discusses the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ), designed to measure scales assessing psychological demands, decision latitude, social support, physical demands, and job insecurity. Part II describes the reliability of the JCQ scales in a cross-national context using 10,288 men and 6,313 women from 6 studies conducted in 4 countries. Substantial similarity in means, standard deviations, and correlations among the scales, and in correlations between scales and demographic variables, is found for both men and women in all studies. Reliability is good for most scales. Results suggest that psychological job characteristics are more similar across national boundaries than across occupations. This article consists of three parts. Part I introduces the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) as a tool for psychosocial job assessment. First, a description of scales and their underlying theoretical concepts is presented. This is followed by a discussion of empirical issues in the development of the questionnaire and its validity. Part I concludes with a discussion of measurement issues, administrative issues, and future challenges.

This study addressed the methodological quality of longitudinal research examining R. Karasek and T. Theorell's (1990) demand-control-(support) model and reviewed the results of the best of this research. Five criteria for evaluating methodological quality were used: type of design, length of time lags, quality of measures, method of analysis, and nonresponse analysis. These criteria were applied to 45 longitudinal studies, of which 19 (42%) obtained acceptable scores on all criteria. These high-quality studies provided only modest support for the hypothesis that especially the combination of high demands and low control results in high job strain. However, good evidence was found for lagged causal effects of work characteristics, especially for self-reported health or well-being outcomes.

SummaryBackgroundPublished work assessing psychosocial stress (job strain) as a risk factor for coronary heart disease is inconsistent and subject to publication bias and reverse causation bias. We analysed the relation between job strain and coronary heart disease with a meta-analysis of published and unpublished studies.MethodsWe used individual records from 13 European cohort studies (1985–2006) of men and women without coronary heart disease who were employed at time of baseline assessment. We measured job strain with questions from validated job-content and demand-control questionnaires. We extracted data in two stages such that acquisition and harmonisation of job strain measure and covariables occurred before linkage to records for coronary heart disease. We defined incident coronary heart disease as the first non-fatal myocardial infarction or coronary death.Findings30 214 (15%) of 197 473 participants reported job strain. In 1·49 million person-years at risk (mean follow-up 7·5 years [SD 1·7]), we recorded 2358 events of incident coronary heart disease. After adjustment for sex and age, the hazard ratio for job strain versus no job strain was 1·23 (95% CI 1·10–1·37). This effect estimate was higher in published (1·43, 1·15–1·77) than unpublished (1·16, 1·02–1·32) studies. Hazard ratios were likewise raised in analyses addressing reverse causality by exclusion of events of coronary heart disease that occurred in the first 3 years (1·31, 1·15–1·48) and 5 years (1·30, 1·13–1·50) of follow-up. We noted an association between job strain and coronary heart disease for sex, age groups, socioeconomic strata, and region, and after adjustments for socioeconomic status, and lifestyle and conventional risk factors. The population attributable risk for job strain was 3·4%.InterpretationOur findings suggest that prevention of workplace stress might decrease disease incidence; however, this strategy would have a much smaller effect than would tackling of standard risk factors, such as smoking.FundingFinnish Work Environment Fund, the Academy of Finland, the Swedish Research Council for Working Life and Social Research, the German Social Accident Insurance, the Danish National Research Centre for the Working Environment, the BUPA Foundation, the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment, the Medical Research Council, the Wellcome Trust, and the US National Institutes of Health.

Medical Research Council, Economic and Social Research Council, European Union New and Emerging Risks in Occupational Safety and Health research programme, Finnish Work Environment Fund, Swedish Research Council for Working Life and Social Research, German Social Accident Insurance, Danish National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Academy of Finland, Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment (Netherlands), US National Institutes of Health, British Heart Foundation.

This longitudinal study examined the causal relationships between job demands, job control and supervisor support on the one hand and mental health on the other. Whereas we assumed that work characteristics affect mental health, we also examined reversed causal relationships (mental health influences work characteristics). Further, the topic of the appropriate time lag for testing causal relationships was addressed. Our hypotheses were tested in a 4-wave study among a heterogeneous sample of 668 Dutch employees using structural equation modelling. The results provide evidence for reciprocal causal relationships between the work characteristics and mental health, although the effects of work characteristics on well-being were causally predominant. The best model fit was found for a 1-year time lag. Compared to earlier */predominantly cross-sectional */results, the present study presents a stronger case for the effects of work characteristics on the development of strain. The results also emphasize the need for a dynamic view of the relationship between work and health; the onedirectional viewpoint in many work stress models does not seem to fully capture the relations between work characteristics and well-being.