 . 296 .304 ** .000 296\tabcellsep Normative .340 ** .000 296 .426 ** .000 296 .304 ** .000 296 1.000 . 296\tabcellsep Global Journal of Human Social Science -\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep © 2019 Global Journals\tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_8}}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{6} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.27024866785079926\textwidth}P{0.23552397868561278\textwidth}P{0.08756660746003551\textwidth}P{0.08454706927175844\textwidth}P{0.08605683836589698\textwidth}P{0.08605683836589698\textwidth}}
Scale\tabcellsep \tabcellsep Self efficacy\tabcellsep Affective\tabcellsep Continuance\tabcellsep Normative\\
\tabcellsep Correlation Coefficient\tabcellsep 1.000\tabcellsep .216 *\tabcellsep -.044\tabcellsep .165\\
Self efficacy\tabcellsep Sig. (2-tailed)\tabcellsep .\tabcellsep .027\tabcellsep .656\tabcellsep .094\\
\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep 104\tabcellsep 104\tabcellsep 104\tabcellsep 104\\
\tabcellsep Correlation Coefficient\tabcellsep .216 *\tabcellsep 1.000\tabcellsep .168\tabcellsep .397 **\\
Affective\tabcellsep Sig. (2-tailed)\tabcellsep .027\tabcellsep .\tabcellsep .088\tabcellsep .000\\
Spearman's\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep 104\tabcellsep 104\tabcellsep 104\tabcellsep 104\\
rho\tabcellsep Correlation Coefficient\tabcellsep -.044\tabcellsep .168\tabcellsep 1.000\tabcellsep .272 **\\
Continuance\tabcellsep Sig. (2-tailed)\tabcellsep .656\tabcellsep .088\tabcellsep .\tabcellsep .005\\
\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep 104\tabcellsep 104\tabcellsep 104\tabcellsep 104\\
\tabcellsep Correlation Coefficient\tabcellsep .165\tabcellsep .397 **\tabcellsep .272 **\tabcellsep 1.000\\
Normative\tabcellsep Sig. (2-tailed)\tabcellsep .094\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .005\tabcellsep .\\
\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep 104\tabcellsep 104\tabcellsep 104\tabcellsep 104\\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_9}Table 6 (}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{7} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.6023178807947019\textwidth}P{0.247682119205298\textwidth}}
\multicolumn{2}{l}{Mann-Whitney Test}\\
Test Statistics\tabcellsep Emotional Stability\\
Mann-Whitney U\tabcellsep 16443.5\\
Wilcoxon W\tabcellsep 28071.5\\
Z\tabcellsep -2.157\\
Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed)\tabcellsep 0.031\\
a. Grouping Variable: Gender\tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_10}Table 7 (}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{7} \par 
\begin{longtable}{}
\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_11}Table 7 (}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{4} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.5010428100987926\textwidth}P{0.05411635565312843\textwidth}P{0.00933040614709111\textwidth}P{0.11476399560922063\textwidth}P{0.08210757409440175\textwidth}P{0.052250274423710205\textwidth}P{0.036388583973655325\textwidth}}
\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Factor}\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Area}\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep Mean Rank\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{KMC}\tabcellsep 80\tabcellsep 194.84\\
\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Self-efficacy}\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{VDC Municipality}\tabcellsep 268 52\tabcellsep 208.32 168.89\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Total}\tabcellsep 400\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep Test Statistic a,b\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Self efficacy}\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Chi-Square}\tabcellsep 5.330\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep Df\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 2\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Asymp. Sig.}\tabcellsep .070\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{a. Kruskal Wallis Test}\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{b. Grouping Variable: Area}\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep Means\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep Report\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep Self-efficacy\\
\tabcellsep Area\tabcellsep \tabcellsep Mean\tabcellsep Median\tabcellsep Std. Deviation\tabcellsep N\\
\tabcellsep KMC\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 32.15\tabcellsep 32.00\tabcellsep 4.661\tabcellsep 80\\
\tabcellsep VDC\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 32.56\tabcellsep 34.00\tabcellsep 5.117\tabcellsep 268\\
\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Municipality}\tabcellsep 31.06\tabcellsep 31.00\tabcellsep 4.633\tabcellsep 52\\
\tabcellsep Total\tabcellsep \tabcellsep 32.28\tabcellsep 33.00\tabcellsep 4.981\tabcellsep 400\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{Table 4 exhibits that the result of Kruskal-Wallis}\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{Test conforms that there is no significant differences on}\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{medians in (or distribution of) self-efficacy among}\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{employees of SACCOS operating in the area of}\\
Kathmandu\tabcellsep Metropolitan\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{City(KMC),}\tabcellsep Village\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{Development Committee and Municipality(p= 0.07,}\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{p>0.05) However, all different areas of SACCOS}\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{employees have a moderate level of self-efficacy. The}\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{analysis of the data proves that the self-efficacy level of}\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{the KMC, VDC and Municipality's SACCOS employees}\\
\multicolumn{5}{l}{have not shown the significant differences in an}\\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{individual's belief.}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
VIII.\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_13}Table 4}\end{figure}
 		 		\backmatter   			 
\subsection[{Acknowledgements}]{Acknowledgements}\par
We would like to acknowledge our regards to Dr. Antigonos Sochos, University of Bedfordshire, U.K.  			  			 			 			  				\begin{bibitemlist}{1}
\bibitem[Tilburg]{b21}\label{b21} 	 		\textit{},  		 			Holland Tilburg 		.  		Tilburg University Press.  	 
