# Correlation Analysis between Emotion Control and Professional Self-Efficacy of Singing Artists Based on Multidimensional Environment

Authors: Ziyu Liu
Journal: Journal of Environmental and Public Health
 (2022)

---

## Abstract

The tertiary industry occupies a large area in China’s economic system, and it plays an important function in the growth of China’s economic development. It is of positive significance to study the relationship between emotional labor and occupational self-efficacy of singing artists in the tertiary industry. This paper mainly studies the correlation between the emotional labor of singing artists and their professional self-efficacy and analyzes the strength of the correlation. This paper selects 150 singing art personnel in the singing art association in city A to conduct a questionnaire survey and conducts data processing on the questionnaire. This paper explores the influencing factors of emotional labor and four dimensions of occupational self-efficacy. This paper firstly analyzes the differences of the influencing factors of emotional labor and then tests the interaction of the different factors selected. It then conducts a significant test on the four dimensions of professional self-efficacy and finally studies the correlation between the two based on the previous analysis results. This paper concludes that there is a highly significant relationship between the emotional labor and professional ego efficacy of singing artists. And the correlation coefficient and determination coefficient are 0.293 and 0.087, respectively. It shows that 8.7% of the total variance in occupational self-efficacy variables can be explained by emotional labor. There was no significant correlation between surface acting and occupational self-efficacy. Deep acting has the greatest correlation with the physical and mental efficacy dimension of occupational self-efficacy, with a correlation coefficient of 0.391. There were significant correlations between natural performance and the four dimensions of occupational self-efficacy. The highest value is interpersonal efficacy, which is 0.337. The research conclusions of this paper have certain reference value for exploring the relationship between emotional labor and professional self-efficacy of singing artists.


---

## Body

## 1. Introduction

The share of the tertiary sector in the Chinese market is steadily increasing. And it plays an important role and significance in China’s modern economic construction. In the tertiary industry, there are service groups from various industries, which play an important role in the construction of different industries. With the passage of time, the identity of singing artists has changed and is gradually understood. Singing artists not only bring us wonderful music but also give us a new understanding of the charm of music. But in everyday art performances, any emotional labor by singing artists will have a certain impact on the profession. In this context, we study the relationship between emotional labor and occupational self-efficacy among singing artists. Through this relationship, the adverse effects caused by negative emotions can be eliminated, and the artistic behavior ability of singing artists can be improved.To better investigate the relationship between the emotional labor and professional self-efficacy of singing arts personnel, this paper selects 150 singing art personnel in the singing art association of city A to conduct a questionnaire survey and analysis. In this paper, we examine data on various components that have an impact on emotional labor and four dimensions of occupational self-efficacy. It obtained the correlation strength of different influencing factors of emotional labor on the four dimensions of occupational self-efficacy. The final conclusion has positive significance for the subsequent improvement of emotional labor behavior of singing artists. It also directly enhanced their professional self-efficacy.In different industries, any changes in employees’ emotions can affect their work. If employees are in a positive mood, their productivity and performance will be higher than if they are in a negative mood. However, which influencing factors are related to emotional labor, and whether there is a correlation between emotional labor and occupational self-efficacy, different researchers have analyzed and studied it. Da-Yee et al. examined the role of personality in this relationship by analyzing the relationship between emotional labor and job burnout, and the results suggest that emotional labor is the source of job burnout. The positive self-efficacy of personality traits can improve the ability of employees [1]. Satyaningrum and Djastuti conducted SEMPLS analysis with 90 employees of BTN Bank. He concluded that emotional labor has a positive effect on job stress and turnover intention but has no significant effect on creativity [2]. Etin and Bekta performed SPSS and AMOS data analyses on 138 medical staff. The findings suggest that harmonious passions have direct and negative effects on surface behavior and positive effects on natural feelings. It reinforces deep behavior [3]. Guedes et al. studied the role of occupational identity on emotional labor and concluded that occupational identity has a positive impact on the emotional labor of deep behavior and shallow behavior [4]. It can be seen that there is a certain correlation between the influence factors of employees’ emotional labor and many behaviors. Darban et al. mainly studied 150 nurses. In the method of random sampling, he conducts questionnaire survey analysis with tools such as Neefe. His research assesses the relationship between organizational learning and professional self-efficacy among nurses. The results showed a significant positive correlation between self-efficacy scores and organizational learning dimensions such as systems thinking, team learning, and shared vision. And these three organizational learning dimensions predicted a 16.1% change in professional self-efficacy [5]. Jarwan et al.’s survey found that professional self-efficacy was related to three dimensions of counselors’ gender, school stage, and years of experience with their professional competence. He performed statistical analysis of the mean and standard deviation, 3-WAY-ANOVA analysis, and simple regression analysis of 88 counselors in public schools. He concluded that there is a statistically positive effect between educational counselors’ self-efficacy, and professional competence [6]. Safari et al. examined the impact of EFI teachers’ self-efficacy on their professional development, using data from 212 teachers in the school to establish a structural equation to verify the relationship. The results showed that there were significant internal associations between all latent variables and their subscales and that self-efficacy and job satisfaction had positive predictive effects on career development. Self-efficacy has greater predictive power than job satisfaction [7]. Biasutti et al. examined the professional self-efficacy of music teachers and conducted a questionnaire survey of 335 music teachers. The results show that occupational self-efficacy is positively predicted by factors such as professional satisfaction, and coping strategies that passively accept key situations have a negative impact on it [8]. It can be seen that each person has unique insights into the analysis of emotional labor and occupational self-efficacy. This also leads to new insights for the study in this paper.On the basis of previous research and combined with the research topic of the article, this paper selects the main emotional labor influencing factors of singing artists. The influencing factors are age, singing years, education level, singing level, and professional level. This paper also analyzes the differences of influencing factors on emotional labor. In order to eliminate errors, it introduces population variables to analyze whether there is an interaction between the influencing factors. Then, this paper analyzes the four dimensions of occupational self-efficacy: occupational cognition and development efficacy, interpersonal efficacy, physical and mental efficacy, and occupational technical efficacy. Finally, it analyzes the relationship between emotional labor and occupational self-efficacy based on the previous research results. In this paper, it is concluded that there is a correlation between the two and the correlation is significant, which brings positive significance to its work.


## 2. Introduction to the Theory of Emotional Labor and Occupational Self-Efficacy

### 2.1. Definition of Emotional Labor

The concept of emotional labor was first proposed by American sociologist in 1983; it is mainly through emotional efforts to complete the work [9]. However, many scholars have different opinions on the definition of emotional labor. The definition of emotional labor can generally be divided into the following three types. The specific conditions are shown in Table 1.Table 1
Emotional labor definition table.
PerspectiveProposerCircumscriptionHuman interactionMorris and FeldmanTo meet the work requirements of the enterprise in the interactive processFocus on individual emotional processingGrandeyIndividuals conduct inner adjustment to meet enterprise requirementsEmotional labor regardless of job typeHochschildEmotional regulation that meets the requirements of the publicTo sum up, scholars have not yet unified the definition of emotional labor, although it brings certain difficulties to subsequent research. However, it also makes the research on emotional labor show diversified characteristics, which makes the research content have certain innovation and novel effects.


### 2.2. Definition of Self-Efficacy

Self-efficacy is an important cognitive means of individual motivation, which is helpful for understanding the complexity of individuals in career planning and career development. Simply put, occupational self-efficacy is the specific use of self-efficacy in occupations [10]. It mainly includes two aspects of research. One is the belief in an individual’s ability to succeed in a career field and meet the conditions required for that career. The second is the belief that individuals can complete the process of career decision-making in different occupational fields.


### 2.3. Correlation

#### 2.3.1. Simple Correlation Analysis

In simple correlation analysis, Pearson product-distance correlation, Spearman rank correlation, and Kendall tau-b rank correlation are generally used to measure the degree of correlation between two variables [11]. This paper mainly analyzes and studies the Pearson product-distance correlation. When the variables as a whole show a normal distribution or approximate normal distribution and the sample size value is greater than 30, the calculated correlation coefficient has practical significance. The Pearson product distance correlation mainly calculates the correlation between two continuous variables, and its calculation equation is as follows:(1)θAB=∑i=1nai−a¯bi−b¯∑i=1nai−a¯2∑i=1nbi−b¯2.A=a1,a2,…,an,B=b1,b2,…,bn, and a¯,b¯ are the mean values of variables A and B, respectively, ai,bi are the observed values of variables A and B, respectively, and n is the sample size.After calculating the value ofθAB, it needs to be tested by statistics. The test equation is as follows:(2)r=θABn−21−θAB2.Whent>tn/2, it indicates that there is a significant correlation between the two samples; when t>tn/2, it indicates that there is no correlation between the two samples. Generally, the value of α can also be used to measure the correlation between two variables. When α=0.05, there is a significant correlation between the two variables; when α=0.01, there is a highly significant correlation between the two variables.Spearman’s rank correlation is mainly used to measure the correlation between non-normal distribution or ordinal variables. It can generally be carried out by the operation method of “−1 means very dissatisfied, 0 means dissatisfied, 1 means satisfied, and 2 means very satisfied.”The Kendall tau-b rank correlation is mainly calculated by calculating the number of homologous pairs and heterologous pairs and then obtains the correlation coefficient. It is testing the significance of the correlation coefficient.


#### 2.3.2. Classical Correlation Analysis

The classic correlation analysis is to perform multivariate statistical analysis on the whole of two variables to analyze the correlation between them [12]. Suppose there are two clusters of parameters X1,X2,…,Xn, Y1,Y2,…,Ym, m and n are both greater than 1. If the composite variable of these two variables is expressed by M and N, the linear combination expression of X and Y is as follows:(3)M=a1X1+a2X2+⋯+anXn,N=b1Y1+b2Y2+⋯+bmYm.M and N are the integrated variables generated by the linear combination of variables X and Y, and a=a1,a2,…,an, b=b1,b2,…,bm are the unknown combination coefficient [13]. Next, the coefficients of a and b need to be determined, and the calculation equation is as follows:(4)ρM,N=ρa′X,b′Y=CovM,NvarMvarN=Cova′X,b′Yvara′Xvarb′Y.CovM,N is the covariance of variables M and N, varM is the variance of variable M, and varN is the variance of variable N.


## 2.1. Definition of Emotional Labor

The concept of emotional labor was first proposed by American sociologist in 1983; it is mainly through emotional efforts to complete the work [9]. However, many scholars have different opinions on the definition of emotional labor. The definition of emotional labor can generally be divided into the following three types. The specific conditions are shown in Table 1.Table 1
Emotional labor definition table.
PerspectiveProposerCircumscriptionHuman interactionMorris and FeldmanTo meet the work requirements of the enterprise in the interactive processFocus on individual emotional processingGrandeyIndividuals conduct inner adjustment to meet enterprise requirementsEmotional labor regardless of job typeHochschildEmotional regulation that meets the requirements of the publicTo sum up, scholars have not yet unified the definition of emotional labor, although it brings certain difficulties to subsequent research. However, it also makes the research on emotional labor show diversified characteristics, which makes the research content have certain innovation and novel effects.


## 2.2. Definition of Self-Efficacy

Self-efficacy is an important cognitive means of individual motivation, which is helpful for understanding the complexity of individuals in career planning and career development. Simply put, occupational self-efficacy is the specific use of self-efficacy in occupations [10]. It mainly includes two aspects of research. One is the belief in an individual’s ability to succeed in a career field and meet the conditions required for that career. The second is the belief that individuals can complete the process of career decision-making in different occupational fields.


## 2.3. Correlation

### 2.3.1. Simple Correlation Analysis

In simple correlation analysis, Pearson product-distance correlation, Spearman rank correlation, and Kendall tau-b rank correlation are generally used to measure the degree of correlation between two variables [11]. This paper mainly analyzes and studies the Pearson product-distance correlation. When the variables as a whole show a normal distribution or approximate normal distribution and the sample size value is greater than 30, the calculated correlation coefficient has practical significance. The Pearson product distance correlation mainly calculates the correlation between two continuous variables, and its calculation equation is as follows:(1)θAB=∑i=1nai−a¯bi−b¯∑i=1nai−a¯2∑i=1nbi−b¯2.A=a1,a2,…,an,B=b1,b2,…,bn, and a¯,b¯ are the mean values of variables A and B, respectively, ai,bi are the observed values of variables A and B, respectively, and n is the sample size.After calculating the value ofθAB, it needs to be tested by statistics. The test equation is as follows:(2)r=θABn−21−θAB2.Whent>tn/2, it indicates that there is a significant correlation between the two samples; when t>tn/2, it indicates that there is no correlation between the two samples. Generally, the value of α can also be used to measure the correlation between two variables. When α=0.05, there is a significant correlation between the two variables; when α=0.01, there is a highly significant correlation between the two variables.Spearman’s rank correlation is mainly used to measure the correlation between non-normal distribution or ordinal variables. It can generally be carried out by the operation method of “−1 means very dissatisfied, 0 means dissatisfied, 1 means satisfied, and 2 means very satisfied.”The Kendall tau-b rank correlation is mainly calculated by calculating the number of homologous pairs and heterologous pairs and then obtains the correlation coefficient. It is testing the significance of the correlation coefficient.


