The Quality of Work Life Scale: Validity Evidence from Brazil and Portugal

Abstract

Quality of work life (QWL) is an important construct, based on satisfaction of worker’s needs. It is strongly related to higher work engagement and lower burnout. To properly establish comparisons between countries’ QWL with a psychometric instrument, the measure must show validity evidence, namely in terms of measurement invariance. This study aims to assess the validity evidence of the Quality of Work Life Scale (QWLS) by examining the internal structure of the measure (i.e., dimensionality, reliability, and measurement invariance) and its relations with other variables such as burnout and work engagement. The measure was tested using a total sample of 1163 workers, 566 workers from Portugal, and 597 from Brazil. The data had a good fit to the QWLS second-order model and good reliability estimates for the two countries. Full-uniqueness measurement invariance was achieved for data for Portugal and Brazil and for gender too. The measure also demonstrated good nomological validity evidence by successfully predicting burnout and work engagement.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

Notes

  1. 1.

    Although only the study by Afsar and Burcu (2014) reported individual estimates for each of the first-order factors.

  2. 2.

    According ISCO-08 (International Labour Office 2012) this group includes science, engineering, health, teaching, business and administration, or information and communication technology professionals.

References

  1. Abdollahzade, F., Asghari, E., Asghari Jafarabadi, M., Mohammadi, F., Rohan, A., & Mardani-Kivi, M. (2016). Predictive factors of quality of work life among operating room nurses in training hospitals. Journal of Guilan University of Medical Sciences, 25(99), 57–68 http://journal.gums.ac.ir/article-1-1285-en.html.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Afsar, S. T., & Burcu, E. (2014). The adaptation and validation of quality of work life scale to Turkish culture. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 9(4), 897–910. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-013-9276-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Alban, M. (2018). The degradation of Brazilian socioeconomics. Brazilian Journal of Political Economy, 38(1), 167–183. https://doi.org/10.1590/0101-31572018v38n01a10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Arndt, A. D., Singhapakdi, A., & Tam, V. (2015). Consumers as employees: The impact of social responsibility on quality of work life among Australian engineers. Social Responsibility Journal, 11(1), 98–108. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-06-2013-0075.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2008). Towards a model of work engagement. Career Development International, 13(3), 209–223. https://doi.org/10.1108/13620430810870476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Verbeke, W. (2004). Using the job demands-resources model to predict burnout and performance. Human Resource Management, 43(1), 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Sanz-Vergel, A. I. (2014). Burnout and work engagement: The JD–R approach. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 389–411. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2017). Highlights of women’s earnings in 2016 (no. 1069). Washington, DC: Author https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/womens-earnings/2016/pdf/home.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Buse, A. (1982). The likelihood ratio, Wald, and Lagrange multiplier tests: An expository note. The American Statistician, 36(3a), 153–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.1982.10482817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410600219.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Campos, J. A. D. B., Carlotto, M. S., & Marôco, J. (2012). Oldenburg burnout inventory - student version: Cultural adaptation and validation into Portuguese. Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 25(4), 709–718. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-79722012000400010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cardoso, A. R., Guimarães, P., & Portugal, P. (2016). What drives the gender wage gap? A look at the role of firm and job-title heterogeneity. Oxford Economic Papers, 68(2), 506–524. https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/gpv069.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Cavalcanti, L., Oliveira, A. T. de, Araujo, D., & Tonhati, T. (Eds.). (2017). A inserção dos imigrantes no mercado de trabalho brasileiro: Relatório anual 2017. Brasília: OBMigra http://obmigra.mte.gov.br/index.php/relatorio-anual.