\bibitem[Goldberg ()]{b19}\label{b19} 	 		\textit{A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lowerlevel facets of several five-factor Models},  		 			L R Goldberg 		.  		1999.  	 	 (I) 
\bibitem[Mccrae and Costa ()]{b25}\label{b25} 	 		‘A Five-Factor Theory of Personality’.  		 			R R Mccrae 		,  		 			P T Costa 		.  	 	 		\textit{Handbook of personality},  				 			L A P Pervin \& O,  			John 		 (ed.)  		 (New York)  		1999. The Guilford Press.  	 	 (2 ed.) 
\bibitem[Meyer and Allen ()]{b27}\label{b27} 	 		‘A three-component conceptualization of organizational commitment’.  		 			J P Meyer 		,  		 			N J Allen 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-Z}{10.1016/1053-4822(91)90011-Z}.  	 	 		\textit{Human Resource Management Review}  		1991. 1 p. 61.  	 
\bibitem[
			JungG
		 ()]{b24}\label{b24} 	 		‘Analytical Psychology and Education: Three Lectures. Pages 65?132 in Carl Gustav Jung, Collected Works’.  		 			JungG 		.  	 	 		\textit{Pantheon. ? First published as Analytische Psychologic und Erziehung 25. Koirala, U}  		1926. 1954. 1989. 17 p. .  		 			University of Allahabad, 		 	 	 (J.Pers. Soc. Psychol.) 
\bibitem[Park and Rainey ()]{b29}\label{b29} 	 		‘Antecedents, Mediators, and Consequences of Affective, Normative, and Continuance Commitment: Empirical Tests of Commitment Effects in Federal Agencies’.  		 			S M Park 		,  		 			H G Rainey 		.  	 	 		\textit{Review of Public Personnel Administration}  		2007. 27  (3)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Brislin ()]{b8}\label{b8} 	 		‘Back-translation for Crosscultural research’.  		 			R W Brislin 		.  		 Doi: 10.1177/ 135910457000301.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Cross-cultural Psychology}  		1970. 1 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Cooperatives and Employment. Second Global Report. Contribution of cooperatives to decent work in the changing world of work CICOPA ()]{b11}\label{b11} 	 		‘Cooperatives and Employment. Second Global Report. Contribution of cooperatives to decent work in the changing world of work’.  	 	 		\textit{CICOPA}  		2017.  	 
\bibitem[Church ()]{b10}\label{b10} 	 		\textit{Culture and personality: Toward an integrated cultural traits},  		 			A T Church 		.  		2000.  	 
\bibitem[Costa et al. ()]{b13}\label{b13} 	 		‘Four ways five factors are basic’.  		 			P T Costa 		,  		 			Jr 		,  		 			R R Mccrae 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(92)90236-I}{10.1016/0191-8869(92)90236-I}.  	 	 		\textit{Personality and Individual Differences}  		1992a. 13  (6)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Agrawal ()]{b0}\label{b0} 	 		\textit{Management and Development},  		 			G R Agrawal 		.  		1977. Kathmandu: CEDA.  	 
\bibitem[Mccrae ()]{b32}\label{b32} 	 		 			R R Mccrae 		.  		\textit{Creativity, Divergent Thinking},  				1987.  	 
\bibitem[Mervield et al. (ed.)]{b20}\label{b20} 	 		 			Mervield 		,  		 			F De Deary 		,  		 			Fruyt 		.  		\textit{Personality psychology in Europe},  				 			\&f,  			Ostendorf 		 (ed.)  		7 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Pradhan ()]{b30}\label{b30} 	 		\textit{Organizational Climate in the Public and Private Enterprises in Nepal. Unpublished PhD. thesis submitted to FOM},  		 			A M Pradhan 		.  		1999. Kathmandu.  		 			Tribhuvan University 		 	 
\bibitem[Gautama ()]{b18}\label{b18} 	 		\textit{Organizational Commitment in Nepal},  		 			T Gautama 		.  		2004.  		 			Kathmandu: Faculty of Management, Tribhuvan University 		 	 	 (Unpublished PhD. Thesis) 
\bibitem[Gautam et al. ()]{b17}\label{b17} 	 		‘Organizational commitment in Nepalese setting’.  		 			T Gautam 		,  		 			R Van Dick 		,  		 			U Wagner 		.  	 	 		\textit{Asian Journal of Social Psychology}  		2001. 4 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Allport ()]{b1}\label{b1} 	 		\textit{Pattern and growth in personality},  		 			G W Allport 		.  		1961. New York; Holt, Rinehart \& Winston.  	 
