Work characteristics and occupational healthvalidation and proposal of a shortened version of the Work Design Questionnaire

  1. García Izquierdo, Antonio León 1
  2. Castaño Pérez, Ana M. 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Oviedo (Spain)
Revista:
Anales de psicología

ISSN: 0212-9728,  1695-2294

Año de publicación: 2022

Volumen: 38

Número: 1

Páginas: 149-162

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.6018/ANALESPS.480481 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDIGITUM editor

Otras publicaciones en: Anales de psicología

Objetivos de desarrollo sostenible

Resumen

El interés por el estudio de las características del trabajo para explicar cómo la relación de un individuo con el entorno laboral puede conducir a respuestas desadaptativas ha cobrado una importancia renovada a la luz de la creciente preocupación por el desarrollo de organizaciones saludables y por la diversidad organizacional. Este estudio tiene como objetivo desarrollar una versión abreviada del Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ) con el fin de facilitar su uso e interpretación en este contexto. Las propiedades psicométricas de este cuestionario reducido se probaron en una muestra multisectorial de trabajadores en España. Para ello, aplicamos el cuestionario a una muestra de 500 trabajadores y analizamos la relación entre las carácterísiticas del trabajo y las variables seleccionadas de salud ocupacional (satisfacción, bienestar y agotamiento emocional). Los resultados mostraron una fiabilidad y una validez orientada al criterio adecuadas para la versión abreviada del WDQ, esto es, el WDQ18-S, así como evidencia de invarianza factorial de género. Posteriormente se discuten los resultados y sus implicaciones para el uso del WDQ en el ámbito aplicado e investigador de la salud ocupacional y la prevención de riesgos laborales.

€ Ver financiación

Información de financiación

-The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this arti-cle: Ministerio de Econom?a y Competitividad and Fondos Sociales Europeos (reference PSI-2013-44854R), C?tedra Asturias Pre-venci?n (reference CATI-04-2018), and Consejer?a de Econom?a y Empleo del Gobierno del Principado de Asturias and Fondos Eu-ropeos de Desarrollo Regional (reference FC-GRUPIN-IDI/2018/000132).