### 2.3.2. Classical Correlation Analysis

The classic correlation analysis is to perform multivariate statistical analysis on the whole of two variables to analyze the correlation between them [12]. Suppose there are two clusters of parameters X1,X2,…,Xn, Y1,Y2,…,Ym, m and n are both greater than 1. If the composite variable of these two variables is expressed by M and N, the linear combination expression of X and Y is as follows:(3)M=a1X1+a2X2+⋯+anXn,N=b1Y1+b2Y2+⋯+bmYm.M and N are the integrated variables generated by the linear combination of variables X and Y, and a=a1,a2,…,an, b=b1,b2,…,bm are the unknown combination coefficient [13]. Next, the coefficients of a and b need to be determined, and the calculation equation is as follows:(4)ρM,N=ρa′X,b′Y=CovM,NvarMvarN=Cova′X,b′Yvara′Xvarb′Y.CovM,N is the covariance of variables M and N, varM is the variance of variable M, and varN is the variance of variable N.


## 2.3.1. Simple Correlation Analysis

In simple correlation analysis, Pearson product-distance correlation, Spearman rank correlation, and Kendall tau-b rank correlation are generally used to measure the degree of correlation between two variables [11]. This paper mainly analyzes and studies the Pearson product-distance correlation. When the variables as a whole show a normal distribution or approximate normal distribution and the sample size value is greater than 30, the calculated correlation coefficient has practical significance. The Pearson product distance correlation mainly calculates the correlation between two continuous variables, and its calculation equation is as follows:(1)θAB=∑i=1nai−a¯bi−b¯∑i=1nai−a¯2∑i=1nbi−b¯2.A=a1,a2,…,an,B=b1,b2,…,bn, and a¯,b¯ are the mean values of variables A and B, respectively, ai,bi are the observed values of variables A and B, respectively, and n is the sample size.After calculating the value ofθAB, it needs to be tested by statistics. The test equation is as follows:(2)r=θABn−21−θAB2.Whent>tn/2, it indicates that there is a significant correlation between the two samples; when t>tn/2, it indicates that there is no correlation between the two samples. Generally, the value of α can also be used to measure the correlation between two variables. When α=0.05, there is a significant correlation between the two variables; when α=0.01, there is a highly significant correlation between the two variables.Spearman’s rank correlation is mainly used to measure the correlation between non-normal distribution or ordinal variables. It can generally be carried out by the operation method of “−1 means very dissatisfied, 0 means dissatisfied, 1 means satisfied, and 2 means very satisfied.”The Kendall tau-b rank correlation is mainly calculated by calculating the number of homologous pairs and heterologous pairs and then obtains the correlation coefficient. It is testing the significance of the correlation coefficient.


## 2.3.2. Classical Correlation Analysis

The classic correlation analysis is to perform multivariate statistical analysis on the whole of two variables to analyze the correlation between them [12]. Suppose there are two clusters of parameters X1,X2,…,Xn, Y1,Y2,…,Ym, m and n are both greater than 1. If the composite variable of these two variables is expressed by M and N, the linear combination expression of X and Y is as follows:(3)M=a1X1+a2X2+⋯+anXn,N=b1Y1+b2Y2+⋯+bmYm.M and N are the integrated variables generated by the linear combination of variables X and Y, and a=a1,a2,…,an, b=b1,b2,…,bm are the unknown combination coefficient [13]. Next, the coefficients of a and b need to be determined, and the calculation equation is as follows:(4)ρM,N=ρa′X,b′Y=CovM,NvarMvarN=Cova′X,b′Yvara′Xvarb′Y.CovM,N is the covariance of variables M and N, varM is the variance of variable M, and varN is the variance of variable N.


## 3. Correlation Function Model Based on Neural Network Algorithm

When we analyze the relationship between emotional activity and occupational self-efficacy, we need to collect and clean the data of the above two variables in turn and finally build a correlation analysis model. On the basis of the above theory, in this manuscript, we introduced a BP neural network algorithm [13], which provides an in-depth analysis of the variable relationship between the two variables in light of the above theory [14]. The linear and nonlinear relationships between the two variables are fitted to the data. The better the fitting degree, the more accurate the correlation function model is [15]. Before this, it is necessary to clean the selected data and then build a functional model for it.


### 3.1. Realization Process of BP Neural Network Algorithm

The biggest advantage of the neural network [16, 17] is that it can automatically adjust the weights through changes in the environment, thereby achieving the purpose of its own adaptability. The input layer, hidden layer, and output layer make up the bulk of a BP neural network; the hidden layer may consist of one or more layers. There are typically two signal transmission paths when using the BP neural network algorithm. The input signal is one. The value is input by the input layer, transmitted from front to back, and then finally arrives at the output port. The difference between the neural network’s actual and theoretical output values, or error signal, is the other. It propagates backwards sequentially starting at the output end, each training reducing the error until the output value is infinitesimally close to the theoretical expected value. The BP neural network uses the following calculation method.


#### 3.1.1. Forward Propagation of Working Signal

The expression for the input value of theith node of the hidden layer is as follows:(5)ai=∑j=1Nωijxj+θi.The expression for the output value of theith node of the hidden layer is as follows:(6)li=ϕai=ϕ∑j=1Nωijxj+θi.The expression for the input value of thekth node of the output layer is as follows:(7)ak=∑i=1nωkiyi+bk=∑i=1nωkiϕ∑j=1Nωijxj+θi+bk.The expression of the output value of thekth node of the output layer is as follows:(8)lk=μak=μ∑i=1nωkiϕ∑j=1Nωijxj+θi+bk.


#### 3.1.2. Backward Propagation of the Error Signal

Assuming that there is a samplep, the expression of its quadratic error function is as follows:(9)Ep=12∑k=1LTk−ck2.For allP training samples, the total error function expression is as follows:(10)Ep=12∑p=1p∑k=1LTkp−ckp2.Each time the system is trained, its error gradient should decrease successively. Therefore, we need to calculate the adjustment coefficient value ofΔωki,Δbk,Δωij,Δθi. The calculation equation of the above adjustment coefficient value is as follows:(11)Δωki=σ∑p=1p∑k=1LTkp−ckpμ′ckyi,Δbk=σ∑p=1p∑k=1LTkp−ckpμ′ck,Δωij=σ∑p=1p∑k=1LTkp−ckpμ′ckωkiϕ′aixi,Δθi=σ∑p=1p∑k=1LTkp−ckpμ′ckωkiϕ′ai.


### 3.2. Data Cleaning

Sorting out the collected data and adding missing values to the sorted data is known as data cleaning. The data of various magnitudes are normalized, and its duplicate values are removed. It gives numbers in the range [0, 1] data values. With this type of processing, the issue of the system’s processing time being consumed by the large magnitude difference is avoided. This paper primarily normalizes the aforementioned circumstance, and it processes using the maximum and minimum methods as well as the mean variance method.The maximum-minimum method is to take the maximum value of 1 and the minimum value of 0 in the sequence values of different dimensions. It then scales linearly to normalize the values in the matrix [18]. Its calculation equation is as follows:(12)Ai′=Ai−AminAmax−Amin.Among them,Ai′ is the parameter after normalization, Ai is the parameter before normalization, and Amax,Amin are the maximum and minimum values of sequence values in different dimensions, respectively.The mean variance method is to use the mean value as the standard and normalize the parameters according to the variance distribution [19]. Its calculation equation is as follows:(13)Ai′=Ai−AmeanAvar.Among them,Ai′ is the parameter after normalization, Ai is the parameter before normalization, and Amean,Avar are the mean and variance corresponding to the sequence of each dimension, respectively.


### 3.3. Correlation Function Model

#### 3.3.1. Model Layer Selection

Although increasing the number of network layers can increase the model’s accuracy, it also makes the model more complex and, as a result, takes longer to compute. The input layer, the hidden layer, and the output layer are all one layer in this paper. The associated model of the final output layer and the reverse transmission of the error are the other two. There are a total of four layers in this model.


#### 3.3.2. Selection of the Number of Hidden Layers

Compared with increasing the number of hidden layers, increasing the number of neurons in the hidden layer to improve the accuracy of the neural network model is not only simple to operate but also better than other methods. Therefore, in this model, the number of neurons in the hidden layer is selected, and the selection equation is as follows:(14)l<a+b+c.Among them, any natural number ofc∈0,10, l is the number of neurons in the hidden layer, a is the number of nodes in the output layer, and b is the number of nodes in the input layer.


#### 3.3.3. Model Training Method Selection

The essence of the BP neural network training is actually to optimize the nonlinear objective function [20]. Its optimized equation is as follows:(15)fAi+1=minfAi+ϕiBAi.Among them,Ai is the vector set of ownership values and input values in the model, and BAi is the fitting direction of each component in A in space. ϕi is the step size in the BAi direction that makes fAi+1 reach the optimal solution.


#### 3.3.4. Analysis of Model Results

When we experiment with an association model, we need to test the model. It generally uses the linear correlation coefficientR to evaluate the pros and cons of the model, and its correlation coefficient is in the interval [0, 1]. When the value of R is close to 1, the correlation of the fitting degree of the model is better. The calculation equation is as follows:(16)R=1−∑i=1nxi−x^2∑i=1nxi−x¯2.


## 3.1. Realization Process of BP Neural Network Algorithm

The biggest advantage of the neural network [16, 17] is that it can automatically adjust the weights through changes in the environment, thereby achieving the purpose of its own adaptability. The input layer, hidden layer, and output layer make up the bulk of a BP neural network; the hidden layer may consist of one or more layers. There are typically two signal transmission paths when using the BP neural network algorithm. The input signal is one. The value is input by the input layer, transmitted from front to back, and then finally arrives at the output port. The difference between the neural network’s actual and theoretical output values, or error signal, is the other. It propagates backwards sequentially starting at the output end, each training reducing the error until the output value is infinitesimally close to the theoretical expected value. The BP neural network uses the following calculation method.


### 3.1.1. Forward Propagation of Working Signal

The expression for the input value of theith node of the hidden layer is as follows:(5)ai=∑j=1Nωijxj+θi.The expression for the output value of theith node of the hidden layer is as follows:(6)li=ϕai=ϕ∑j=1Nωijxj+θi.The expression for the input value of thekth node of the output layer is as follows:(7)ak=∑i=1nωkiyi+bk=∑i=1nωkiϕ∑j=1Nωijxj+θi+bk.The expression of the output value of thekth node of the output layer is as follows:(8)lk=μak=μ∑i=1nωkiϕ∑j=1Nωijxj+θi+bk.


### 3.1.2. Backward Propagation of the Error Signal

Assuming that there is a samplep, the expression of its quadratic error function is as follows:(9)Ep=12∑k=1LTk−ck2.For allP training samples, the total error function expression is as follows:(10)Ep=12∑p=1p∑k=1LTkp−ckp2.Each time the system is trained, its error gradient should decrease successively. Therefore, we need to calculate the adjustment coefficient value ofΔωki,Δbk,Δωij,Δθi. The calculation equation of the above adjustment coefficient value is as follows:(11)Δωki=σ∑p=1p∑k=1LTkp−ckpμ′ckyi,Δbk=σ∑p=1p∑k=1LTkp−ckpμ′ck,Δωij=σ∑p=1p∑k=1LTkp−ckpμ′ckωkiϕ′aixi,Δθi=σ∑p=1p∑k=1LTkp−ckpμ′ckωkiϕ′ai.


## 3.1.1. Forward Propagation of Working Signal

The expression for the input value of theith node of the hidden layer is as follows:(5)ai=∑j=1Nωijxj+θi.The expression for the output value of theith node of the hidden layer is as follows:(6)li=ϕai=ϕ∑j=1Nωijxj+θi.The expression for the input value of thekth node of the output layer is as follows:(7)ak=∑i=1nωkiyi+bk=∑i=1nωkiϕ∑j=1Nωijxj+θi+bk.The expression of the output value of thekth node of the output layer is as follows:(8)lk=μak=μ∑i=1nωkiϕ∑j=1Nωijxj+θi+bk.