  15. Cetrano, G., Tedeschi, F., Rabbi, L., Gosetti, G., Lora, A., Lamonaca, D., Manthorpe, J., & Amaddeo, F. (2017). How are compassion fatigue, burnout, and compassion satisfaction affected by quality of working life? Findings from a survey of mental health staff in Italy. BMC Health Services Research, 17(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-2726-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Chan, K. W., & Wyatt, T. A. (2007). Quality of work life: A study of employees in Shanghai, China. Asia Pacific Business Review, 13(4), 501–517. https://doi.org/10.1080/13602380701250681.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9(2), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Connerley, M. L., & Wu, J. (Eds.). (2016). Handbook on well-being of working women. Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9897-6.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Costa, H. A., & Costa, E. S. (2017). Precariousness and call Centre work: Operators’ perceptions in Portugal and Brazil. European Journal of Industrial Relations, 24, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959680117736626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Danna, K., & Griffin, R. W. (1999). Health and well-being in the workplace: A review and synthesis of the literature. Journal of Management, 25(3), 357–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. de Freitas, A. B. (2007). Traços brasileiros para uma análise organizacional. In F. C. P. Motta & M. P. Caldas (Eds.), Cultura organizacional e cultura brasileira (pp. 38–54). São Paulo: Atlas.

    Google Scholar 

  22. de Holanda, S. B. (2012). O homem cordial. São Paulo: Penguin & Companhia das Letras.

    Google Scholar 

  23. de Jong, M., de Boer, A. G. E. M., Tamminga, S. J., & Frings-Dresen, M. H. W. (2015). Quality of working life issues of employees with a chronic physical disease: A systematic review. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 25(1), 182–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-014-9517-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Demerouti, E., & Bakker, A. B. (2008). The Oldenburg burnout inventory: A good alternative to measure burnout and engagement. In J. R. B. Halbesleben (Ed.), Handbook of stress and burnout in health care (pp. 65–78). New York: Nova Science.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Dias, S., Queirós, C., & Carlotto, M. S. (2010). Burnout syndrome and associated factors among health professionals: A comparative study between Brazil and Portugal. Aletheia, 32, 4–21.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Donnelly, K., Twenge, J. M., Clark, M. A., Shaikh, S. K., Beiler-May, A., & Carter, N. T. (2016). Attitudes toward women’s work and family roles in the United States, 1976–2013. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 40(1), 41–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361684315590774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Easton, S. A., & Van Laar, D. L. (2018). User manual for the Work-Related Quality of Life (WRQoL) scale: A mesure of quality of working life (2nd ed.). Portsmouth: University of Portsmouth All. https://doi.org/10.17029/EASTON2018.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Easton, S. A., Van Laar, D. L., & Marlow-Vardy, R. (2013). Quality of working life and the police. Management, 3(3), 135–141. https://doi.org/10.5923/j.mm.20130303.01.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Efraty, D., & Sirgy, M. J. (1990). The effects of quality of working life (QWL) on employee behavioral responses. Social Indicators Research, 22(1), 31–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00286389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Elizur, D., & Shye, S. (1990). Quality of work life and its relation to quality of life. Applied Psychology. An International Review, 39(3), 275–291. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.1990.tb01054.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Ernst Kossek, E., & Ozeki, C. (1998). Work-family conflict, policies, and the job-life satisfaction relationship: A review and directions for organizational behavior-human resources research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(2), 139–149. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.2.139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Eurofound. (2017). Sixth European Working Conditions Survey - Overview report (2017 update). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2806/422172.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Finney, S. J., & DiStefano, C. (2013). Non-normal and categorical data in structural equation modeling. In G. R. Hancock & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (2nd ed., pp. 439–492). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Garibaldi de Hilal, A. V. (2009). In E. H. Kessler & D. J. Wong-MingJi (Eds.), Cultural mythology and global leadership. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Green, J. N., Langland, V., & Schwarcz, L. M. (Eds.). (2019). The Brazil reader: History, culture, politics (2nd ed.). Durham: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Greenan, N., Kalugina, E., & Walkowiaky, E. (2014). Has the quality of working life improved in the EU-15 between 1995 and 2005? Industrial and Corporate Change, 23(2), 399–428. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtt012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis: Pearson new international edition (7th ed.). Harlow: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Hays, W. L. (1963). Statistics for psychologists. New York: Holt, Rinehart, Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2–3), 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152X.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Hofstede, G., Garibaldi de Hilal, A. V., Malvezzi, S., Tanure, B., & Vinken, H. (2010). Comparing regional cultures within a country: Lessons from Brazil. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 41(3), 336–352. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022109359696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Højsgaard, S., & Halekoh, U. (2018). doBy: Groupwise statistics, LSmeans, linear contrasts, utilities (R package version 4.6–2) [Computer software]. https://cran.r-project.org/package=doBy.