Financiadores

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Aguado, D., Andrés, J. C., García-Izquierdo, A. L., & Rodríguez, J. (2019). LinkedIn “Big Four”: Job performance validation in the ICT sector. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 35, 53-64. https://doi.org/10.5093/jwop2019a7
  • Alcover, C. M., Guglielmi, D., Depolo, M., & Mazzetti, G. (2021). “Aging-and-Tech Job Vulnerability”: A proposed framework on the dual impact of aging and AI, robotics, and automation among older workers. Organizational Psychology Review, 11(2), 175–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041386621992105
  • Azañedo, C. M., Fernández-Abascal, E. G., & Barraca, J. (2017). The short form of the VIA Inventory of Strengths. Psicothema, 29(2), 254–260. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2016.225
  • Bargsted, M., Ramírez-Vielma, R., & Yeves, J. (2019). Professional self-efficacy and job satisfaction: The mediator role of work design. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 35, 157-163. https://doi.org/10.5093/jwop2019a18
  • Batz-Barbarich, C., Tay, L., Kuykendall, L., & Cheung, H. K. (2018). A Meta-Analysis of Gender Differences in Subjective Well-Being: Estimating Effect Sizes and Associations With Gender Inequality. Psychological Science, 29(9), 1491-1503. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0956797618774796
  • Baumgartner, H., & Steenkamp, J.-B. E. M. (2001). Response Styles in Marketing Research: A Cross-National Investigation. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 143–156. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.38.2.143.18840
  • Bayona, J. A., Caballer, A., & Peiró, J. M. (2015). The work design questionnaire: Spanish version and validation. Revista de Psicología Del Trabajo y de Las Organizaciones, 31(3), 187–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rpto.2015.06.001
  • Bertolino, M., Angel, V., & Steiner, D. D. (2011). Questionnaire sur les caracteristiques du poste (QCP), traduction du WDQ de Morgeson et Humphrey (2006). https://www.psychologie.uni-frankfurt.de/56107021/Bertolino__Angel____Steiner_French_version_of_WDQ.pdf
  • Borges-Andrade, J. E., Peixoto, A. L. A., Queiroga, F., & Pérez-Nebra, A. R. (2019). Adaptation of the Work Design Questionnaire to Brazil. Revista Psicologia Organizações e Trabalho, 19(3), 720–731. https://doi.org/10.17652/rpot/2019.3.16837
  • Browne, M., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen, & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136-162). Sage.
  • Castaño, A. M., Fontanil, Y., & García-Izquierdo, A. L. (2019). Why Can’t I Become a Manager?—A Systematic Review of Gender Stereotypes and Organizational Discrimination. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(10), 1813. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16101813
  • Castaño, AM. & García-Izquierdo, AL. (2018). Validity evidence of the Organizational Justice Scale in Spain. Psicothema, 30(3), 344-350. http://dx.doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2017.415
  • Castaño, AM., Fontanil, Y., & García-Izquierdo, AL.(2020). Gendered Beliefs in STEM Undergraduates: A Comparative Analysis of Fuzzy Rating versus Likert Scales. Sustainability, 12(15), 6227. 10.3390/su12156227
  • Chen, F.F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fi t indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464-504. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834.
  • Cheung, G.W., & Rensvold, R.B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233-255. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5
  • Cifre, E., Vera, M., & Signani, F. (2015). Women and men at work: analyzing occupational stress and well-being from a gender perspective. Revista Puertorriqueña de Psicología, 26(2), 172-191. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=5891769
  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. Academic Press.
  • Cox, T., & Griffiths, A. J. (1996). The assessment of psychosocial hazards at work. In M. J. Schabracq, J. A. M. Winnubst, & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Handbook of Work and Health Psychology (pp. 127-146). Wiley and Sons.
  • DeBode, J. D., Armenakis, A. A., Feild, H. S., & Walker, A. G. (2013). Assessing Ethical Organizational Culture: Refinement of a Scale. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 49(4), 460-484. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886313500987
  • DeSimone, J. A., & Harms, P. D. (2018). Dirty data: The effects of screening respondents who provide low-quality data in survey research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 33(5), 559–577. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-017-9514-9
  • Diedenhofen, B., & Musch, J. (2016). cocron: A web interface and R package for the statistical comparison of Cronbach’s alpha coefficients. International Journal of Internet Science, 11(1), 51-60. Retrived from https://www.ijis.net/ijis11_1/ijis11_1_diedenhofen_and_musch.pdf and http://comparingcronbachalphas.org/ a web interface to compare Cronbach alphas
  • Ellis, P. D. (2009). Effect size calculators. http://www.polyu.edu.hk/mm/effectsizefaqs/calculator/calculator.html
  • Elosúa, P. (2005). Evaluación progresiva de la invarianza factorial entre las versiones original y adaptada de una escala de autoconcepto [Progressive evaluation of factor invariance between the original and adapted versions of a self-concept scale]. Psicothema, 17(2), 356-362. http://www.psicothema.com/psicothema.asp?id=3112
  • Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149-1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
  • Fernández, M., Ramírez, R., Sánchez, J. C., Bargsted, M., Polo, J. D., & Ruiz, M. A. (2017). Spanish-Language Adaptation of Morgeson and Humphrey’s Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ). The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 20, e28, 1-30. https://doi.org/10.1017/sjp.2017.24
  • García-Izquierdo, AL., Fernández, C., & Arrondo, R. (2018). Gender Diversity on Boards of Directors and Remuneration Committees: The Influence on Listed Companies in Spain. Frontiers in Psychology, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01351
  • García-Izquierdo, AL, Ponsoda-Gil, V., & Aguado, D. (2019). New Insights on Technology and Assessment: Introduction to JWOP Special Issue. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 35, 49-52. https://doi.org/10.5093/jwop2019a6
  • Gartzia, L., Pizarro, J., & Baniandres, J. (2018). Emotional Androgyny: A Preventive Factor of Psychosocial Risks at Work? Frontiers in Psychology, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02144
  • Goldberg, D., & Williams, P. (1996). Cuestionario de Salud General GHQ (General Health Questionnaire). Guía para el usuario de las distintas versiones [General Health Questionnaire GHQ (General Health Questionnaire). User’s guide for the different versions]. Masson.
  • Gorgievski-Duijvesteijn, M., Peeters, P., Rietzschel, E. F., & Bipp, T. (2016). Reliability and validity of the Dutch translation of the work design questionnaire. Gedrag En Organisatie : Tijdschrift Voor Sociale, Arbeids- En Organisatie-Psychologie, 29(3), 273–301. http://hdl.handle.net/1765/94861