## 3.1.2. Backward Propagation of the Error Signal

Assuming that there is a samplep, the expression of its quadratic error function is as follows:(9)Ep=12∑k=1LTk−ck2.For allP training samples, the total error function expression is as follows:(10)Ep=12∑p=1p∑k=1LTkp−ckp2.Each time the system is trained, its error gradient should decrease successively. Therefore, we need to calculate the adjustment coefficient value ofΔωki,Δbk,Δωij,Δθi. The calculation equation of the above adjustment coefficient value is as follows:(11)Δωki=σ∑p=1p∑k=1LTkp−ckpμ′ckyi,Δbk=σ∑p=1p∑k=1LTkp−ckpμ′ck,Δωij=σ∑p=1p∑k=1LTkp−ckpμ′ckωkiϕ′aixi,Δθi=σ∑p=1p∑k=1LTkp−ckpμ′ckωkiϕ′ai.


## 3.2. Data Cleaning

Sorting out the collected data and adding missing values to the sorted data is known as data cleaning. The data of various magnitudes are normalized, and its duplicate values are removed. It gives numbers in the range [0, 1] data values. With this type of processing, the issue of the system’s processing time being consumed by the large magnitude difference is avoided. This paper primarily normalizes the aforementioned circumstance, and it processes using the maximum and minimum methods as well as the mean variance method.The maximum-minimum method is to take the maximum value of 1 and the minimum value of 0 in the sequence values of different dimensions. It then scales linearly to normalize the values in the matrix [18]. Its calculation equation is as follows:(12)Ai′=Ai−AminAmax−Amin.Among them,Ai′ is the parameter after normalization, Ai is the parameter before normalization, and Amax,Amin are the maximum and minimum values of sequence values in different dimensions, respectively.The mean variance method is to use the mean value as the standard and normalize the parameters according to the variance distribution [19]. Its calculation equation is as follows:(13)Ai′=Ai−AmeanAvar.Among them,Ai′ is the parameter after normalization, Ai is the parameter before normalization, and Amean,Avar are the mean and variance corresponding to the sequence of each dimension, respectively.


## 3.3. Correlation Function Model

### 3.3.1. Model Layer Selection

Although increasing the number of network layers can increase the model’s accuracy, it also makes the model more complex and, as a result, takes longer to compute. The input layer, the hidden layer, and the output layer are all one layer in this paper. The associated model of the final output layer and the reverse transmission of the error are the other two. There are a total of four layers in this model.


### 3.3.2. Selection of the Number of Hidden Layers

Compared with increasing the number of hidden layers, increasing the number of neurons in the hidden layer to improve the accuracy of the neural network model is not only simple to operate but also better than other methods. Therefore, in this model, the number of neurons in the hidden layer is selected, and the selection equation is as follows:(14)l<a+b+c.Among them, any natural number ofc∈0,10, l is the number of neurons in the hidden layer, a is the number of nodes in the output layer, and b is the number of nodes in the input layer.


### 3.3.3. Model Training Method Selection

The essence of the BP neural network training is actually to optimize the nonlinear objective function [20]. Its optimized equation is as follows:(15)fAi+1=minfAi+ϕiBAi.Among them,Ai is the vector set of ownership values and input values in the model, and BAi is the fitting direction of each component in A in space. ϕi is the step size in the BAi direction that makes fAi+1 reach the optimal solution.


### 3.3.4. Analysis of Model Results

When we experiment with an association model, we need to test the model. It generally uses the linear correlation coefficientR to evaluate the pros and cons of the model, and its correlation coefficient is in the interval [0, 1]. When the value of R is close to 1, the correlation of the fitting degree of the model is better. The calculation equation is as follows:(16)R=1−∑i=1nxi−x^2∑i=1nxi−x¯2.


## 3.3.1. Model Layer Selection

Although increasing the number of network layers can increase the model’s accuracy, it also makes the model more complex and, as a result, takes longer to compute. The input layer, the hidden layer, and the output layer are all one layer in this paper. The associated model of the final output layer and the reverse transmission of the error are the other two. There are a total of four layers in this model.


## 3.3.2. Selection of the Number of Hidden Layers

Compared with increasing the number of hidden layers, increasing the number of neurons in the hidden layer to improve the accuracy of the neural network model is not only simple to operate but also better than other methods. Therefore, in this model, the number of neurons in the hidden layer is selected, and the selection equation is as follows:(14)l<a+b+c.Among them, any natural number ofc∈0,10, l is the number of neurons in the hidden layer, a is the number of nodes in the output layer, and b is the number of nodes in the input layer.


## 3.3.3. Model Training Method Selection

The essence of the BP neural network training is actually to optimize the nonlinear objective function [20]. Its optimized equation is as follows:(15)fAi+1=minfAi+ϕiBAi.Among them,Ai is the vector set of ownership values and input values in the model, and BAi is the fitting direction of each component in A in space. ϕi is the step size in the BAi direction that makes fAi+1 reach the optimal solution.


## 3.3.4. Analysis of Model Results

When we experiment with an association model, we need to test the model. It generally uses the linear correlation coefficientR to evaluate the pros and cons of the model, and its correlation coefficient is in the interval [0, 1]. When the value of R is close to 1, the correlation of the fitting degree of the model is better. The calculation equation is as follows:(16)R=1−∑i=1nxi−x^2∑i=1nxi−x¯2.


## 4. Correlation Emotional Labor and Occupational Self-Efficacy

We mainly study the relationship between emotional labor and occupational self-efficacy of singing artists. Before the study, we make research hypotheses. The hypotheses are as follows:Hypothesis 1: the emotional labor of singing artists is related to variables such as age, personality, and singing yearsHypothesis 2: the professional self-efficacy of singing artists is related to variables such as singing years and ageHypothesis 3: there is a certain correlation between emotional labor and professional self-efficacy of singing artistsOn the basis of this assumption, this paper conducts a questionnaire survey on 150 singing art personnel in the singing art association in city A through random sampling. A total of 150 questionnaires were distributed in this questionnaire survey, and 148 copies were returned. Statistical analysis was performed on the returned questionnaires. Finally, 145 valid questionnaires were obtained, and the validity rate of the questionnaire was 96.7%, which met the experimental requirements. The survey results are shown in Table2.Table 2
Questionnaire survey basic information table.
CategoryNumber of peopleQuestionnaire valid percentageGenderBoys53.4Girls14096.6AgeUnder 30 years old21.4Between the ages of 30 and 4553.4Between the ages of 45 and 603826.2Over 60 years old10069Singing yearsLess than three years4531More than three years and less than five years2517.2More than five years and less than eight years2013.8More than eight years5538Professional levelProfessional12586.2Amateur2013.8Singing levelPrimary3524.1Intermediate4531Advanced6544.9Education levelNo education1510.3Educated in higher education13089.7In order to better analyze the relationship between emotional labor and occupational self-efficacy, we divided emotional labor and occupational self-efficacy into dimensions. Emotional labor is generally divided into three dimensions: surface acting, deep acting, and natural expression. Occupational self-efficacy is generally divided into occupational cognitive and developmental efficacy, occupational technical efficacy, occupational interpersonal efficacy, and occupational physical and mental efficacy.


### 4.1. Statistical Results of Emotional Labor of Singing Artists

#### 4.1.1. General Characteristics of Emotional Labor of Singing Artists

In order to examine the overall characteristics of the emotional labor of singing artists, this paper conducts a descriptive statistical analysis on the emotional labor of 150 singing artists in city A and from three dimensions. We use Likert measure to score it, and the range of scores is [1, 5]. The results are shown in Table 3.Table 3
Descriptive statistics of the overall characteristics of emotional labor of singing art personnel.
Number of peopleMaximum valueMinimal valueAverage valueStandard deviationEmotional labor1454.91.653.60.49Surface play14551.123.10.81Deep play14551.2540.62Natural expression14551.683.780.75We represent the composition of the data in Table3, and the results are shown in Figure 1.Figure 1
Scores of three types of emotional labor for singing arts personnel.Combining Table3 and Figure 1, it can be seen that the average score of emotional labor of singing artists is 3.6 points, which is at an upper-middle level. The average scores of the three dimensions of surface acting, deep acting, and natural expression in the sample are 3.1 points, 4 points, and 3.78 points, respectively, which belong to the middle range. The scores of the above three dimensions are deep acting > natural expression > surface acting. We now conduct a pairwise test for the significance of differences in the average values of the three selected dimensions, and the results are shown in Table 4.Table 4
Paired samples of singing artists’ emotional labor dimensions.
dfT valueP valueSurface play-deep play144−13.061…0.001Surface play-natural representation144−8.661…0.001Deep play-natural representation1445.331…0.001Among them, “…” meansP<0.01.From Table4, it can be seen that the T value of surface acting-deep acting is −13.061, df = 144, P<0.01, and the T value of surface acting-natural acting is −8.661, df = 144, P<0.01. Deep-playing-natural representation has a T value of 5.331, df = 144, P<0.01. It shows that there are significant differences among the above three dimensions. It also shows that the degree of emotional labor strategies commonly used by singing artists are deep acting, natural acting, and surface acting.


#### 4.1.2. Differences in the Emotional Labor of Singing Artists on the Age Variable

We calculated the mean and standard deviation of surface acting, deep acting, natural expression, and emotional labor for each of the four age ranges. The calculation results are shown in Table5.Table 5
The basic profile of singing artists of different ages on the three dimensions of emotional labor.
NEmotional laborSurface playDeep playNatural representationUnder 30 years old23.72±0.53.24±0.84±0.63.81±0.7Between the ages of 30 and 4553.67±0.473.11±0.83.96±0.53.85±0.6Between the ages of 45 and 60383.64±0.32.86±0.74.19±0.53.7±0.6Over 60 years old1003.68±0.53.38±0.74.03±0.73.64±0.8From Table5, it can be seen that the total score of emotional labor of singing artists under the age of 30 is the highest, and the natural performance scores of singing artists between the ages of 30 and 45 are the highest. Deep acting between the ages of 45 and 60 scored the highest, and surface acting was the highest for those over the age of 60. However, there is no significant difference in age structure between emotional labor, surface acting, natural expression, and deep acting, indicating that the difference has no practical significance. We are conducting a one-way ANOVA on the emotional labor of singing artists in different age groups. The results are shown in Table 6.Table 6
ANOVA for the comparison of emotional labor dimensions among singing artists of different ages.
Square andDegree of freedomMean sum of squaresF-testPost hoc comparison LSD methodEmotional laborIntergroup0.130.040.18n.s.Within the group51.81420.23Total51.9145Surface playIntergroup4.631.542.32∗A > C, D > CWithin the group148.81420.67Total153.4145Deep playIntergroup1.430.481.20n.s.Within the group89.21420.40Total90.6145Natural representationIntergroup1.730.561.03n.s.Within the group122.61420.55Total124.3145Among them, n.s. meansP>0.05, “∗” means P<0.05. A represents the group under the age of 30, C represents the group between the ages of 45 and 60, and D represents the group over the age of 60.From the data analysis in Table6, it can be seen that the significance level coefficient of singing artists in different age ranges in the surface layer is 0.04, which is less than 0.05. It shows that there is a significant difference in the age variable of surface acting. In our comparative analysis of singing artists of other age groups, we found that the surface acting scores between the ages of 45 and 60 were 0.08 and 0.04 points lower than those under 30 and over 60, respectively. Its significance probability is less than 0.05. The descriptions are significantly different.


#### 4.1.3. Differences in Emotional Labor of Singing Artists on the Variable of Singing Years

We calculated the mean and standard deviation of the singing years of surface acting, deep acting, natural expression, and emotional labor. The calculation results are shown in Table7.Table 7
Basic information on the three dimensions of emotional exertion among singing artists with different years of singing experience.
NEmotional laborSurface playDeep playNatural representationLess than three years453.65±0.43.19±0.83.9±0.73.8±0.7More than three years and less than five years253.63±0.53.01±0.83.8±0.63.87±0.7More than five years and less than eight years203.79±0.43.10±0.94.2±0.53.89±0.7More than eight years553.66±0.43.16±0.74.1±0.63.6±0.8It can be seen from Table7 that the scores of emotional labor, natural performance, and deep performance of singing artists in the interval of five years to eight years are higher than those of other singing years. Singing artists with less than three years of singing experience scored the highest in deep performance. However, there is no significant difference in emotional labor, surface acting, and natural performance in their singing years, but there are certain significant differences in deep acting. We are conducting a one-way analysis of variance on the emotional labor of singing artists under different singing years, and the results are shown in Table 8.Table 8
ANOVA for the comparison of the dimensions of emotional functioning among singing artists with different years of singing experience.
Square andDegree of freedomMean sum of squaresF-testPost hoc comparison LSD methodEmotional laborIntergroup0.530.180.78n.s.Within the group51.41420.23Total51.9145Surface playIntergroup0.830.280.41n.s.Within the group152.71420.69Total153.5145Deep playIntergroup3.231.072.72∗Within the group87.51420.39C > A, C > BTotal90.7145Natural representationIntergroup2.530.841.54n.s.Within the group121.81420.55Total124.31450.79As can be seen from Table8, the significance level of singing artists under different singing years in the deep performance is 0.045, which is less than 0.05. It shows that there are significant differences in the variable of singing years in deep acting, and the analysis of other singing years interval is carried out. It is concluded that the scores of singing years in the interval of five to eight years are 0.14 and 0.16 points higher than those of less than three years and three to five years, indicating that there is a significant difference.


