Job crafting refers to the act of employees actively altering work aspects to better suit their values and interests. Slemp and Vella-Brodrick (2013) proposed a Job Crafting Questionnaire (JCQ) in English consisting of three facets: task crafting, cognitive crafting, and relational crafting. This is in line with the original conceptualization of job crafting by Wrzesniewski and Dutton (2001) . However, there has not yet been an evaluated German translation of this measure. Therefore, this paper aims at evaluating the psychometric properties of scores from a German translation of the JCQ, using the original Australian dataset and a German sample of 482 employees. Our findings showed first evidence for the reliability and validity of the scores. We also extend prior research and include creative self-efficacy in the nomological network of job crafting. Importantly, strong factorial measurement invariance was demonstrated, allowing for comparisons between the job crafting scores of German- and English-speaking samples. Based on this example, we highlight the importance of enriching measurement invariance tests by including other key constructs. Our results suggest that the German JCQ is an acceptable tool for measuring job crafting, as originally conceptualized by Wrzesniewski and Dutton (2001) .

Driving behavior after take-over requests (TORs) is one of the most popular subjects in human factors re-search on highly automated driving. Many studies utilized one-step TOR procedures to prompt drivers to resume vehicle control. The present paper examines driver behavior when experiencing a two-step TOR procedure in different modalities. A two-step TOR gives drivers a choice to resume vehicle controls be-tween a warning (first step) and an alarm (second step). Our findings indicate that a substantial number of drivers resumes vehicle controls after the second step, resulting in a higher number of crashes. More generally, criticality of the driving situation increases with increasing reaction times. Driving and interview data suggest that step two of the TOR should be presented earlier. Alternatively, a multi-step TOR could be used to increase drivers’ situational awareness. Auditory TORs are associated with shorter reaction times than visual-auditory TORs. Implications on TOR design are discussed.

Highly automated cars will be on the worlds’ roads within the next decade. In highly automated driving the vehicle’s lateral and longitudinal controls can be passed on from the driver to the vehicle and back again. The design of a vehicle’s take-over requests will largely determine the driver’s performance after taking back vehicle control. In the scope of this paper, potential drivers of highly automated cars were asked about their preferences regarding the human-machine interface design of take-over requests. Participants were asked to evaluate eight different take-over requests that differed with respect to (a) take-over request procedure (one-step or two-step procedure), (b) visual take-over request modality (text or text and pictogram), and (c) auditory take-over request modality (tone or speech). Results showed that participants preferred a two-step procedure using text and speech to communicate take-over requests. A subsequent conjoint analysis revealed that take-over requests ideally use speech output in a two-step procedure. Finally, a detailed evaluation showed that the best take-over request interface received significantly higher user experience ratings regarding product characteristics as well as users’ emotions and consequences of product use than the worst take-over request interface. Results are related to the background literature and practical implications are discussed.