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

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