On cross-sectional questionnaire studies of relationships between psychosocial conditions at work and health—are they reliable?
- 439 Downloads
Common interpretation problems in psychosocial work environment research
It is not known to what extent self reported assessments of the psychosocial work environment—that the majority of research reports have been based upon—reflect individual characteristics (which may distort the perception of reality) and to what extent they reflect true environmental conditions. Critics argue that “subjectivity bias” may explain most of the observed associations between psychosocial working conditions and health (Wainwright and Calnan 2002; Mc Leod and Davey Smith 2003). This is indeed a classical problem in this research. We will discuss some aspects of this but the reader interested in the whole range of assessment problems is referred to other articles (for instance Zapf et al. 1996).
The problem with self-reported data is particularly prominent when both psychosocial environment and health are described by means of self-reports (common method variance) and when both are recorded at the same...
KeywordsDecision Latitude Psychological Demand Psychosocial Work Environment Biological Risk Factor Psychosocial Working Condition
- Cooper C (2000) Introduction: a discussion about the role of negative affectivity in job stress research. J Occup Behav 21:77Google Scholar
- Hasselhorn HM, Theorell T, Hammar N, Alfredsson L, Westerholm P och WOLF-Studiegruppen (2002) Vad påverkar hjärtkärl riskfaktorer: ”upplevelsen” eller de objektiva arbetsförhållandena? National institute for working life, Stockholm, Arbete och Hälsa, vol 7. National Institute for Working Life, Stockholm pp15–19Google Scholar
- Hasselhorn H-M, Theorell T, Hammar N, Alfredsson L, Westerholm P, the WOLF Study Group (2004) Occupational health care team ratings and self reports of demands and decision latitude. Stress Research Reports, 314, National Institute for Psychosocial Factors and Health, Stockholm, SwedenGoogle Scholar
- Haynes SG (1991) The effect of job demands, job control, and new technologies on the health of employed women: A review. In: Frankenhaeuser M, Lundberg U et al (eds) Women, work, and health: stress and opportunities. The Plenum series on stress and coping, vol 271. Plenum Press, New York, NY, USA, pp157–169Google Scholar
- Johnson JV, Stewart WF (1993) Measuring work organization exposure over the life course with a job-exposure matrix. Scand J Work Environ Health 19:21–28Google Scholar
- Johnson J, Stewart W, Hall E, Fredlund P, Theorell T (1996) Long-term psychosocial work environment and cardiovascular mortality among Swedish men. Am J Publ Health 86:324–331Google Scholar
- Judge T, Erez A, Thoresen C (2000) Why negative affectivity (and self-deception) should be included in job stress research: bathing the baby with the water. J Occup Behav 21:S101—S111Google Scholar
- Karasek RA, Theorell T (1990) Healthy work. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Karasek RA, Theorell T, Schwartz JE, Schnall PL, Pieper CF, Michela JL (1988) Job characteristics in relation to the prevalence of myocardial infarction in the US Health Examination Survey (HES) and the Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (HANES). Am J Public Health 78(8):910–918PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Kristensen TS, Bjorner JB, Christensen KB, Borg V (2005). How to measure quantitative demands at work? Results from a national Danish study (Submitted)Google Scholar
- Landsbergis PA, Schnall P, Deitz D (1992) The patterning of psychological attributes and distress by “job strain” and social support in a sample of working men. J Beh Med 15:379–405Google Scholar
- Mc leod J, David Smith G (2003) Psychosocial factors and public health: a suitable case for treatment? J Epidemiol Health 57:565–570Google Scholar
- Netterstrom B (2004) Psychological strain at work increases the risk of cardiovascular disease. Abstract at the 8th International Congress of Behavioral Medicine, Mainz, GermanyGoogle Scholar
- Payne R (2000) Comments on ‘Why negative affectivity should not be controlled in job stress research: don’t throw out the baby with the bath tub water’. J Occup Behav 21:S97–S99Google Scholar
- Spector P, Zapf D, Chen P, Frese M (2000) Why negative affectivity should not be controlled in job stress research: don’t throw out the baby with the bath tub water. J Occup Behav 21:S79–S95Google Scholar
- Theorell T, Tsutsumi A, Hallquist J, Reuterwall C, Hogstedt C., Fredlund P, Emlund N, Johnson J, The Stockholm Heart Epidemiology Program (SHEEP) (1998) Decision latitude, job strain, and myocardial infarction: a study of working men in Stockholm. Am J Publ Health 88:382–388Google Scholar
- Tsutsumi A, Theorell T, Hallqvist J, Reuterwall C (1999) Association between job characteristics and plasma fibrinogen in a normal working population: a cross sectional analysis in referents of the SHEEP study. J Epidemiol Commun Health 53(6):348–354Google Scholar
- Wainwright D, Calnan M (2002) Work stress—the making of a modern epidemic. Open University Press, Buckingham, UKGoogle Scholar