Study of the validity of a job-exposure matrix for psychosocial work factors: results from the national French SUMER survey
- 379 Downloads
To construct and evaluate the validity of a job-exposure matrix (JEM) for psychosocial work factors defined by Karasek’s model using national representative data of the French working population.
National sample of 24,486 men and women who filled in the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) by Karasek measuring the scores of psychological demands, decision latitude, and social support (individual scores) in 2003 (response rate 96.5%). Median values of the three scores in the total sample of men and women were used to define high demands, low latitude, and low support (individual binary exposures). Job title was defined by both occupation and economic activity that were coded using detailed national classifications (PCS and NAF/NACE). Two JEM measures were calculated from the individual scores of demands, latitude and support for each job title: JEM scores (mean of the individual score) and JEM binary exposures (JEM score dichotomized at the median).
The analysis of the variance of the individual scores of demands, latitude, and support explained by occupations and economic activities, of the correlation and agreement between individual measures and JEM measures, and of the sensitivity and specificity of JEM exposures, as well as the study of the associations with self-reported health showed a low validity of JEM measures for psychological demands and social support, and a relatively higher validity for decision latitude compared with individual measures.
Job-exposure matrix measure for decision latitude might be used as a complementary exposure assessment. Further research is needed to evaluate the validity of JEM for psychosocial work factors.
KeywordsPsychosocial work factors Job stress Occupation Economic activity Job-exposure matrix
The authors thank the members of the DARES (French Ministry of Labour), especially Nicole Guignon for their help and advice. The authors also thank all the 1,792 occupational physicians and ‘médecins inspecteurs régionaux du travail’, all the employees who participated to the SUMER survey and made this study possible, and Maryvonne Auxenfants-Prigent for her linguistic help. This study was supported by the DARES of the French Ministry of Labour.
- Ardilly P (1994) Les techniques de sondage. Editions Technip, ParisGoogle Scholar
- Eurostat (2002) NACE: Statistical Classification of Economic Activities in the European Community, Rev. 1.1. LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
- Fredlund P, Hallqvist J, Diderichsen F (2000) Psychosocial job exposure matrix: an update of a classification system for work-related psychosocial exposures (in Swedish), vol 11. Arbetslivsinstitutet, StockholmGoogle Scholar
- Hasselhorn HM, Theorell T, Hammar N, Alfredsson L, Westerholm P, the Wolf Study Group. Occupational health care team ratings and self reports of demands and decision latitude. 2004. Stress Research Reports, vol 314. National Institute for Psychosocial Factors and Health, Stockholm, SwedenGoogle Scholar
- Hémon D, Goldberg M (1993) Retrospective evaluation of occupational exposures in epidemiology: a European concerted action 1990–1992. Int J Epidemiol 22:(suppl 2)Google Scholar
- INSEE (2003a) Nomenclature des professions et catégories socio-professionnelles 2003. INSEE, Nomenclatures et codes, ParisGoogle Scholar
- INSEE (2003b) Nomenclatures d’activités et de produits françaises - Edition 2003. INSEE, Nomemclatures et codes, ParisGoogle Scholar
- International Labour Office (1990) International standard classification of occupations (ISCO-88). International Labour Office, GenevaGoogle Scholar
- Johnson J, Stewart W, Fredlund P, Hall E, Theorell T (1990) Psychosocial job exposure matrix: an occupationally aggregated attribution system for work environment exposure characteristics, vol 221. National Institute for Psychosocial Factors and Health, Department of Stress Research, WHO Psychosocial CentreGoogle Scholar
- Karasek R (1985) Job content questionnaire and user’s guide. Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Southern California, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
- Karasek R, Theorell T (1990) Healthy work: stress, productivity, and the reconstruction of working life. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Netterstrom B, Kristensen TS. Self-reported job strain increases the risk of ischaemic heart disease: a 14-year cohort study of employed Danish men. 2005. In: Fourth international conference on work environment and cardiovascular diseases, Newport Beach, March 9–11, 2005Google Scholar
- Niedhammer I (2002) Psychometric properties of the French version of the Karasek Job Content Questionnaire: a study of the scales of decision latitude, psychological demands, social support, and physical demands in the GAZEL cohort. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 75:129–144PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Niedhammer I, Chastang JF, Gendrey L, David S, Degioanni S (2006) Propriétés psychométriques de la version française des échelles de la demande psychologique, de la latitude décisionnelle et du soutien social du “Job Content Questionnaire” de Karasek: résultats de l’enquête nationale SUMER. Santé Publique 18:413–427PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Theorell T, Tsutsumi A, Hallquist J, Reuterwall C, Hogstedt C, Fredlund P, Emlund N, Johnson JV (1998) Decision latitude, job strain, and myocardial infarction: a study of working men in Stockholm. The SHEEP Study Group. Stockholm Heart epidemiology Program. Am J Public Health 88:382–388PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar