Measuring job stressors and strains: Where we have been, where we are, and where we need to go.

Hurrell, Joseph J.; Nelson, Debra L.; Simmons, Bret L.

doi:10.1037/1076-8998.3.4.368

Cited by 244 publications

(214 citation statements)

References 95 publications

(143 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

200

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In worklife long-term stress is often evaluated from experienced symptoms and work-related effects (12). These measurement scales have different names, depending on their content and purpose.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity of a single-item measure of stress symptoms

Elo¹,

Leppänen²,

Jahkola³

2003

Scand J Work Environ Health

674

502

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives The objective of the study was to investigate the content, criterion, and construct validity of a singleitem measure of stress symptoms. Such a concise measure would be useful in monitoring stress at work. The criteria for validity were convergence with conceptionally close measures, the plausibility of associations with health and work characteristics, and the power to discriminate between groups.Methods Four sets of independent cross-sectional data were used. The first data set, from Finland Post, comprised symptoms of ill health and mental resources (N=1014). The second, from four Nordic countries, included well-known validated scales on exhaustion, mental health, sleep, vitality, and optimism, and therefore the convergence between the measures could be studied (N=1015). The third, from a metal factory, included three indicators of health and four work characteristics (N=773). The fourth, representing the Finnish working population, described group differences in stress symptoms (N=2156) and allowed comparison with a study on emotional exhaustion in the working population. Distributions, correlations, and factor analysis were used for the study. ResultsThe stress-symptoms item converged with items on psychological symptoms and sleep disturbances and with validated measures of well-being. It had theoretically grounded associations with indicators of health and psychosocial work characteristics, and it discriminated between gender and age groups and industrial branches in accordance with the validated emotional exhaustion scale. ConclusionsThe stress-symptoms item showed satisfactory content, criterion, and construct validity for grouplevel analysis. It is suggested that the longer scales used to measure psychological stress can be replaced with it in survey research.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity of a single-item measure of stress symptoms

Elo¹,

Leppänen²,

Jahkola³

2003

Scand J Work Environ Health

674

502

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If we consider that in each work environment the working conditions are particular, consequently the finding of an 'objective' measure has to be specifically related to that specific workplace. Still, a more comprehensive coverage of every particular working situation, organisation or workplace, and of the working conditions that constitute psychosocial work risk factors, is needed 31) . In summary, taking into consideration the above limitations, psychological demands measured by the JCQ seem to reflect the actual psychosocial work environment of bus drivers, but although it is not always easy (or possible) to get good 'objective' indicators of the psychosocial work risk factors, it is necessary to continue looking for better refined external independent indicators as a proxy of the psychosocial environment, especially for job control and job social support.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

External Validation of Psychological Job Demands in a Bus Driver Sample

Gimeno

Benavides

Mira

et al. 2004

Journal of Occupational Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

External Validation of Psychological Job Demands in a Bus Driver Sample: David Gimeno, et al. Occupational Health Research Unit. Department of Health and Experimental Sciences, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Spain—Psychosocial risk factors have been considered as characteristics of the work environment rather than an individual issue, but their presence in the workplace is usually measured by self‐reported questionnaires, based on worker attitudes. The objective of the study was to compare a self‐reported measure of psychological job demands in a bus driver sample with selected indicators of bus company activity, as external ‘objective’ indicators, in order to assess its external validity. The final sample included 713 drivers in 41 routes. Self‐reported measures of psychosocial work risk factors were obtained by the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ). Four external indicators were available for each route: passengers, break times, bus incidents, and regulating actions. Spearman's correlation coefficient was estimated to assess the validity. Correlation coefficients showed that self‐reported psychological demands were statistically significant correlated (p<0.05) with two external indicators: bus incidents (rho=0.397), and regulating actions (rho=0.475). Self‐reported psychosocial risk factors have been compared with independent external indicators of the psychosocial work environment, trying to avoid any subject's perception. According to our results, psychological demands measured by the JCQ seem to reflect the actual psychosocial work environment. Other studies are necessary to confirm these results and to assess job control and job social support. This would be another step in improving our knowledge of the quality of measurement of psychosocial risk factors.

show abstract

“…Furthermore, self-report was used to measure organizational learning. Although this allowed to assess individual perceptions, which are not easily measured through more objective measures (Hurrell et al, 1998), self-report also has disadvantages, such as social desirability and negative affectivity (Hurrell et al, 1998). When all variables are measured using self-report these issues are pronounced, potentially leading to spurious relationships (Hurrell et al, 1998).…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving organizational learning through leadership training

Hasson

Schwarz

Holmström

et al. 2016

JWL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Improving organizational learning through leadership training AbstractPurpose: Managers play a crucial role in providing opportunities to employees for learning.Although scholars have called for intervention research on the effects of leadership development on organizational learning, no such research is currently available. This paper evaluates whether training of managers at workplaces can improve organizational learning. Originality/value:The study provides empirical evidence that organizational learning can be improved through leadership training. Both line managers and their subordinates perceived that organizational learning had increased after the training intervention, albeit in different ways. Implications for developing leadership training programs and for evaluating these are discussed.

show abstract

Measuring job stressors and strains: Where we have been, where we are, and where we need to go.

Cited by 244 publications

References 95 publications

Validity of a single-item measure of stress symptoms

Validity of a single-item measure of stress symptoms

External Validation of Psychological Job Demands in a Bus Driver Sample

Improving organizational learning through leadership training

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About