  43. Horst, C., Pereira, S., & Sheringham, O. (2016). The impact of class on feedback mechanisms: Brazilian migration to Norway, Portugal and the United Kingdom. In O. Bakewell, G. Engbersen, M. L. Fonseca, & C. Horst (Eds.), Beyond networks: Feedback in international migration (pp. 90–112). London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137539212_5.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Hsu, M.-Y. (2016). A quality of working life survey instrument for hospital nurses. Journal of Nursing Research, 24(1), 87–99. https://doi.org/10.1097/jnr.0000000000000098.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. International Labour Office. (2012). International standard classification of occupations. Isco-08 (Vol. I). Geneva: International Labour Organization. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.1419.3126.

    Google Scholar 

  47. International Organization for Migration (Ed.). (2017). World migration report 2018. Geneva: Author https://www.iom.int/wmr/world-migration-report-2018.

    Google Scholar 

  48. International Test Commission. (2018). ITC guidelines for translating and adapting tests (second edition). International Journal of Testing, 18(2), 101–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/15305058.2017.1398166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Jenaro, C., Flores, N., Orgaz, M. B., & Cruz, M. (2011). Vigour and dedication in nursing professionals: Towards a better understanding of work engagement. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 67(4), 865–875. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2010.05526.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Jorge, M. R. (1998). Adaptação transcultural de instrumentos de pesquisa em saúde mental. Revista de Psiquiatria Clínica, 25(5), 233–239.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Jorgensen, T. D., Pornprasertmanit, S., Schoemann, A. M., & Rosseel, Y. (2018). semTools: Useful tools for structural equation modeling (R package version 0.5–1) [Computer software]. https://cran.r-project.org/package=semTools.

  52. Kanten, S., & Sadullah, O. (2012). An empirical research on relationship quality of work life and work engagement. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 62, 360–366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Knox, S., & Irving, J. A. (1997). An interactive quality of work life model applied to organizational transition. The Journal of Nursing Administration, 27(1), 39–47. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005110-199701000-00009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Koonmee, K., & Virakul, B. (2007). Ethics, quality of work life, and employee job-related outcomes: A survey of HR and marketing managers in Thai business. NIDA Development Journal, 47(4), 67–97. https://doi.org/10.14456/ndj.2007.3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Koonmee, K., Singhapakdi, A., Virakul, B., & Lee, D.-J. (2010). Ethics institutionalization, quality of work life, and employee job-related outcomes: A survey of human resource managers in Thailand. Journal of Business Research, 63(1), 20–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.01.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Lau, R. S. M., & May, B. E. (1998). A win-win paradigm for quality of work life and business performance. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 9(3), 211–226. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.3920090302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Lee, D.-J., Singhapakdi, A., & Sirgy, M. J. (2007). Further validation of a need-based quality-of-work-life (QWL) measure: Evidence from marketing practitioners. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 2(4), 273–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-008-9042-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Lewis, J. (2009). Work–family balance, gender and policy. Northampton: Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781848447400.

    Google Scholar 

  59. LimeSurvey GmbH. (2017). LimeSurvey: An open source survey tool [computer software]. Hamburg: Author http://www.limesurvey.org.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Louis, K. S. (1998). Effects of teacher quality of work life in secondary schools on commitment and sense of efficacy. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/0924345980090101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Lyonette, C., Crompton, R., & Wall, K. (2007). Gender, occupational class and work-life conflict: A comparison of Britain and Portugal. Community, Work & Family, 10(3), 283–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668800701456245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Mardia, K. V. (1970). Measures of multivariate skewness and kurtosis with applications. Biometrika, 57(3), 519–530. https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/57.3.519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Marôco, J. (2014). Análise de equações estruturais: Fundamentos teóricos, software & aplicações (2nd ed.). Pêro Pinheiro: ReportNumber.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Marôco, J., Campos, J. A. D. B., Vinagre, M. d. G., & Pais-Ribeiro, J. L. (2014). Adaptação transcultural Brasil-Portugal da Escala de Satisfação com o Suporte Social para estudantes do ensino superior. Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 27(2), 247–256. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-7153.201427205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Marta, J. K. M., Singhapakdi, A., Lee, D.-J., Sirgy, M. J., Koonmee, K., & Virakul, B. (2013). Perceptions about ethics institutionalization and quality of work life: Thai versus American marketing managers. Journal of Business Research, 66(3), 381–389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.08.019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Martel, J.-P., & Dupuis, G. (2006). Quality of work life: Theoretical and methodological problems, and resentation of a new model and measuring instrument. Social Indicators Research, 77(2), 333–368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-004-5368-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. McNamara, A., Arino de la Rubia, E., Zhu, H., Ellis, S., & Quinn, M. (2018). Skimr: Compact and flexible summaries of data (R package version 1.0.3) [Computer software]. https://cran.r-project.org/package=skimr.