  • Humphrey, S. E., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Integrating motivational, social, and contextual work design features: A meta-analytic summary and theoretical extension of the work design literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(5), 1332–1356. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.5.1332
  • International Labor Organization. (2020). Decent work. https://www.ilo.org/global/topics/decent-work/lang--en/index.htm
  • Krosnick, J. A. (1999). Survey Research. Annual Review of Psychology, 50(1), 537–567. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.50.1.537
  • Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159-174. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2529310
  • Leka, S., & Cox, T. (2008). PRIMA-EF - Guidance on the European Framework for Psychosocial Risk Management: A resource for employers and worker representatives. World Health Organization. http://www.who.int/occupational_health/publications/PRIMA-EF%20Guidance_9.pdf
  • Liu, M., & Wronski, L. (2018). Examining Completion Rates in Web Surveys via Over 25,000 Real-World Surveys. Social Science Computer Review, 36(1), 116–124. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439317695581
  • Lloret-Segura, S., Ferreres-Traver, A., Hernández-Baeza, A., & Tomás-Marco, I. (2014). El análisis factorial exploratorio de los ítems: Una guía práctica, revisada y actualizada [Exploratory Item Factor Analysis: A practical guide revised and up-dated]. Anales de Psicología / Annals of Psychology, 30(3), 1151-1169. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.30.3.199361
  • López-Araújo, B., & Osca, A. (2010). Influencia de algunas variables organizacionales sobre la salud y la accidentabilidad laboral [Influence of some organizational variables on occupational health and accident rate]. Annals of Psychology, 26(1), 89-94. https://revistas.um.es/analesps/article/view/92001
  • MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2012). Common Method Bias in Marketing: Causes, Mechanisms, and Procedural Remedies. Journal of Retailing, 88(4), 542–555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2012.08.001
  • Marcus, B., Bosnjak, M., Lindner, S., Pilischenko, S., & Schütz, A. (2007). Compensating for Low Topic Interest and Long Surveys: A Field Experiment on Nonresponse in Web Surveys. Social Science Computer Review, 25(3), 372-383. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439307297606
  • Meliá, J. L., & Peiró, J. M. (1989). El Cuestionario de satisfacción S10/12: Estructura Factorial, Fiabilidad y Validez [Satisfaction Quewstionnaire S10/12: Factor Structure, Reliability and Validity]. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, 4(11), 179-187. https://journals.copmadrid.org/jwop/art/00ac8ed3b4327bdd4ebbebcb2ba10a00
  • Morgeson, F. P., & Humphrey, S. E. (2006). The Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(6), 1321–1339. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1321
  • Muñiz, J., & Fonseca-Pedrero, E. (2019). Diez pasos para la construcción de un test [Ten steps in test construction]. Picothema, 31(1), 7–16. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2018.291
  • Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2012). Mplus User’s Guide. Seventh Edition. Muthén & Muthén.
  • Osca, A., & López-Araújo, B. (2020). Work stress, personality and occupational accidents: Should we expect differences between men and women? Safety Science, 124, 104582. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2019.104582
  • Parker, S. K. (2014). Beyond Motivation: Job and Work Design for Development, Health, Ambidexterity, and More. Annual Review of Psychology, 65(1), 661–691. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115208
  • Parker, S. K., Morgeson, F., Johns, G. (2017). 100 years of work design research: Looking back and looking forward. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(3), 403-420. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000106
  • Peiró, J. M., Bayona, J. A., Caballer, A., & Di Fabio, A. (2020). Importance of work characteristics affects job performance: The mediating role of individual dispositions on the work design-performance relationships. Personality and Individual Differences, 157, 109808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.109808
  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879-903. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of Method Bias in Social Science Research and Recommendations on How to Control It. Annual Review of Psychology, 63(1), 539-569. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452
  • Purvanova, R. K. & Muros, J. P. (2010). Gender differences in burnout: A meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77(2), 168-185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2010.04.006
  • Ramis, Y., Viladrich, C., Sousa, C., & Jannes, C. (2015). Exploring the factorial structure of the Sport Anxiety Scale-2: Invariance across language, gender, age and type of sport. Psicothema, 27(2), 174-181. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2014.263
  • Rivera-Torres, P., Araque-Padilla, R. A., & Montero-Simó, M. J. (2013). Job Stress Across Gender: The Importance of Emotional and Intellectual Demands and Social Support in Women. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 10(1), 375–389. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph10010375
  • Rudman, L. A., Moss-Racusin, C. A., Phelan, J. E., & Nauts, S. (2012). Status incongruity and backlash effects: Defending the gender hierarchy motivates prejudice against female leaders. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 165-179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.10.008
  • Salanova, M., Llorens, S., Grau, R., Schaufeli, W. B., & Peiró, J. M. (2000). Desde el “burnout” al “engagement”: ¿una nueva perspectiva? [From “burnout” to “engagement”: A new perspective?]. Revista de Psicología del Trabajo y de las Organizaciones, 16(2), 117-134. http://www.copmadrid.org/web/articulos/2000162/trabajo
  • Schaufeli, W. B., & Dierendonck, D. V. (1993). The construct validity of two burnout measures. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14(7), 631–647. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030140703
  • Stegmann, S., Dick, R. van, Ullrich, J., Charalambous, J., Menzel, B., Egold, N., & Wu, T. T.-C. (2010). Der Work Design Questionnaire. Zeitschrift Für Arbeits- Und Organisationspsychologie A&O, 54(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1026/0932-4089/a000002
  • Eagly, A. H., & Karau, S. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psychological review, 109(3), 573-598. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.109.3.573
  • Pedrero-Pérez, E. J., Mora-Rodríguez, C., Rodríguez-Gómez, R., Benítez-Robredo, M. T., Ordóñez-Franco, A., González-Robledo, L., & Méndez-Gago, S. (2020). GHQ-12 in adolescents: contributions to the controversial factorial validity.Anales de Psicología / Annals of Psychology,36(2), 247–253. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.372721
  • Sureda, E., Mancho, J., & Sesé, A. (2018). Psychosocial risk factors, organizational conflict and job satisfactionin Health professionals: A SEM model. Anales de Psicología / Annals of Psychology, 35(1), 106-115. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.35.1.297711
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet