Available instruments for measurement of …

1 Int Arch Occup Environ Health (2008) 82:1 12 DOI instruments for measurement of psychosocial factors in the work environmentMaria Carla Tabanelli Marco Depolo Robin M. T. Cooke Guido Sarchielli Roberta BonWglioli Stefano Mattioli Francesco S. Violante Received: 19 October 2007 / Accepted: 20 February 2008 / Published online: 13 March 2008 Springer-Verlag 2008 AbstractObjectiveTo provide an overview of the spectrum ofavailable for measurement and evaluation of work-relatedpsychosocial systematically searched the literature/inter-net to identify and describe the main Available question-naires and observational instruments for assessment ofwork-related psychosocial factors (with/without other jobstressors).ResultsA total of 33 instruments were identiWed (26questionnaires, 7 observational), many (11 questionnaires,5 observational) linked to national of relevant information (on the internet orelsewhere) regarding the instruments varied summary of the range of instrumentscurrently Available for evaluation of multiple work stressorsat individual, group and/or organizational levels may pro-vide a useful tool for operators and Occupational health Workplace Observation Risk assessmentIntroductionAssessment of occupational psychosocial factors and theirimpact on the health and safety of workers is an extremelyrelevant and topical subject (Cox and Rial-Gonz lez2005; Kasl 1998; Rosenstock 1997; Wrighy and Cropanz-ano 2000), which has been oYcially acknowledged byvarious national governments (Conseil National du Tra-vail (CNT) 2004; Delaunois et al.)

2 2002; D Hertefelt 2002;F d ration G n rale du Travail de Belgique (FGTB)2002; Levi et al. 1999; Peter et al. 2004; Schaufeli andKompier 2001). Psychosocial factors include exposuresthought to impact on the well-being and health outcomesof workers ( temporal aspects of employment and thework itself, aspects of work content, work-group, supervi-sion, organisational conditions). Other factors that can beincluded in an assessment include strain ( workers psychological and physiological reactions to stressors interms of anxiety, depression, high blood pressure, heavysmoking, alcohol consumption, etc.) and coping strategies(Kasl 1987; Kristensen 1995). Psychosocial factors areassessed using psychological (as distinct from technicalor physiological) models in which stress is viewed interms of dynamic interactions between individuals andtheir work environment. The theoretical basis can beinteractional focusing on the structural characteristics ofthe person s interaction with their work environment, asin the Person-Environment Fit (French et al.

3 1982) andthe Demand Control model developed by Karasek (1979)and later expanded by Johnson et al. (1991) as theDemand Control Support model. The basis may also betransactional focusing on the cognitive processes andemotional reactions governing person-environment inter-actions, as in EVort-Reward Imbalance model developedby Siegrist (1990), and the models devised by Lazarus andM. C. Tabanelli R. M. T. Cooke R. BonWglioli S. Mattioli F. S. ViolanteAlma Mater Studiorum-University of Bologna, Occupational Medicine Unit, Hospital, Bologna, ItalyM. Depolo G. SarchielliFaculty of Psychology, Department of Educational Science, Alma Mater Studiorum-University of Bologna, Bologna, ItalyS. Mattioli (&) Medicina del Lavoro, Policlinico Sant Orsola-Malpighi, Via P. Palagi 9, 40138 Bologna, Italye-mail: Arch Occup Environ Health (2008) 82:1 12123 Folkman (1984) in the and Cox and Mackay(1981) in the questionnaires, usually containing ques-tions regarding presence of risk factors in the work environ-ment, are widely used since they are inexpensive and easyto analyze.

4 An intrinsic limitation of self-reported question-naires is that they provide subjective measures, represent-ing the occupational stress perceptions of individualworkers. Objective assessments are based on observa-tional approaches, including archival data ( sicknessleave, performance measures, accidents), and biologicalmeasures (of adrenaline, cortisol values, etc). However,they are much more expensive to administer (Frese andZapf 1988; Leitner and Resch 2005; Kompier 2005).An overview of the spectrum of Available resources forevaluation of psychosocial factors could facilitate selectionof appropriate instruments for speciWc studies and provide auseful resource for enhancement of assessment therefore systematically searched the literature to iden-tify and describe the main Available instruments for subjec-tive/objective assessment of work-related psychosocialfactors (with/without other job stressors).

5 MethodsStudy designWe used a systematic search strategy to identify anddescribe reported questionnaires and observational instru-ments for measurement and evaluation of work-related psy-chosocial factors (with/without inclusion of strain andcoping) that can be applied to a wide range of professionalsettings, whether at individual, group or organisation level( instruments designed only for the assessment of strainwere not included).Search strategyWe identiWed relevant search terms ( psychosocial factors , work , stress , job , stressors , occupational , work-place , evironment , health , questionnaire , instrument , measure , observational , subjective , objective , assessment ) by consulting citations included in reviewarticles on meausurement of job stressors and strains (Hurrelet al. 1998; Quick 1998; Rick et al. 2001). In 2005 2006, weused combinations of these terms to conduct databasesearches in PubMed, PsychINFO, SSCI (Social ScienceCitation Index), Emerald, Science Direct, Ingenta Connect,Inter Science, and Job Stress Network.