  68. Millsap, R. E., & Yun-Tein, J. (2004). Assessing factorial invariance in ordered-categorical measures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39(3), 479–515. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327906MBR3903_4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Mohan, K. P., & Suppareakchaisakul, N. (2014). Psychosocial correlates of the quality of work life among university teachers in Thailand and Malaysia. International Journal of Behavioral science, 9(2), 1–16 https://www.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/IJBS/article/view/20099/pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Motta, F. C. P. (2007). Cultura e organizações no Brasil. In F. C. P. Motta & M. P. Caldas (Eds.), Cultura organizacional e cultura brasileira (pp. 25–37). São Paulo: Atlas.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Muthén, B. O. (1983). Latent variable structural equation modeling with categorical data. Journal of Econometrics, 22(1–2), 43–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(83)90093-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Nimalathasan, B., & Ather, S. M. (2010). Quality of work life (QoWL) and job satisfaction (JS): A study of academic professionals of private universities in Bangladesh. In Annual Research Conference (ARC)-2010. Jaffna, Sri Lanka: University of Jaffna.

  73. OECD. (2018). International migration outlook 2018. Paris: Author. https://doi.org/10.1787/migr_outlook-2018-en.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Ollier-Malaterre, A., & Foucreault, A. (2017). Cross-national work-life research: Cultural and structural impacts for individuals and organizations. Journal of Management, 43(1), 111–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316655873.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Page, K. M., & Vella-Brodrick, D. A. (2012). From nonmalfeasance to beneficence: Key criteria, approaches, and ethical issues relating to positive employee health and well-being. In N. P. Reilly, M. J. Sirgy, & C. A. Gorman (Eds.), Work and quality of life: Ethical practices in organizations (pp. 463–489). Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4059-4_25.

    Google Scholar 

  76. R Core Team. (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing (version 3.5.1) [computer software]. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing https://www.r-project.org/.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Ramawickrama, J., Opatha, H. H. D. N. P., & Pushpakumari, M. D. (2017). Quality of work life, job satisfaction, and the facets of the relationship between the two constructs. International Business Research, 10(4), 167–182. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v10n4p167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Rastogi, M., Rangnekar, S., & Rastogi, R. (2018). Psychometric evaluation of need-based quality of work life scale in an Indian sample. Industrial and Commercial Training, 50(1), 10–19. https://doi.org/10.1108/ICT-06-2017-0041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Reis, R. (2015). Looking for a success in the euro crisis adjustment programs: The case of Portugal. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 458, 433–458. https://doi.org/10.1353/eca.2015.0010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Revelle, W. (2018). psych: Procedures for psychological, psychometric, and personality research (R package version 1.8.12) [Computer software]. Evanston: Northwestern University https://cran.r-project.org/package=psych.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Rosa, A. R., Tureta, C., & Brito, M. J. d. (2006). Cultura organizacional e cultura brasileira revisitadas: Uma atualização hermenêutica do dilema brasileiro. Revista Eletrônica de Gestão Organizacional, 4(3), 3–17 https://periodicos.ufpe.br/revistas/gestaoorg/article/view/21482.