#### 4.1.4. Differences in Emotional Labor of Singing Artists on the Variable of Education Level

We conducted an independent samplet-test on the emotional labor of singing and artistic personnel under different education levels, and the results are shown in Table 9.Table 9
Analysis of the differences in the emotional labor of singing artists in terms of education level.
Education levelNAverage valueStandard deviationT valueP valueEmotional laborNo education153.610.69−0.8620.391Educated in higher education1303.690.45Surface playNo education153.120.81−1.404∗0.575Educated in higher education1303.040.68Deep playNo education153.810.850.5650.047Educated in higher education1304.010.53Natural representationNo education153.570.94−1.3710.181Educated in higher education1303.810.71As can be seen from Table9, in the three dimensions of surface acting, deep acting, and natural expression, only the p value of deep acting is less than 0.05, and its value is 0.047. In combination with the T value, it shows that the educated singing artist is higher on the 0.05 significance level than the uneducated.


#### 4.1.5. Difference Comparison of Emotional Labor on Singing Rank Variables of Singing Artists

We calculated the mean and standard deviation of the singing ranks of the singing artists for surface acting, deep acting, natural expression, and emotional labor. The calculation results are shown in Table10.Table 10
Table of basic information on the three dimensions of emotional labor of singing artists at different singing levels.
NEmotional laborSurface playDeep playNatural representationPrimary353.66±0.43.2±0.84.1±0.63.6±0.4Intermediate453.75±0.53.1±0.84.1±0.73.7±0.5Advanced653.63±0.43.07±0.83.9±0.63.6±0.5From Table10, it can be seen that the scores of emotional labor, natural expression, and deep acting are higher for singing artists at the intermediate singing level than for junior and advanced singing artists. Singing artists at the junior singing level have the highest surface acting scores. We are conducting a one-way analysis of variance on the emotional labor of singing artists under different singing levels, and the results are shown in Table 11.Table 11
ANOVA table comparing the differences in the three dimensions of emotional labor among singing arts personnel at different singing levels.
Square andDegree of freedomMean sum of squaresF-testPost hoc comparison LSD methodEmotional laborIntergroup0.6730.331.46n.s.Within the group51.261420.23Total51.93145Surface playIntergroup0.8130.400.59n.s.Within the group152.711420.68Total153.52145Deep playIntergroup1.9830.992.50B > CWithin the group88.711420.40Total90.69145Natural representationIntergroup4.4532.234.16B > AWithin the group119.921420.54Total124.371450.33As can be seen from Table11, the significance level of singing artists under different singing levels in the deep performance is 0.043, which is less than 0.05. It shows that deep acting has significant differences in singing rank variables. In combination with Tables 10 and 11, it is known that in deep acting, the score of intermediate singing artists is 0.03 points higher than that of senior singing artists, and its significance is less than 0.05. It shows that the intermediate singing artist is higher than the senior singing artist on the 0.05 meaning level. At the same time, the significance of the natural performance of singing artists under different singing levels is less than 0.05, and its value is 0.03. It shows that there is a significant difference in the singing level of natural performance.


#### 4.1.6. Differences in Emotional Labor of Singing Artists on the Variable of Professional Degree

We conducted an independent samplet-test on the emotional labor of professional and amateur singing and art personnel, and the results are shown in Table 12.Table 12
Analysis of the differences in the emotional labor of singing artists in the degree of specialization variable.
Education levelNAverage valueStandard deviationT valueP valueEmotional laborProfessional1253.670.51−1.0710.287Amateur203.720.43Surface playProfessional1253.110.81−0.5810.564Amateur203.190.88Deep playProfessional1254.130.680.5170.608Amateur204.010.52Natural representationProfessional1253.710.78−2.4210.018Amateur203.930.61As can be seen from Table12, amateur singing artists scored higher than professionals in emotional labor, surface acting, and natural performance. However, the scores in deep acting are lower. After corresponding analysis, it is concluded that only natural performance has significant differences in professional level. It shows that the natural performance score of professional singing and artistic personnel is lower than that of amateur singing and artistic personnel on the level of 0.05.


### 4.2. Interaction of Emotional Labor of Singing Artists on Demographic Variables

In the previous analysis, I tested the effects of variables like age and years of singing on emotional labor using theT test and one-way analysis of variance. However, the potential correlation between various factors was not taken into account during the analysis described above. We must therefore examine this section of the content. Bivariate analysis is used to determine whether there is an interaction between the aforementioned differences using the dependent variables of emotional labor and surface acting and the independent variables of the singers’ age and years of singing.


#### 4.2.1. The Influence of the Interaction of Demographic Variables on the Emotional Labor of Singing Artists

We use the variables of singing artist’s age, singing years, and other variables as independent variables and use the emotional labor of singing artist as the dependent variable to conduct bivariate analysis. It detects whether there is an interaction between the differences of the above variables in the emotional labor of singing artists, and the results are shown in Table13.Table 13
The effect of the interaction of two variables on the emotional labor of singing arts personnel data sheet.
Square anddfMean squareFpAge∗years of singing experience1.5250.230.960.42Age∗education level1.1330.381.640.18Age∗singing level2.1960.371.610.15Age∗professional level0.3920.210.860.43Years of performance∗education level0.9830.331.420.24Years of performing∗singing level1.3760.231.010.43Years of performing∗professional degree0.6730.231.010.39Education level∗singing level0.9920.492.180.12Education level∗professional level0.0310.030.010.91Singing level∗professional level0.8220.411.810.17It can be seen from Table13 that the interaction effect of demographic variables on emotional labor is non-significant. Combined with the previous one-way analysis of variance, we can see that each variable has no significant impact on the emotional labor of singing artists.


#### 4.2.2. The Influence of the Interaction of Demographic Variables on the Surface Performance of Singing Artists

We use demographic variables as independent variables and perform bivariate analysis with the surface performance of singing artists as dependent variables. The results are shown in Table14.Table 14
The effect of the interaction of two variables on the surface role of singing art personnel.
Square anddfMean squareFpAge∗years of singing experience2.3850.480.710.62Age∗education level2.6230.871.310.27Age∗singing level4.6660.781.170.33Age∗professional level2.0621.031.540.22Years of performance∗education level9.2133.074.680.03Years of performing∗singing level4.8760.811.190.31Years of performing∗professional degree3.6431.211.790.15Education level∗singing level0.4320.220.310.73Education level∗professional level0.8410.841.220.13Singing level∗professional level5.7122.854.310.02It can be seen from Table14 that the p=0.03 of singing artists and education levels under different singing years is less than 0.05. It shows that there is an interaction between the two in surface play. The p=0.02 of the singing level and professional degree, and its value is less than 0.05, indicating that there is also an interaction between the two in surface acting. Combined with the previous analysis results, we need to analyze the main effects; the results are shown in Figures 2 and 3.Figure 2
The interaction of performing years and educational level in the surface play.Figure 3
The interaction between singing rank and degree of expertise in surface play.As can be seen from Figure2, when the education level of singing artists is used as the implementation standard, with the increase of singing years. It can be seen that the surface acting score of the number of uneducated singing artists shows a trend of first decreasing, then increasing and then decreasing. When the singing years are between 3 and 5 years, the score is the smallest at 1.32. When the singing years are between 5 and 8 years, the peak value is 4.51 points. Then, the score of the singing years of more than 8 years tends to be less than 3 years. The surface performance scores of educated singing artists tended to decrease with increasing years of singing. But overall, its scores did not change much. When the performance standard is based on the singing years of the singing artists, and the singing years are less than 3 years, the surface acting scores of the two are the same. When the singing years are between 3 and 5 years, the difference between the two surface acting scores is the largest, which is 1.86 points. For the remaining singing years, the scores of the educated singing artists were lower than those of the uneducated.As can be seen from Figure3, when the singing level is used as the implementation standard, in the elementary and intermediate singing levels, the surface acting scores of the professional singing artists are lower than those of the amateur system. In the advanced singing level, the surface acting score of professional singing artists is higher than that of amateur. Among them, in the intermediate singing level, the difference between the two scores is the largest, which is 0.7 points. In the primary singing level, the difference between the two scores is the smallest, which is 0.37 points. When the professional level is used as the implementation standard, the surface acting score of professional singing artists presents a “V” shape with the increase of the singing level. The surface acting scores of amateur singing artists showed a downward trend.


#### 4.2.3. The Influence of the Interaction of Demographic Variables on the Deep Performance of Singing Artists

We use demographic variables as independent variables and perform a bivariate analysis with the deep performance of singing artists as the dependent variable. The results are shown in Table15.Table 15
The effect of the interaction of two variables on the deep play of singing art personnel.
Square anddfMean squareFpAge∗years of singing experience0.8450.170.430.831Age∗education level3.1231.042.650.048Age∗singing level4.960.8252.130.052Age∗professional level1.1520.541.340.261Years of performance∗education level4.2131.413.620.014Years of performing∗singing level2.6760.451.160.323Years of performing∗professional degree0.9230.3120.810.401Education level∗singing level3.33821.674.340.013Education level∗professional level0.3110.310.740.391Singing level∗professional level0.28720.1430.360.712It can be seen from Table15 that there are significant differences in age, education level, singing level, and years of singing in the scores of deep performance of singing artists. However, there is an interaction between singing artists of different education levels and their singing level, age, and singing years, and the values are all less than 0.05. Next, a simple main effect test is carried out, and the results are shown in Figures 4–6.Figure 4
Schematic diagram of the interaction between educational level and singing level on deep play.Figure 5
Schematic representation of the interaction between education level and age on deep play.Figure 6
Schematic diagram of the interaction between education level and singing years on deep play.Figure4 shows that, when the education level is used as the implementation standard, the singing level of the uneducated singing artist gradually raises the deep acting score as the singing level rises. The educated singing arts population’s deep acting scores, on the other hand, revealed the opposite trend—a downward trend. When the singing level is the implementation standard, untrained singers perform worse than trained singers when the singing level is elementary or intermediate. The score value is higher than that of the educated at the advanced singing level, which shows the opposite trend.It can be seen from Figure5 that when the education level is used as the implementation standard, with the increase of age, the deep performance scores of uneducated singing artists fluctuate greatly. The score between the ages of 45 and 60 was the lowest at 3.73. The scores of those who have received education are relatively stable, and although there is a decline, the overall trend is showing an upward trend. When using age as the implementation standard, in the four age ranges, when the age is greater than 60 years old, the difference between the scores of the uneducated and the educated is the largest, which is 0.62 points. When the age is less than 30 years old, the difference between the two scores is the smallest, which is 0.2 points.As can be seen from Figure6, when the education level is used as the implementation standard, with the increase of singing years, the deep performance scores of uneducated singing artists appear twists and turns. The scores of those who have received education increase year by year. When the performance standard is based on singing years, in the interval of four singing years, when the singing years are more than three years and less than five years, the score of uneducated singing and artistic personnel is higher than that of those who have received education. Others are lower than the educated.


#### 4.2.4. The Influence of the Interaction of Demographic Variables on the Surface Performance of Singing Artists

We use demographic variables as independent variables and perform bivariate analysis with the natural performance of singers as dependent variables. The results are shown in Table16.Table 16
The effect of the interaction of two variables on the natural performance of singing arts personnel.
Square anddfMean squareFpAge∗years of singing experience2.3150.460.830.53Age∗education level0.8330.280.50.670Age∗singing level2.3760.3980.740.61Age∗professional level0.3920.470.160.73Years of performance∗education level0.4730.250.430.72Years of performing∗singing level8.0561.342.630.02Years of performing∗professional degree0.7430.1160.270.81Education level∗singing level1.9120.210.380.71Education level∗professional level0.0810.080.020.898Singing level∗professional level0.2420.120.220.83It can be seen from Table16 that there is an interaction between the singing level and the singing years in terms of natural performance. We now conduct a simple main effect test on it, and the results are shown in Figure 7:Figure 7
Schematic representation of the interaction between singing rank and singing years on natural performance.As can be seen from Figure7, when the singing level is used as the implementation standard, in the primary singing level, the natural performance score with the singing years of more than three years and less than eight years is the highest. In the intermediate singing level, the highest score is 4.1 for more than three years and less than five years. In the advanced singing level, those who have been singing for more than eight years have the highest score of 3.88. When the singing years are used as the implementation standard, with the increase of the singing level, the scores of the singing years of more than three years but less than five years and the scores of more than five years and less than eight years show an opposite trend. It is an inverted V-shaped structure, and the scores of those singing years are less than three years will gradually decrease. The decline is not large and relatively stable.


### 4.3. Vocational Self-Efficacy of Singing Artists

We divide the professional self-efficacy of singing artists into four dimensions: professional cognition and development efficacy, professional technical efficacy, physical and mental efficacy, and interpersonal efficacy. At the same time, we conduct descriptive statistical analysis on the four dimensions, and the analysis results are shown in Table17 and Figure 8.Table 17
Descriptive statistics table of the overall characteristics of professional self-efficacy of singing arts personnel.
Number of peopleMaximum valueMinimal valueAverage valueStandard deviationProfessional self-efficacy14552.53.90.47Career perception and development effectiveness145523.50.61Career technical performance145524.20.76Physical and mental performance145524.10.61Interpersonal effectiveness145534.30.53Figure 8
Score chart of the four types of occupational self-efficacy of singing arts personnel.Combining with the descriptive statistical results in Table17 and Figure 8, it can be seen that the average score of professional self-efficacy of singing artists is 3.9 points, which is at the upper middle level. It shows that the level of professional self-efficacy of the singing artists in city A is high. The scoring order of the four dimensions of occupational self-efficacy is interpersonal efficacy > occupational technical efficacy > physical and mental efficacy > occupational cognition and development efficacy. We are carrying out the significance test of the pairwise mean difference of the four dimensions, and the results are shown in Table 18.Table 18
A paired sample test of each dimension of professional self-efficacy among singing arts personnel.
dfT valueP valueCareer perception and development effectiveness-interpersonal effectiveness144−18.965∗0.001Career perception and developmental effectiveness-physical and mental effectiveness144−11.254∗0.001Career perception and developmental efficacy-career technical efficacy144−9.131∗0.001Interpersonal effectiveness-physical and mental effectiveness1447.899∗0.001Interpersonal effectiveness-career technical effectiveness1444.641∗0.001Physical and mental effectiveness-vocational and technical effectiveness144−0.9540.346Among them,∗P<0.001.It can be seen from Table18 that the P=0.346>0.05 of physical and mental efficacy-vocational technical efficacy indicates that there is no significant difference, while the P values of other combinations are all less than 0.05. It shows that there are significant differences between the above combinations. To sum up, it can be concluded that the interpersonal efficacy is the highest in the professional self-efficacy of singing artists. Occupational cognition and development efficacy were the lowest, and there were significant differences.


### 4.4. Correlation between Emotional Labor and Occupational Self-Efficacy of Singing Artists

We now conduct a correlation analysis on the emotional labor and occupational self-efficacy of singing artists, and the results are shown in Table19.Table 19
Table of correlation coefficients between emotional labor and professional self-efficacy of singing arts personnel.
Professional self-efficacyCareer perception and development effectivenessInterpersonal effectivenessPhysical and mental performanceCareer technical performanceEmotional labor0.293∗0.173∗0.324∗0.331∗0.105R2=0.087R2=0.031R2=0.155R2=0.105R2=0.211Surface play−0.062−0.063−0.061−0.059−0.057R2=0.039R2=0.039R2=0.039R3=3.6e−5R2=0.031Deep play0.344∗0.216∗0.378∗0.391∗0.091∗R2=0.119R2=0.046R2=0.141R2=0.154R2=0.007Natural representation0.311∗0.199∗0.337∗0.277∗0.187∗R2=0.097R2=0.04R2=0.113R2=0.077R2=0.034Among them,∗the correlation is significant when the significance level is equal to 0.01.It can be seen from Table19 that there is a significant and positive correlation between emotional labor and professional self-efficacy of singing artists. The correlation coefficient between the two is 0.293, which is a weak correlation. Its coefficient of determination, R2=0.087, indicates that 8.7% of the total variance in the occupational self-efficacy variable can be explained by emotional labor. The correlation coefficients between surface acting and occupational self-efficacy, occupational cognition and development efficacy, interpersonal efficacy, physical and mental efficacy, and occupational technical efficacy are as follows. It is −0.062, −0.063, −0.061, −0.059, and −0.057, all of which are negative correlations and their magnitudes are all less than 0.05. It shows that there is no significant level difference. The correlation coefficients between deep acting and occupational self-efficacy, occupational cognition and development efficacy, interpersonal efficacy, physical and mental efficacy, and occupational technical efficacy are as follows. The order is 0.344, 0.216, 0.378, 0.391, and 0.091, all of which are greater than 0.05, indicating a significant level of difference. Among them, the largest correlation coefficient is 0.391, and its determination coefficient is 0.154. It shows that the physical and mental efficacy variables can explain 15.4% of the total variance of the deep acting variables. The correlation coefficients between natural performance and occupational self-efficacy, occupational cognition and development efficacy, interpersonal efficacy, physical and mental efficacy, and occupational technical efficacy were 0.311, 0.199, 0.337, 0.277, and 0.187 respectively. The correlation coefficients are all greater than 0.05, indicating that there is a certain correlation, among which the coefficient of interpersonal effectiveness is the largest, and its determination coefficient is 0.113. The variable indicating interpersonal efficacy can explain 11.3% of the total variance of the natural performance variable.


## 4.1. Statistical Results of Emotional Labor of Singing Artists

### 4.1.1. General Characteristics of Emotional Labor of Singing Artists

In order to examine the overall characteristics of the emotional labor of singing artists, this paper conducts a descriptive statistical analysis on the emotional labor of 150 singing artists in city A and from three dimensions. We use Likert measure to score it, and the range of scores is [1, 5]. The results are shown in Table 3.Table 3
Descriptive statistics of the overall characteristics of emotional labor of singing art personnel.
Number of peopleMaximum valueMinimal valueAverage valueStandard deviationEmotional labor1454.91.653.60.49Surface play14551.123.10.81Deep play14551.2540.62Natural expression14551.683.780.75We represent the composition of the data in Table3, and the results are shown in Figure 1.Figure 1
Scores of three types of emotional labor for singing arts personnel.Combining Table3 and Figure 1, it can be seen that the average score of emotional labor of singing artists is 3.6 points, which is at an upper-middle level. The average scores of the three dimensions of surface acting, deep acting, and natural expression in the sample are 3.1 points, 4 points, and 3.78 points, respectively, which belong to the middle range. The scores of the above three dimensions are deep acting > natural expression > surface acting. We now conduct a pairwise test for the significance of differences in the average values of the three selected dimensions, and the results are shown in Table 4.Table 4
Paired samples of singing artists’ emotional labor dimensions.
dfT valueP valueSurface play-deep play144−13.061…0.001Surface play-natural representation144−8.661…0.001Deep play-natural representation1445.331…0.001Among them, “…” meansP<0.01.From Table4, it can be seen that the T value of surface acting-deep acting is −13.061, df = 144, P<0.01, and the T value of surface acting-natural acting is −8.661, df = 144, P<0.01. Deep-playing-natural representation has a T value of 5.331, df = 144, P<0.01. It shows that there are significant differences among the above three dimensions. It also shows that the degree of emotional labor strategies commonly used by singing artists are deep acting, natural acting, and surface acting.


### 4.1.2. Differences in the Emotional Labor of Singing Artists on the Age Variable

We calculated the mean and standard deviation of surface acting, deep acting, natural expression, and emotional labor for each of the four age ranges. The calculation results are shown in Table5.Table 5
The basic profile of singing artists of different ages on the three dimensions of emotional labor.
NEmotional laborSurface playDeep playNatural representationUnder 30 years old23.72±0.53.24±0.84±0.63.81±0.7Between the ages of 30 and 4553.67±0.473.11±0.83.96±0.53.85±0.6Between the ages of 45 and 60383.64±0.32.86±0.74.19±0.53.7±0.6Over 60 years old1003.68±0.53.38±0.74.03±0.73.64±0.8From Table5, it can be seen that the total score of emotional labor of singing artists under the age of 30 is the highest, and the natural performance scores of singing artists between the ages of 30 and 45 are the highest. Deep acting between the ages of 45 and 60 scored the highest, and surface acting was the highest for those over the age of 60. However, there is no significant difference in age structure between emotional labor, surface acting, natural expression, and deep acting, indicating that the difference has no practical significance. We are conducting a one-way ANOVA on the emotional labor of singing artists in different age groups. The results are shown in Table 6.Table 6
ANOVA for the comparison of emotional labor dimensions among singing artists of different ages.
Square andDegree of freedomMean sum of squaresF-testPost hoc comparison LSD methodEmotional laborIntergroup0.130.040.18n.s.Within the group51.81420.23Total51.9145Surface playIntergroup4.631.542.32∗A > C, D > CWithin the group148.81420.67Total153.4145Deep playIntergroup1.430.481.20n.s.Within the group89.21420.40Total90.6145Natural representationIntergroup1.730.561.03n.s.Within the group122.61420.55Total124.3145Among them, n.s. meansP>0.05, “∗” means P<0.05. A represents the group under the age of 30, C represents the group between the ages of 45 and 60, and D represents the group over the age of 60.From the data analysis in Table6, it can be seen that the significance level coefficient of singing artists in different age ranges in the surface layer is 0.04, which is less than 0.05. It shows that there is a significant difference in the age variable of surface acting. In our comparative analysis of singing artists of other age groups, we found that the surface acting scores between the ages of 45 and 60 were 0.08 and 0.04 points lower than those under 30 and over 60, respectively. Its significance probability is less than 0.05. The descriptions are significantly different.


### 4.1.3. Differences in Emotional Labor of Singing Artists on the Variable of Singing Years

We calculated the mean and standard deviation of the singing years of surface acting, deep acting, natural expression, and emotional labor. The calculation results are shown in Table7.Table 7
Basic information on the three dimensions of emotional exertion among singing artists with different years of singing experience.
NEmotional laborSurface playDeep playNatural representationLess than three years453.65±0.43.19±0.83.9±0.73.8±0.7More than three years and less than five years253.63±0.53.01±0.83.8±0.63.87±0.7More than five years and less than eight years203.79±0.43.10±0.94.2±0.53.89±0.7More than eight years553.66±0.43.16±0.74.1±0.63.6±0.8It can be seen from Table7 that the scores of emotional labor, natural performance, and deep performance of singing artists in the interval of five years to eight years are higher than those of other singing years. Singing artists with less than three years of singing experience scored the highest in deep performance. However, there is no significant difference in emotional labor, surface acting, and natural performance in their singing years, but there are certain significant differences in deep acting. We are conducting a one-way analysis of variance on the emotional labor of singing artists under different singing years, and the results are shown in Table 8.Table 8
ANOVA for the comparison of the dimensions of emotional functioning among singing artists with different years of singing experience.
Square andDegree of freedomMean sum of squaresF-testPost hoc comparison LSD methodEmotional laborIntergroup0.530.180.78n.s.Within the group51.41420.23Total51.9145Surface playIntergroup0.830.280.41n.s.Within the group152.71420.69Total153.5145Deep playIntergroup3.231.072.72∗Within the group87.51420.39C > A, C > BTotal90.7145Natural representationIntergroup2.530.841.54n.s.Within the group121.81420.55Total124.31450.79As can be seen from Table8, the significance level of singing artists under different singing years in the deep performance is 0.045, which is less than 0.05. It shows that there are significant differences in the variable of singing years in deep acting, and the analysis of other singing years interval is carried out. It is concluded that the scores of singing years in the interval of five to eight years are 0.14 and 0.16 points higher than those of less than three years and three to five years, indicating that there is a significant difference.


### 4.1.4. Differences in Emotional Labor of Singing Artists on the Variable of Education Level

We conducted an independent samplet-test on the emotional labor of singing and artistic personnel under different education levels, and the results are shown in Table 9.Table 9
Analysis of the differences in the emotional labor of singing artists in terms of education level.
Education levelNAverage valueStandard deviationT valueP valueEmotional laborNo education153.610.69−0.8620.391Educated in higher education1303.690.45Surface playNo education153.120.81−1.404∗0.575Educated in higher education1303.040.68Deep playNo education153.810.850.5650.047Educated in higher education1304.010.53Natural representationNo education153.570.94−1.3710.181Educated in higher education1303.810.71As can be seen from Table9, in the three dimensions of surface acting, deep acting, and natural expression, only the p value of deep acting is less than 0.05, and its value is 0.047. In combination with the T value, it shows that the educated singing artist is higher on the 0.05 significance level than the uneducated.


### 4.1.5. Difference Comparison of Emotional Labor on Singing Rank Variables of Singing Artists

We calculated the mean and standard deviation of the singing ranks of the singing artists for surface acting, deep acting, natural expression, and emotional labor. The calculation results are shown in Table10.Table 10
Table of basic information on the three dimensions of emotional labor of singing artists at different singing levels.
NEmotional laborSurface playDeep playNatural representationPrimary353.66±0.43.2±0.84.1±0.63.6±0.4Intermediate453.75±0.53.1±0.84.1±0.73.7±0.5Advanced653.63±0.43.07±0.83.9±0.63.6±0.5From Table10, it can be seen that the scores of emotional labor, natural expression, and deep acting are higher for singing artists at the intermediate singing level than for junior and advanced singing artists. Singing artists at the junior singing level have the highest surface acting scores. We are conducting a one-way analysis of variance on the emotional labor of singing artists under different singing levels, and the results are shown in Table 11.Table 11
ANOVA table comparing the differences in the three dimensions of emotional labor among singing arts personnel at different singing levels.
Square andDegree of freedomMean sum of squaresF-testPost hoc comparison LSD methodEmotional laborIntergroup0.6730.331.46n.s.Within the group51.261420.23Total51.93145Surface playIntergroup0.8130.400.59n.s.Within the group152.711420.68Total153.52145Deep playIntergroup1.9830.992.50B > CWithin the group88.711420.40Total90.69145Natural representationIntergroup4.4532.234.16B > AWithin the group119.921420.54Total124.371450.33As can be seen from Table11, the significance level of singing artists under different singing levels in the deep performance is 0.043, which is less than 0.05. It shows that deep acting has significant differences in singing rank variables. In combination with Tables 10 and 11, it is known that in deep acting, the score of intermediate singing artists is 0.03 points higher than that of senior singing artists, and its significance is less than 0.05. It shows that the intermediate singing artist is higher than the senior singing artist on the 0.05 meaning level. At the same time, the significance of the natural performance of singing artists under different singing levels is less than 0.05, and its value is 0.03. It shows that there is a significant difference in the singing level of natural performance.


### 4.1.6. Differences in Emotional Labor of Singing Artists on the Variable of Professional Degree

We conducted an independent samplet-test on the emotional labor of professional and amateur singing and art personnel, and the results are shown in Table 12.Table 12
Analysis of the differences in the emotional labor of singing artists in the degree of specialization variable.
Education levelNAverage valueStandard deviationT valueP valueEmotional laborProfessional1253.670.51−1.0710.287Amateur203.720.43Surface playProfessional1253.110.81−0.5810.564Amateur203.190.88Deep playProfessional1254.130.680.5170.608Amateur204.010.52Natural representationProfessional1253.710.78−2.4210.018Amateur203.930.61As can be seen from Table12, amateur singing artists scored higher than professionals in emotional labor, surface acting, and natural performance. However, the scores in deep acting are lower. After corresponding analysis, it is concluded that only natural performance has significant differences in professional level. It shows that the natural performance score of professional singing and artistic personnel is lower than that of amateur singing and artistic personnel on the level of 0.05.


## 4.1.1. General Characteristics of Emotional Labor of Singing Artists

In order to examine the overall characteristics of the emotional labor of singing artists, this paper conducts a descriptive statistical analysis on the emotional labor of 150 singing artists in city A and from three dimensions. We use Likert measure to score it, and the range of scores is [1, 5]. The results are shown in Table 3.Table 3
Descriptive statistics of the overall characteristics of emotional labor of singing art personnel.
Number of peopleMaximum valueMinimal valueAverage valueStandard deviationEmotional labor1454.91.653.60.49Surface play14551.123.10.81Deep play14551.2540.62Natural expression14551.683.780.75We represent the composition of the data in Table3, and the results are shown in Figure 1.Figure 1
Scores of three types of emotional labor for singing arts personnel.Combining Table3 and Figure 1, it can be seen that the average score of emotional labor of singing artists is 3.6 points, which is at an upper-middle level. The average scores of the three dimensions of surface acting, deep acting, and natural expression in the sample are 3.1 points, 4 points, and 3.78 points, respectively, which belong to the middle range. The scores of the above three dimensions are deep acting > natural expression > surface acting. We now conduct a pairwise test for the significance of differences in the average values of the three selected dimensions, and the results are shown in Table 4.Table 4
Paired samples of singing artists’ emotional labor dimensions.
dfT valueP valueSurface play-deep play144−13.061…0.001Surface play-natural representation144−8.661…0.001Deep play-natural representation1445.331…0.001Among them, “…” meansP<0.01.From Table4, it can be seen that the T value of surface acting-deep acting is −13.061, df = 144, P<0.01, and the T value of surface acting-natural acting is −8.661, df = 144, P<0.01. Deep-playing-natural representation has a T value of 5.331, df = 144, P<0.01. It shows that there are significant differences among the above three dimensions. It also shows that the degree of emotional labor strategies commonly used by singing artists are deep acting, natural acting, and surface acting.


## 4.1.2. Differences in the Emotional Labor of Singing Artists on the Age Variable

We calculated the mean and standard deviation of surface acting, deep acting, natural expression, and emotional labor for each of the four age ranges. The calculation results are shown in Table5.Table 5
The basic profile of singing artists of different ages on the three dimensions of emotional labor.
NEmotional laborSurface playDeep playNatural representationUnder 30 years old23.72±0.53.24±0.84±0.63.81±0.7Between the ages of 30 and 4553.67±0.473.11±0.83.96±0.53.85±0.6Between the ages of 45 and 60383.64±0.32.86±0.74.19±0.53.7±0.6Over 60 years old1003.68±0.53.38±0.74.03±0.73.64±0.8From Table5, it can be seen that the total score of emotional labor of singing artists under the age of 30 is the highest, and the natural performance scores of singing artists between the ages of 30 and 45 are the highest. Deep acting between the ages of 45 and 60 scored the highest, and surface acting was the highest for those over the age of 60. However, there is no significant difference in age structure between emotional labor, surface acting, natural expression, and deep acting, indicating that the difference has no practical significance. We are conducting a one-way ANOVA on the emotional labor of singing artists in different age groups. The results are shown in Table 6.Table 6
ANOVA for the comparison of emotional labor dimensions among singing artists of different ages.
Square andDegree of freedomMean sum of squaresF-testPost hoc comparison LSD methodEmotional laborIntergroup0.130.040.18n.s.Within the group51.81420.23Total51.9145Surface playIntergroup4.631.542.32∗A > C, D > CWithin the group148.81420.67Total153.4145Deep playIntergroup1.430.481.20n.s.Within the group89.21420.40Total90.6145Natural representationIntergroup1.730.561.03n.s.Within the group122.61420.55Total124.3145Among them, n.s. meansP>0.05, “∗” means P<0.05. A represents the group under the age of 30, C represents the group between the ages of 45 and 60, and D represents the group over the age of 60.From the data analysis in Table6, it can be seen that the significance level coefficient of singing artists in different age ranges in the surface layer is 0.04, which is less than 0.05. It shows that there is a significant difference in the age variable of surface acting. In our comparative analysis of singing artists of other age groups, we found that the surface acting scores between the ages of 45 and 60 were 0.08 and 0.04 points lower than those under 30 and over 60, respectively. Its significance probability is less than 0.05. The descriptions are significantly different.


## 4.1.3. Differences in Emotional Labor of Singing Artists on the Variable of Singing Years

We calculated the mean and standard deviation of the singing years of surface acting, deep acting, natural expression, and emotional labor. The calculation results are shown in Table7.Table 7
Basic information on the three dimensions of emotional exertion among singing artists with different years of singing experience.
NEmotional laborSurface playDeep playNatural representationLess than three years453.65±0.43.19±0.83.9±0.73.8±0.7More than three years and less than five years253.63±0.53.01±0.83.8±0.63.87±0.7More than five years and less than eight years203.79±0.43.10±0.94.2±0.53.89±0.7More than eight years553.66±0.43.16±0.74.1±0.63.6±0.8It can be seen from Table7 that the scores of emotional labor, natural performance, and deep performance of singing artists in the interval of five years to eight years are higher than those of other singing years. Singing artists with less than three years of singing experience scored the highest in deep performance. However, there is no significant difference in emotional labor, surface acting, and natural performance in their singing years, but there are certain significant differences in deep acting. We are conducting a one-way analysis of variance on the emotional labor of singing artists under different singing years, and the results are shown in Table 8.Table 8
ANOVA for the comparison of the dimensions of emotional functioning among singing artists with different years of singing experience.
Square andDegree of freedomMean sum of squaresF-testPost hoc comparison LSD methodEmotional laborIntergroup0.530.180.78n.s.Within the group51.41420.23Total51.9145Surface playIntergroup0.830.280.41n.s.Within the group152.71420.69Total153.5145Deep playIntergroup3.231.072.72∗Within the group87.51420.39C > A, C > BTotal90.7145Natural representationIntergroup2.530.841.54n.s.Within the group121.81420.55Total124.31450.79As can be seen from Table8, the significance level of singing artists under different singing years in the deep performance is 0.045, which is less than 0.05. It shows that there are significant differences in the variable of singing years in deep acting, and the analysis of other singing years interval is carried out. It is concluded that the scores of singing years in the interval of five to eight years are 0.14 and 0.16 points higher than those of less than three years and three to five years, indicating that there is a significant difference.


## 4.1.4. Differences in Emotional Labor of Singing Artists on the Variable of Education Level

We conducted an independent samplet-test on the emotional labor of singing and artistic personnel under different education levels, and the results are shown in Table 9.Table 9
Analysis of the differences in the emotional labor of singing artists in terms of education level.
Education levelNAverage valueStandard deviationT valueP valueEmotional laborNo education153.610.69−0.8620.391Educated in higher education1303.690.45Surface playNo education153.120.81−1.404∗0.575Educated in higher education1303.040.68Deep playNo education153.810.850.5650.047Educated in higher education1304.010.53Natural representationNo education153.570.94−1.3710.181Educated in higher education1303.810.71As can be seen from Table9, in the three dimensions of surface acting, deep acting, and natural expression, only the p value of deep acting is less than 0.05, and its value is 0.047. In combination with the T value, it shows that the educated singing artist is higher on the 0.05 significance level than the uneducated.


## 4.1.5. Difference Comparison of Emotional Labor on Singing Rank Variables of Singing Artists

We calculated the mean and standard deviation of the singing ranks of the singing artists for surface acting, deep acting, natural expression, and emotional labor. The calculation results are shown in Table10.Table 10
Table of basic information on the three dimensions of emotional labor of singing artists at different singing levels.
NEmotional laborSurface playDeep playNatural representationPrimary353.66±0.43.2±0.84.1±0.63.6±0.4Intermediate453.75±0.53.1±0.84.1±0.73.7±0.5Advanced653.63±0.43.07±0.83.9±0.63.6±0.5From Table10, it can be seen that the scores of emotional labor, natural expression, and deep acting are higher for singing artists at the intermediate singing level than for junior and advanced singing artists. Singing artists at the junior singing level have the highest surface acting scores. We are conducting a one-way analysis of variance on the emotional labor of singing artists under different singing levels, and the results are shown in Table 11.Table 11
ANOVA table comparing the differences in the three dimensions of emotional labor among singing arts personnel at different singing levels.
Square andDegree of freedomMean sum of squaresF-testPost hoc comparison LSD methodEmotional laborIntergroup0.6730.331.46n.s.Within the group51.261420.23Total51.93145Surface playIntergroup0.8130.400.59n.s.Within the group152.711420.68Total153.52145Deep playIntergroup1.9830.992.50B > CWithin the group88.711420.40Total90.69145Natural representationIntergroup4.4532.234.16B > AWithin the group119.921420.54Total124.371450.33As can be seen from Table11, the significance level of singing artists under different singing levels in the deep performance is 0.043, which is less than 0.05. It shows that deep acting has significant differences in singing rank variables. In combination with Tables 10 and 11, it is known that in deep acting, the score of intermediate singing artists is 0.03 points higher than that of senior singing artists, and its significance is less than 0.05. It shows that the intermediate singing artist is higher than the senior singing artist on the 0.05 meaning level. At the same time, the significance of the natural performance of singing artists under different singing levels is less than 0.05, and its value is 0.03. It shows that there is a significant difference in the singing level of natural performance.