6 Titles and abstractswere carefully screened by one of the authors ( ) toidentify articles that could contain descriptive informationon instruments for assessment of work-related psychosocialfactors (or on roles of individual instruments within broaderapproaches to the problem of work-related stress). Fullpapers were retrieved for all pertinent articles ( 250), whichwere also hand searched for references to further relevant lit-erature and to trace authors original descriptions of instru-ments adopted in results papers. Other instruments wereidentiWed by consulting the NIOSH web search page (usingthe all Welds option) for Organisation of Work Measure-ment Tools for Research and Practice ( ). Catalogs of themain publishers of psyschological and psychosocial tests(PAR, Thames Valley Test Company, NFER Nelson, SHLP sychological Corporation, and ASE) were also searched toidentify potentially relevant instruments .

7 No language-basedexclusions were made. The original instrument (and oYcialrevisions) was identiWed whenever possible and obtainedwhen feasible. To facilitate description of each single instru-ment, further searches were then performed in Google,Google Scholar and PubMed (entering instrument names/acronyms as search terms).Description of instrumentsAll identiWed instruments that included assessment of psy-chosocial factors at work were considered. Based on thecharacteristics of the instruments themselves or theirdescriptions, the single instruments were Wrst groupedaccording to their methodological approach as question-naires or observational instruments (workplace observa-tions, including instruments employing questionnaires aspart of a broader evaluation process). We excluded instru-ments designed only for use in speciWc professions. Due tothe prohibitive number of questionnaires, we also decidedto exclude questionnaires designed to assess only one ortwo factors.

8 For each of the remaining questionnaires, anexperienced psychologist ( ) identiWed the mainobjectives and measures, based on authors descriptions(and original instruments , where feasible). We listed ver-sions (diVerent length questionnaires, professions, etc.), Available languages (including oYcial translations), andoYcial website addresses. We also noted oYciallyacknowledged national/international parent organisations/approaches. Other notes on the instruments main charac-teristics (original purpose, etc.) were reported when consid-ered helpful. For objective instruments , we also consideredtype and identiWed a total of 33 instruments (26 questionnaires, 7observational). Features of the instruments are individuallysummarised in Tables1 and 2 (accompanied by selectedInt Arch Occup Environ Health (2008) 82:1 123123 Table 1 Summary of questionnaires with references to a guide/description [and year of Wrst publication]COPENHAGEN PSYCHOSOCIAL QUESTIONNAIRE (COPSOQ) (Kristensen et al.))

9 2005) [2002]ObjectivesPsychosocial factors, stress, individual health/well-being, personality factors (coping style, sense ofcoherence, etc.)MeasuresCognitive demands; commitment; freedom; demands to hide emotions; emotional demands; feedback; inXuence; insecurity; satisfaction; meaningfulness; career; predictability; leadership; quantitative de-mands; role clarity; role conXicts; community feeling; sensorial demands; social relations/support; men-tal/physical health; coherence; behavioral stressVersionsLong (141-item) for researchers; medium (95-item) for work-environment professionals; brief (44-item) for workplaceLanguagesDutch; Chinese, Danish, English, Flemish, German, Croatian, Malaysia, Norwegian, Persian, Portuguese, Spanish, SwedishNotesOYcial instrument of AMII nternet< rgeskemaer/Psykisk%20arbejdsmilj .aspx>EFFORT-REWARD IMBALANCE (ERI) (Siegrist et al. 2004) [1994]ObjectivesEVort-reward relations as determinants of well-beingMeasures3 unidimensional scales: eVort (6 items on quantitative/qualitative load, overall increase, physical load); reward (11 on Wnancial, esteem, career, security, etc.

10 ; overcommitment (6 or 29 items)Versionsshort (23-item), long (46-item)LanguagesGerman; Chinese, Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Finish, French, Italian, Japanese, Norwegian, Polish, Portuguese, Russian, Spanish, SwedishNotesDeveloped at University of D sseldorf, primarily in cardiovascular health studiesInternet< >GENERAL NORDIC QUESTIONNAIRE (QPS NORDIC) (Lindstrom 2002) [2000]ObjectivesPsychological/social factors (as potential determinants of motivation, health and well-being)MeasuresJob demands/control, role expectation, Work/individual predictability, social interaction, leadership, communication, organisational culture/climate, work group, organisation-commitment, competence, preference for challenge, work motives/centrality, private life interactionsVersionsShort (34-item); long (123-item)LanguagesEnglish, Danish, Icelandic, Norwegian, Suomi, Swedish, GreekeNotesOYcial instrument of Nordic Council of MinistersInternet< >HSE INDICATOR TOOL (HSE) [2004]ObjectivesConditions known to be potential determinants of work-related stressMeasures6 primary stressors: demands; control; support; relationships; role; changeVersions35-itemLanguagesEnglish; Arabic, Bengali, Chinese, Farsi, Gujarati, Hindi, Hungarian, Kurdish, Pashto, Polish, Punjabi, Russian, Tamil, Turkish, Urdu, WelshNotesAn oYcial tool of HSE; designed as key step in HSE s Stress Management Standards processInternet< >JOB CHARACTERISTICS INDEX (JCI) (Sims et al.)