# Research on the Influence of Anxiety Psychology on Unsafe Behavior Among Construction Workers
## 4 Model Validation and Result Analysis
### Regression Analysis
#### 4.4.2 Mediation Effect Testing  
Model 3 in Table 8 examines the effect of anxiety psychology on job satisfaction after controlling for demographic variables (gender, career age, education level, work experience, and anxiety level). Model 4 introduces both anxiety psychology and job \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Dependent Variable**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Dependent Variable: Unsafe Behaviors**} \\  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Model 1**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Model 2**} \\  & \(\beta\) & **t** & \(\beta\) & **t** \\ \hline Control variable & & & & \\ Gender & 0.043 & 1.574 & 0.052 & 1.255 \\ Age & 0.073 ** & 0.532 & 0.077 ** & 0.487 \\ Educational background & \(-0.136\) * & \(-1.272\) & \(-0.115\) * & \(-1.422\) \\ Experience & \(-0.075\) & \(-1.521\) & \(-0.018\) & \(-1.671\) \\ Level of anxiety & 0.173 ** & 1.921 & 0.133 ** & 1.822 \\ \hline Independent variable & & & & \\ Anxiety psychology & & & 0.679 *** & 2.922 \\ \hline R\({}^{2}\) & 0.385 & & 0.601 & \\ R\({}^{2}\) (Adjusted) & 0.363 & & 0.586 & \\ F & 2.852 *** & & 82.630 *** \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* Significance level is \(p<0.001\). *
* Significance level is \(p<0.01\).
* Significance level is \(p<0.05\). All regression coefficients (\(\beta\) values) in the table represent standardized results.  
\end{table} 
Table 7: Regression analysis of the main effect. satisfaction (mediator) to assess their combined influence on unsafe behaviors. Model 5 evaluates the direct effect of job satisfaction (as the sole mediator) on unsafe behaviors while controlling for demographics. Model 3 demonstrated a significant negative correlation between anxiety psychology and job satisfaction (\(\beta=-0.389\), \(p<0.01\)), validating Hypothesis H9 (\"Job satisfaction is negatively correlated with anxiety psychology\"). Comparing Model 2 and Model 4, the regression coefficient of anxiety psychology on unsafe behaviors decreased significantly from \(\beta=0.679\) (\(p<0.001\)) to \(\beta=0.179\) (\(p<0.01\)), meeting the criteria for full mediation. This confirms that job satisfaction fully mediates the relationship between anxiety psychology and unsafe behaviors, supporting Hypothesis H10. Model 5 revealed that job satisfaction alone significantly predicts unsafe behaviors (\(\beta=-0.003\), \(p<0.01\)) with a robust model fit (R\({}^{2}\) = 0.623, adjusted R\({}^{2}\) = 0.618, F = 4.139, \(p<0.001\)), thereby validating Hypothesis H8 (\"Job satisfaction is negatively correlated with unsafe behaviors\"). Model 6 in Table 9 examines the effect of anxiety psychology on organizational climate after controlling for demographic variables (gender, career age, education level, work experience, and anxiety level). Model 7 introduces both anxiety psychology and organizational climate (mediator) to assess their combined influence on unsafe behaviors. Model 8 evaluates the direct effect of organizational climate (as the sole mediator) on unsafe behaviors while controlling for demographics. Model 6 revealed a significant negative correlation between anxiety psychology and organizational climate (\(\beta=-0.383\), \(p<0.01\)), validating Hypothesis H3 (\"Organizational climate is negatively correlated with anxiety psychology\"). Comparing Model 2 and Model 7, the regression coefficient of anxiety psychology on unsafe behaviors decreased substantially from \(\beta=0.679\) (\(p<0.001\)) to \(\beta=0.071\) (\(p<0.01\)), meeting the criteria for full mediation. This confirms that organizational climate fully mediates the anxiety psychology-unsafe behavior relationship, supporting Hypothesis H4. Model 8 demonstrated that organizational climate alone significantly predicts unsafe behaviors (\(\beta=-0.002\), t \(<0.01\)) with strong model fit (R\({}^{2}\) = 0.625, adjusted R\({}^{2}\) = 0.618,