## 4.1.6. Differences in Emotional Labor of Singing Artists on the Variable of Professional Degree

We conducted an independent samplet-test on the emotional labor of professional and amateur singing and art personnel, and the results are shown in Table 12.Table 12
Analysis of the differences in the emotional labor of singing artists in the degree of specialization variable.
Education levelNAverage valueStandard deviationT valueP valueEmotional laborProfessional1253.670.51−1.0710.287Amateur203.720.43Surface playProfessional1253.110.81−0.5810.564Amateur203.190.88Deep playProfessional1254.130.680.5170.608Amateur204.010.52Natural representationProfessional1253.710.78−2.4210.018Amateur203.930.61As can be seen from Table12, amateur singing artists scored higher than professionals in emotional labor, surface acting, and natural performance. However, the scores in deep acting are lower. After corresponding analysis, it is concluded that only natural performance has significant differences in professional level. It shows that the natural performance score of professional singing and artistic personnel is lower than that of amateur singing and artistic personnel on the level of 0.05.


## 4.2. Interaction of Emotional Labor of Singing Artists on Demographic Variables

In the previous analysis, I tested the effects of variables like age and years of singing on emotional labor using theT test and one-way analysis of variance. However, the potential correlation between various factors was not taken into account during the analysis described above. We must therefore examine this section of the content. Bivariate analysis is used to determine whether there is an interaction between the aforementioned differences using the dependent variables of emotional labor and surface acting and the independent variables of the singers’ age and years of singing.


### 4.2.1. The Influence of the Interaction of Demographic Variables on the Emotional Labor of Singing Artists

We use the variables of singing artist’s age, singing years, and other variables as independent variables and use the emotional labor of singing artist as the dependent variable to conduct bivariate analysis. It detects whether there is an interaction between the differences of the above variables in the emotional labor of singing artists, and the results are shown in Table13.Table 13
The effect of the interaction of two variables on the emotional labor of singing arts personnel data sheet.
Square anddfMean squareFpAge∗years of singing experience1.5250.230.960.42Age∗education level1.1330.381.640.18Age∗singing level2.1960.371.610.15Age∗professional level0.3920.210.860.43Years of performance∗education level0.9830.331.420.24Years of performing∗singing level1.3760.231.010.43Years of performing∗professional degree0.6730.231.010.39Education level∗singing level0.9920.492.180.12Education level∗professional level0.0310.030.010.91Singing level∗professional level0.8220.411.810.17It can be seen from Table13 that the interaction effect of demographic variables on emotional labor is non-significant. Combined with the previous one-way analysis of variance, we can see that each variable has no significant impact on the emotional labor of singing artists.


### 4.2.2. The Influence of the Interaction of Demographic Variables on the Surface Performance of Singing Artists

We use demographic variables as independent variables and perform bivariate analysis with the surface performance of singing artists as dependent variables. The results are shown in Table14.Table 14
The effect of the interaction of two variables on the surface role of singing art personnel.
Square anddfMean squareFpAge∗years of singing experience2.3850.480.710.62Age∗education level2.6230.871.310.27Age∗singing level4.6660.781.170.33Age∗professional level2.0621.031.540.22Years of performance∗education level9.2133.074.680.03Years of performing∗singing level4.8760.811.190.31Years of performing∗professional degree3.6431.211.790.15Education level∗singing level0.4320.220.310.73Education level∗professional level0.8410.841.220.13Singing level∗professional level5.7122.854.310.02It can be seen from Table14 that the p=0.03 of singing artists and education levels under different singing years is less than 0.05. It shows that there is an interaction between the two in surface play. The p=0.02 of the singing level and professional degree, and its value is less than 0.05, indicating that there is also an interaction between the two in surface acting. Combined with the previous analysis results, we need to analyze the main effects; the results are shown in Figures 2 and 3.Figure 2
The interaction of performing years and educational level in the surface play.Figure 3
The interaction between singing rank and degree of expertise in surface play.As can be seen from Figure2, when the education level of singing artists is used as the implementation standard, with the increase of singing years. It can be seen that the surface acting score of the number of uneducated singing artists shows a trend of first decreasing, then increasing and then decreasing. When the singing years are between 3 and 5 years, the score is the smallest at 1.32. When the singing years are between 5 and 8 years, the peak value is 4.51 points. Then, the score of the singing years of more than 8 years tends to be less than 3 years. The surface performance scores of educated singing artists tended to decrease with increasing years of singing. But overall, its scores did not change much. When the performance standard is based on the singing years of the singing artists, and the singing years are less than 3 years, the surface acting scores of the two are the same. When the singing years are between 3 and 5 years, the difference between the two surface acting scores is the largest, which is 1.86 points. For the remaining singing years, the scores of the educated singing artists were lower than those of the uneducated.As can be seen from Figure3, when the singing level is used as the implementation standard, in the elementary and intermediate singing levels, the surface acting scores of the professional singing artists are lower than those of the amateur system. In the advanced singing level, the surface acting score of professional singing artists is higher than that of amateur. Among them, in the intermediate singing level, the difference between the two scores is the largest, which is 0.7 points. In the primary singing level, the difference between the two scores is the smallest, which is 0.37 points. When the professional level is used as the implementation standard, the surface acting score of professional singing artists presents a “V” shape with the increase of the singing level. The surface acting scores of amateur singing artists showed a downward trend.


### 4.2.3. The Influence of the Interaction of Demographic Variables on the Deep Performance of Singing Artists

We use demographic variables as independent variables and perform a bivariate analysis with the deep performance of singing artists as the dependent variable. The results are shown in Table15.Table 15
The effect of the interaction of two variables on the deep play of singing art personnel.
Square anddfMean squareFpAge∗years of singing experience0.8450.170.430.831Age∗education level3.1231.042.650.048Age∗singing level4.960.8252.130.052Age∗professional level1.1520.541.340.261Years of performance∗education level4.2131.413.620.014Years of performing∗singing level2.6760.451.160.323Years of performing∗professional degree0.9230.3120.810.401Education level∗singing level3.33821.674.340.013Education level∗professional level0.3110.310.740.391Singing level∗professional level0.28720.1430.360.712It can be seen from Table15 that there are significant differences in age, education level, singing level, and years of singing in the scores of deep performance of singing artists. However, there is an interaction between singing artists of different education levels and their singing level, age, and singing years, and the values are all less than 0.05. Next, a simple main effect test is carried out, and the results are shown in Figures 4–6.Figure 4
Schematic diagram of the interaction between educational level and singing level on deep play.Figure 5
Schematic representation of the interaction between education level and age on deep play.Figure 6
Schematic diagram of the interaction between education level and singing years on deep play.Figure4 shows that, when the education level is used as the implementation standard, the singing level of the uneducated singing artist gradually raises the deep acting score as the singing level rises. The educated singing arts population’s deep acting scores, on the other hand, revealed the opposite trend—a downward trend. When the singing level is the implementation standard, untrained singers perform worse than trained singers when the singing level is elementary or intermediate. The score value is higher than that of the educated at the advanced singing level, which shows the opposite trend.It can be seen from Figure5 that when the education level is used as the implementation standard, with the increase of age, the deep performance scores of uneducated singing artists fluctuate greatly. The score between the ages of 45 and 60 was the lowest at 3.73. The scores of those who have received education are relatively stable, and although there is a decline, the overall trend is showing an upward trend. When using age as the implementation standard, in the four age ranges, when the age is greater than 60 years old, the difference between the scores of the uneducated and the educated is the largest, which is 0.62 points. When the age is less than 30 years old, the difference between the two scores is the smallest, which is 0.2 points.As can be seen from Figure6, when the education level is used as the implementation standard, with the increase of singing years, the deep performance scores of uneducated singing artists appear twists and turns. The scores of those who have received education increase year by year. When the performance standard is based on singing years, in the interval of four singing years, when the singing years are more than three years and less than five years, the score of uneducated singing and artistic personnel is higher than that of those who have received education. Others are lower than the educated.


### 4.2.4. The Influence of the Interaction of Demographic Variables on the Surface Performance of Singing Artists

We use demographic variables as independent variables and perform bivariate analysis with the natural performance of singers as dependent variables. The results are shown in Table16.Table 16
The effect of the interaction of two variables on the natural performance of singing arts personnel.
Square anddfMean squareFpAge∗years of singing experience2.3150.460.830.53Age∗education level0.8330.280.50.670Age∗singing level2.3760.3980.740.61Age∗professional level0.3920.470.160.73Years of performance∗education level0.4730.250.430.72Years of performing∗singing level8.0561.342.630.02Years of performing∗professional degree0.7430.1160.270.81Education level∗singing level1.9120.210.380.71Education level∗professional level0.0810.080.020.898Singing level∗professional level0.2420.120.220.83It can be seen from Table16 that there is an interaction between the singing level and the singing years in terms of natural performance. We now conduct a simple main effect test on it, and the results are shown in Figure 7:Figure 7
Schematic representation of the interaction between singing rank and singing years on natural performance.As can be seen from Figure7, when the singing level is used as the implementation standard, in the primary singing level, the natural performance score with the singing years of more than three years and less than eight years is the highest. In the intermediate singing level, the highest score is 4.1 for more than three years and less than five years. In the advanced singing level, those who have been singing for more than eight years have the highest score of 3.88. When the singing years are used as the implementation standard, with the increase of the singing level, the scores of the singing years of more than three years but less than five years and the scores of more than five years and less than eight years show an opposite trend. It is an inverted V-shaped structure, and the scores of those singing years are less than three years will gradually decrease. The decline is not large and relatively stable.


## 4.2.1. The Influence of the Interaction of Demographic Variables on the Emotional Labor of Singing Artists

We use the variables of singing artist’s age, singing years, and other variables as independent variables and use the emotional labor of singing artist as the dependent variable to conduct bivariate analysis. It detects whether there is an interaction between the differences of the above variables in the emotional labor of singing artists, and the results are shown in Table13.Table 13
The effect of the interaction of two variables on the emotional labor of singing arts personnel data sheet.
Square anddfMean squareFpAge∗years of singing experience1.5250.230.960.42Age∗education level1.1330.381.640.18Age∗singing level2.1960.371.610.15Age∗professional level0.3920.210.860.43Years of performance∗education level0.9830.331.420.24Years of performing∗singing level1.3760.231.010.43Years of performing∗professional degree0.6730.231.010.39Education level∗singing level0.9920.492.180.12Education level∗professional level0.0310.030.010.91Singing level∗professional level0.8220.411.810.17It can be seen from Table13 that the interaction effect of demographic variables on emotional labor is non-significant. Combined with the previous one-way analysis of variance, we can see that each variable has no significant impact on the emotional labor of singing artists.


## 4.2.2. The Influence of the Interaction of Demographic Variables on the Surface Performance of Singing Artists

We use demographic variables as independent variables and perform bivariate analysis with the surface performance of singing artists as dependent variables. The results are shown in Table14.Table 14
The effect of the interaction of two variables on the surface role of singing art personnel.
Square anddfMean squareFpAge∗years of singing experience2.3850.480.710.62Age∗education level2.6230.871.310.27Age∗singing level4.6660.781.170.33Age∗professional level2.0621.031.540.22Years of performance∗education level9.2133.074.680.03Years of performing∗singing level4.8760.811.190.31Years of performing∗professional degree3.6431.211.790.15Education level∗singing level0.4320.220.310.73Education level∗professional level0.8410.841.220.13Singing level∗professional level5.7122.854.310.02It can be seen from Table14 that the p=0.03 of singing artists and education levels under different singing years is less than 0.05. It shows that there is an interaction between the two in surface play. The p=0.02 of the singing level and professional degree, and its value is less than 0.05, indicating that there is also an interaction between the two in surface acting. Combined with the previous analysis results, we need to analyze the main effects; the results are shown in Figures 2 and 3.Figure 2
The interaction of performing years and educational level in the surface play.Figure 3
The interaction between singing rank and degree of expertise in surface play.As can be seen from Figure2, when the education level of singing artists is used as the implementation standard, with the increase of singing years. It can be seen that the surface acting score of the number of uneducated singing artists shows a trend of first decreasing, then increasing and then decreasing. When the singing years are between 3 and 5 years, the score is the smallest at 1.32. When the singing years are between 5 and 8 years, the peak value is 4.51 points. Then, the score of the singing years of more than 8 years tends to be less than 3 years. The surface performance scores of educated singing artists tended to decrease with increasing years of singing. But overall, its scores did not change much. When the performance standard is based on the singing years of the singing artists, and the singing years are less than 3 years, the surface acting scores of the two are the same. When the singing years are between 3 and 5 years, the difference between the two surface acting scores is the largest, which is 1.86 points. For the remaining singing years, the scores of the educated singing artists were lower than those of the uneducated.As can be seen from Figure3, when the singing level is used as the implementation standard, in the elementary and intermediate singing levels, the surface acting scores of the professional singing artists are lower than those of the amateur system. In the advanced singing level, the surface acting score of professional singing artists is higher than that of amateur. Among them, in the intermediate singing level, the difference between the two scores is the largest, which is 0.7 points. In the primary singing level, the difference between the two scores is the smallest, which is 0.37 points. When the professional level is used as the implementation standard, the surface acting score of professional singing artists presents a “V” shape with the increase of the singing level. The surface acting scores of amateur singing artists showed a downward trend.