    Google Scholar 

  82. Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. RStudio Team. (2018). RStudio: Integrated development for R (version 1.1.463) [Computer software]. Boston: RStudio, Inc http://www.rstudio.com/.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Rudnev, M., Lytkina, E., Davidov, E., Schmidt, P., & Zick, A. (2018). Testing measurement invariance for a second-order factor. A cross-national test of the alienation scale. Methods, Data, Analyses, 12(1), 47–76. https://doi.org/10.12758/mda.2017.11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Saha, S., & Kumar, S. P. (2016). Empirical validation of dimensionality of quality of work life in India. International Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research, 14(6), 4253–4266 http://www.serialsjournals.com/serialjournalmanager/pdf/1499751958.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  86. Santos, C., & Garibaldi de Hilal, A. V. (2018). Same, same but different? Women’s experiences with gender inequality in Brazil. Employee Relations, 40(3), 486–499. https://doi.org/10.1108/ER-04-2017-0094.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (2001). A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moment structure analysis. Psychometrika, 66(4), 507–514. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02296192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(3), 293–315. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). Defining and measuring work engagement: Bringing clarity to the concept. In A. B. Bakker & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (pp. 10–24). New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  90. Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 3(1), 71–92. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015630930326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Serviço de Estrangeiros e Fronteiras. (2018). Relatório de imigração, fronteiras e asilo 2017. Lisbon: Author http://sefstat.sef.pt/Docs/Rifa_2014.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Singhapakdi, A., Sirgy, M. J., Lee, D.-J., Senasu, K., Yu, G. B., & Nisius, A. M. (2014). Gender disparity in job satisfaction of Western versus Asian managers. Journal of Business Research, 67(6), 1257–1266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.04.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Sinval, J., Pasian, S. R., Queirós, C., & Marôco, J. (2018). Brazil-Portugal transcultural adaptation of the UWES-9: Internal consistency, dimensionality, and measurement invariance. Frontiers in Psychology, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00353.

  94. Sinval, J., Queirós, C., Pasian, S. R., & Marôco, J. (2019). Transcultural adaptation of the Oldenburg burnout inventory (OLBI) for Brazil and Portugal. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00338.

  95. Sirgy, M. J. (2001). Handbook of quality-of-life research: An ethical marketing perspective. Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9837-8.

    Google Scholar 

  96. Sirgy, M. J., Efraty, D., Siegel, P., & Lee, D.-J. (2001). A new measure of quality of work life (QWL) based on need satisfaction and spillover theories. Social Indicators Research, 55(3), 241–302. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010986923468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Souza, J. C., Paiva, T., & Reimão, R. (2008). Sleep, quality of life and accidents in the lives of Brazilian and Portuguese truck drivers. Psicologia em Estudo, 13(3), 429–436. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-73722008000300003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  98. Stallones, L. (2004). Women in the workforce. In S. Loue & M. Sajatovic (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Women’s Health (pp. 32–40). Boston: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-306-48113-0_4.

    Google Scholar 

  99. Taher, A. (2013). Variations of quality of work life of academic professionals in Bangladesh: A discriminant analysis. European Journal of Training and Development, 37(6), 580–595. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-05-2013-0060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  100. Tuuli, P., & Karisalmi, S. (1999). Impact of working life quality on burnout. Experimental Aging Research, 25(4), 441–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/036107399243922.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  101. Van Laar, D. L., Edwards, J. A., & Easton, S. A. (2007). The work-related quality of life scale for healthcare workers. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 60(3), 325–333. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04409.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  102. Vargas, C., Sarmento, C., & Oliveira, P. (2017). Cultural networks between Portugal and Brazil: A postcolonial review. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 23(3), 300–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286632.2015.1056175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  103. Zin, R. M. (2004). Perception of professional engineers toward quality of worklife and organizational commitment. Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business, 6(3), 323–334 https://journal.ugm.ac.id/gamaijb/article/view/5553/4524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank: the Portuguese national occupational health program of the Directorate-General of Health (DGS) and the William James Center for Research, Portuguese Science Foundation (FCT UID/PSI/04810/2013). This work was produced with the support of INCD funded by FCT and FEDER under the project 22153-01/SAICT/2016.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to João Marôco.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sinval, J., Sirgy, M.J., Lee, DJ. et al. The Quality of Work Life Scale: Validity Evidence from Brazil and Portugal. Applied Research Quality Life 15, 1323–1351 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-019-09730-3

Download citation

Keywords

  • Quality of work life
  • Quality of work life scale
  • Brazil
  • Portugal
  • Measurement invariance