\bibitem[Bibbey et al. ()]{b7}\label{b7} 	 		‘Personality and Physiological reactions to acute psychological stress’.  		 			A Bibbey 		,  		 			D Carroll 		,  		 			T J Roseboom 		,  		 			A C Phillips 		,  		 			S R Derooij 		.  		 Doi: 10.1016/ j.ijpsycho. 2012.10.018.  	 	 		\textit{Int. J. Psychophysiol}  		2013. 90 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Henson and Chambers (2002)]{b22}\label{b22} 	 		\textit{Personality type as a predictor of teaching efficacy and classroom control beliefs in emergency certification teachers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the southwest educational research association},  		 			R K Henson 		,  		 			S M Chambers 		.  		2002. February. Austin, TX. p. .  	 
\bibitem[Bhandari and Kim (2016)]{b6}\label{b6} 	 		‘Predictors of the Health-Promoting Behaviors of Nepalese Migrant Workers’.  		 			P Bhandari 		,  		 			M Kim 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/jnr.0000000000000120}{10.1097/jnr.0000000000000120}.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Nursing Research}  		2016. September 2016. 24 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Eden and Avirma ()]{b15}\label{b15} 	 		‘Self-efficacy training to speed reemployment: Helping people help themselves’.  		 			D Eden 		,  		 			A Avirma 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Applied Psychology}  		1993. 78 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Bandura ()]{b2}\label{b2} 	 		‘Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change’.  		 			A Bandura 		.  	 	 		\textit{Psychological Review}  		1977. 84 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Bandura ()]{b3}\label{b3} 	 		\textit{Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory},  		 			A Bandura 		.  		1986. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.  	 
\bibitem[Mcewen ()]{b26}\label{b26} 	 		‘Stress and Hippocampal Plasticity’.  		 			B S Mcewen 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro22.1.105}{10.1146/annurev.neuro22.1.105}.  	 	 		\textit{Annu. Rev. Neurosci}  		1999. 22 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Rothmann and Coetzer ()]{b31}\label{b31} 	 		‘The Big Five personality dimensions and job performance’.  		 			S Rothmann 		,  		 			E P Coetzer 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v29i1.88}{10.4102/sajip.v29i1.88}.  	 	 		\textit{SA Journal of Industrial Psychology}  		2003. 29  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[John and Srivastava ()]{b23}\label{b23} 	 		‘The Big Five trait taxonomy: history, measurement, and theoretical perspectives’.  		 			O P John 		,  		 			S Srivastava 		.  	 	 		\textit{Handbook of personality: theory and research},  				 			L A Pervin\&,  			O P John 		 (ed.)  		 (New York; Guilford)  		1999. p. .  	 	 (2nd ed.) 
\bibitem[Basnet and Regmi ()]{b4}\label{b4} 	 		‘The Correlational Study of the Personality traits, Commitments and Self-efficacy of Co-operative Employees’.  		 			D M Basnet 		,  		 			M P Regmi 		.  	 	 		\textit{of Kathmandu. 9 th Int'l Conference "Mapping Global Changes in Business, Economy, Society and Culture},  				 (Udaipur, India; Udaipur, Rajasthan)  		2018. 2018 January, 19-20.  		 			Faculty of Management, Pacific University 		 	 
\bibitem[Chiou and Wan ()]{b9}\label{b9} 	 		‘The dynamic change of self-efficacy in information searching on the internet : influence of valence of expérience and prior self-efficacy’.  		 			W B Chiou 		,  		 			C S Wan 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JRLP.141.6.589-604}{10.3200/JRLP.141.6.589-604}.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Psychology}  		2007. 141 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Donnellan et al. ()]{b14}\label{b14} 	 		\textit{The Mini-IPIP},  		 			M B Donnellan 		,  		 			F L Oswald 		,  		 			B M Baird 		,  		 			R E Lucas 		.  		2006.  	 
\bibitem[Basnet ()]{b5}\label{b5} 	 		\textit{The Relationship among Personality Traits, Self-efficacy, and Organizational Commitment of Employees of selected Saving and Credit Cooperatives},  		 			D M Basnet 		.  		2018.  	 
\bibitem[Clutterbuck, D., & Lane, G. (ed.) ()]{b12}\label{b12} 	 		\textit{The situational mentor: An international review of competencies and capabilities in mentoring},  		Clutterbuck, D., \& Lane, G. (ed.)  		2004. Aldershot, United Kingdom: Gower Publishing Limited.  	 
\bibitem[Eysenck ()]{b16}\label{b16} 	 		\textit{The structure of human personality},  		 			H J Eysenck 		.  		1970. New York, NY, US; Methuen.  	 
\bibitem[Norman ()]{b28}\label{b28} 	 		‘Toward an Adequate Taxonomy of Personality Attributes: Replicated Factor Structures’.  		 			W T Norman 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology}  		1963. 66 p. .  	 
\end{bibitemlist}
 			 		 	 
\end{document}