## 4.2.3. The Influence of the Interaction of Demographic Variables on the Deep Performance of Singing Artists

We use demographic variables as independent variables and perform a bivariate analysis with the deep performance of singing artists as the dependent variable. The results are shown in Table15.Table 15
The effect of the interaction of two variables on the deep play of singing art personnel.
Square anddfMean squareFpAge∗years of singing experience0.8450.170.430.831Age∗education level3.1231.042.650.048Age∗singing level4.960.8252.130.052Age∗professional level1.1520.541.340.261Years of performance∗education level4.2131.413.620.014Years of performing∗singing level2.6760.451.160.323Years of performing∗professional degree0.9230.3120.810.401Education level∗singing level3.33821.674.340.013Education level∗professional level0.3110.310.740.391Singing level∗professional level0.28720.1430.360.712It can be seen from Table15 that there are significant differences in age, education level, singing level, and years of singing in the scores of deep performance of singing artists. However, there is an interaction between singing artists of different education levels and their singing level, age, and singing years, and the values are all less than 0.05. Next, a simple main effect test is carried out, and the results are shown in Figures 4–6.Figure 4
Schematic diagram of the interaction between educational level and singing level on deep play.Figure 5
Schematic representation of the interaction between education level and age on deep play.Figure 6
Schematic diagram of the interaction between education level and singing years on deep play.Figure4 shows that, when the education level is used as the implementation standard, the singing level of the uneducated singing artist gradually raises the deep acting score as the singing level rises. The educated singing arts population’s deep acting scores, on the other hand, revealed the opposite trend—a downward trend. When the singing level is the implementation standard, untrained singers perform worse than trained singers when the singing level is elementary or intermediate. The score value is higher than that of the educated at the advanced singing level, which shows the opposite trend.It can be seen from Figure5 that when the education level is used as the implementation standard, with the increase of age, the deep performance scores of uneducated singing artists fluctuate greatly. The score between the ages of 45 and 60 was the lowest at 3.73. The scores of those who have received education are relatively stable, and although there is a decline, the overall trend is showing an upward trend. When using age as the implementation standard, in the four age ranges, when the age is greater than 60 years old, the difference between the scores of the uneducated and the educated is the largest, which is 0.62 points. When the age is less than 30 years old, the difference between the two scores is the smallest, which is 0.2 points.As can be seen from Figure6, when the education level is used as the implementation standard, with the increase of singing years, the deep performance scores of uneducated singing artists appear twists and turns. The scores of those who have received education increase year by year. When the performance standard is based on singing years, in the interval of four singing years, when the singing years are more than three years and less than five years, the score of uneducated singing and artistic personnel is higher than that of those who have received education. Others are lower than the educated.


## 4.2.4. The Influence of the Interaction of Demographic Variables on the Surface Performance of Singing Artists

We use demographic variables as independent variables and perform bivariate analysis with the natural performance of singers as dependent variables. The results are shown in Table16.Table 16
The effect of the interaction of two variables on the natural performance of singing arts personnel.
Square anddfMean squareFpAge∗years of singing experience2.3150.460.830.53Age∗education level0.8330.280.50.670Age∗singing level2.3760.3980.740.61Age∗professional level0.3920.470.160.73Years of performance∗education level0.4730.250.430.72Years of performing∗singing level8.0561.342.630.02Years of performing∗professional degree0.7430.1160.270.81Education level∗singing level1.9120.210.380.71Education level∗professional level0.0810.080.020.898Singing level∗professional level0.2420.120.220.83It can be seen from Table16 that there is an interaction between the singing level and the singing years in terms of natural performance. We now conduct a simple main effect test on it, and the results are shown in Figure 7:Figure 7
Schematic representation of the interaction between singing rank and singing years on natural performance.As can be seen from Figure7, when the singing level is used as the implementation standard, in the primary singing level, the natural performance score with the singing years of more than three years and less than eight years is the highest. In the intermediate singing level, the highest score is 4.1 for more than three years and less than five years. In the advanced singing level, those who have been singing for more than eight years have the highest score of 3.88. When the singing years are used as the implementation standard, with the increase of the singing level, the scores of the singing years of more than three years but less than five years and the scores of more than five years and less than eight years show an opposite trend. It is an inverted V-shaped structure, and the scores of those singing years are less than three years will gradually decrease. The decline is not large and relatively stable.


## 4.3. Vocational Self-Efficacy of Singing Artists

We divide the professional self-efficacy of singing artists into four dimensions: professional cognition and development efficacy, professional technical efficacy, physical and mental efficacy, and interpersonal efficacy. At the same time, we conduct descriptive statistical analysis on the four dimensions, and the analysis results are shown in Table17 and Figure 8.Table 17
Descriptive statistics table of the overall characteristics of professional self-efficacy of singing arts personnel.
Number of peopleMaximum valueMinimal valueAverage valueStandard deviationProfessional self-efficacy14552.53.90.47Career perception and development effectiveness145523.50.61Career technical performance145524.20.76Physical and mental performance145524.10.61Interpersonal effectiveness145534.30.53Figure 8
Score chart of the four types of occupational self-efficacy of singing arts personnel.Combining with the descriptive statistical results in Table17 and Figure 8, it can be seen that the average score of professional self-efficacy of singing artists is 3.9 points, which is at the upper middle level. It shows that the level of professional self-efficacy of the singing artists in city A is high. The scoring order of the four dimensions of occupational self-efficacy is interpersonal efficacy > occupational technical efficacy > physical and mental efficacy > occupational cognition and development efficacy. We are carrying out the significance test of the pairwise mean difference of the four dimensions, and the results are shown in Table 18.Table 18
A paired sample test of each dimension of professional self-efficacy among singing arts personnel.
dfT valueP valueCareer perception and development effectiveness-interpersonal effectiveness144−18.965∗0.001Career perception and developmental effectiveness-physical and mental effectiveness144−11.254∗0.001Career perception and developmental efficacy-career technical efficacy144−9.131∗0.001Interpersonal effectiveness-physical and mental effectiveness1447.899∗0.001Interpersonal effectiveness-career technical effectiveness1444.641∗0.001Physical and mental effectiveness-vocational and technical effectiveness144−0.9540.346Among them,∗P<0.001.It can be seen from Table18 that the P=0.346>0.05 of physical and mental efficacy-vocational technical efficacy indicates that there is no significant difference, while the P values of other combinations are all less than 0.05. It shows that there are significant differences between the above combinations. To sum up, it can be concluded that the interpersonal efficacy is the highest in the professional self-efficacy of singing artists. Occupational cognition and development efficacy were the lowest, and there were significant differences.


## 4.4. Correlation between Emotional Labor and Occupational Self-Efficacy of Singing Artists

We now conduct a correlation analysis on the emotional labor and occupational self-efficacy of singing artists, and the results are shown in Table19.Table 19
Table of correlation coefficients between emotional labor and professional self-efficacy of singing arts personnel.
Professional self-efficacyCareer perception and development effectivenessInterpersonal effectivenessPhysical and mental performanceCareer technical performanceEmotional labor0.293∗0.173∗0.324∗0.331∗0.105R2=0.087R2=0.031R2=0.155R2=0.105R2=0.211Surface play−0.062−0.063−0.061−0.059−0.057R2=0.039R2=0.039R2=0.039R3=3.6e−5R2=0.031Deep play0.344∗0.216∗0.378∗0.391∗0.091∗R2=0.119R2=0.046R2=0.141R2=0.154R2=0.007Natural representation0.311∗0.199∗0.337∗0.277∗0.187∗R2=0.097R2=0.04R2=0.113R2=0.077R2=0.034Among them,∗the correlation is significant when the significance level is equal to 0.01.It can be seen from Table19 that there is a significant and positive correlation between emotional labor and professional self-efficacy of singing artists. The correlation coefficient between the two is 0.293, which is a weak correlation. Its coefficient of determination, R2=0.087, indicates that 8.7% of the total variance in the occupational self-efficacy variable can be explained by emotional labor. The correlation coefficients between surface acting and occupational self-efficacy, occupational cognition and development efficacy, interpersonal efficacy, physical and mental efficacy, and occupational technical efficacy are as follows. It is −0.062, −0.063, −0.061, −0.059, and −0.057, all of which are negative correlations and their magnitudes are all less than 0.05. It shows that there is no significant level difference. The correlation coefficients between deep acting and occupational self-efficacy, occupational cognition and development efficacy, interpersonal efficacy, physical and mental efficacy, and occupational technical efficacy are as follows. The order is 0.344, 0.216, 0.378, 0.391, and 0.091, all of which are greater than 0.05, indicating a significant level of difference. Among them, the largest correlation coefficient is 0.391, and its determination coefficient is 0.154. It shows that the physical and mental efficacy variables can explain 15.4% of the total variance of the deep acting variables. The correlation coefficients between natural performance and occupational self-efficacy, occupational cognition and development efficacy, interpersonal efficacy, physical and mental efficacy, and occupational technical efficacy were 0.311, 0.199, 0.337, 0.277, and 0.187 respectively. The correlation coefficients are all greater than 0.05, indicating that there is a certain correlation, among which the coefficient of interpersonal effectiveness is the largest, and its determination coefficient is 0.113. The variable indicating interpersonal efficacy can explain 11.3% of the total variance of the natural performance variable.


## 5. Conclusion

Different industries have started to thrive recently as a result of the expansion of the tertiary industry. On a fundamental level, both the nature of the work and the status of singing artists have changed significantly. This paper primarily examines and studies the relationship between singing artists’ professional self-efficacy and emotional labor in this context. The data from the four dimensions of emotional labor and occupational self-efficacy are analyzed in this paper, and a correlation analysis is then done between the two. The three sections below represent the main research for this paper.


### 5.1. Emotional Labor, Occupational Self-Efficacy, and Relevance Theory

This paper introduces the definitions of emotional labor and occupational self-efficacy. The explanation of emotional labor in this paper introduces the research of many scholars and then makes inferences and guesses between the two. It then makes a correlation theory introduction to the possible relationship between the two.


### 5.2. Theoretical Model of Correlation Analysis

This paper constructs a theoretical model of the relationship between emotional labor and occupational self-efficacy. Before establishing the model, the realization process of the model is introduced, and then the selected data are cleaned and the associated model is established.


### 5.3. Correlation Analysis between Emotional Labor and Occupational Self-Efficacy

This paper conducts a questionnaire survey and analysis of 150 singing art personnel in the singing art association in city A. It conducts data analysis on the influencing factors of emotional labor and four dimensions of occupational self-efficacy. This paper conducts an experimental analysis on the difference of influence factors on emotional labor and whether there is an interaction between different influence factors, and conducts a descriptive statistical analysis on the four dimensions of occupational self-efficacy. Finally, according to the analysis results, the correlation analysis between emotional labor and occupational self-efficacy is carried out. It draws the findings that there is a correlation between the two.Due to the influence of the experimental environment, the experimental data selected in this paper are not extensive enough and the influencing factors and dimensions are not perfect, making the analysis results imprecise. It may affect the follow-up analysis work, and the focus of the follow-up work is to improve and improve the above shortcomings.


## 5.1. Emotional Labor, Occupational Self-Efficacy, and Relevance Theory

This paper introduces the definitions of emotional labor and occupational self-efficacy. The explanation of emotional labor in this paper introduces the research of many scholars and then makes inferences and guesses between the two. It then makes a correlation theory introduction to the possible relationship between the two.


## 5.2. Theoretical Model of Correlation Analysis

This paper constructs a theoretical model of the relationship between emotional labor and occupational self-efficacy. Before establishing the model, the realization process of the model is introduced, and then the selected data are cleaned and the associated model is established.


## 5.3. Correlation Analysis between Emotional Labor and Occupational Self-Efficacy

This paper conducts a questionnaire survey and analysis of 150 singing art personnel in the singing art association in city A. It conducts data analysis on the influencing factors of emotional labor and four dimensions of occupational self-efficacy. This paper conducts an experimental analysis on the difference of influence factors on emotional labor and whether there is an interaction between different influence factors, and conducts a descriptive statistical analysis on the four dimensions of occupational self-efficacy. Finally, according to the analysis results, the correlation analysis between emotional labor and occupational self-efficacy is carried out. It draws the findings that there is a correlation between the two.Due to the influence of the experimental environment, the experimental data selected in this paper are not extensive enough and the influencing factors and dimensions are not perfect, making the analysis results imprecise. It may affect the follow-up analysis work, and the focus of the follow-up work is to improve and improve the above shortcomings.



---

*Source: 2876474-2022-09-09.xml*