Ghent University Academic Bibliography

Advanced

Occupation-differential construct validity of the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) psychological job demands scale with physical job demands items: a mixed methods research

BongKyoo Choi, Alicia Kurowski, Meg Bond, Dean Baker, Els Clays UGent, Dirk De Bacquer UGent and Laura Punnett (2012) ERGONOMICS. 55(4). p.425-439
abstract
The construct validity of the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) psychological demands scale in relationship to physical demands has been inconsistent. This study aims to test quantitatively and qualitatively whether the scale validity differs by occupation. Hierarchical clustering analyses of 10 JCQ psychological and physical demands items were conducted in 61 occupations from two datasets: one of non-faculty workers at a university in the United States (6 occupations with 208 total workers) and the other of a Belgian working population (55 occupations with 13,039 total workers). The psychological and physical demands items overlapped in 13 of 61 occupation-stratified clustering analyses. Most of the overlaps occurred in physically-demanding occupations and involved the two psychological demands items, 'work fast' and 'work hard'. Generally, the scale reliability was low in such occupations. Additionally, interviews with eight university workers revealed that workers interpreted the two psychological demands items differently by the nature of their tasks. The scale validity was occupation-differential. Practitioner Summary: The JCQ psychological job demands scale as a job demand measure has been used worldwide in many studies. This study indicates that the wordings of the 'work fast' and 'work hard' items of the scale need to be reworded enough to differentiate mental and physical job demands as intended, 'psychological.'
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
year
type
journalArticle (original)
publication status
published
subject
keyword
interview, COEFFICIENTS, ALPHA, SUPPORT, VERSION, HEALTH, RELIABILITY, INTERNAL CONSISTENCY, DECISION LATITUDE, Belgium, PSYCHOSOCIAL WORK-ENVIRONMENT, PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES, reliability, clustering analysis, the United States
journal title
ERGONOMICS
Ergonomics
volume
55
issue
4
pages
425 - 439
Web of Science type
Article
Web of Science id
000303584000004
JCR category
ERGONOMICS
JCR impact factor
1.674 (2012)
JCR rank
3/16 (2012)
JCR quartile
1 (2012)
ISSN
0014-0139
DOI
10.1080/00140139.2011.645887
language
English
UGent publication?
yes
classification
A1
copyright statement
I have transferred the copyright for this publication to the publisher
id
2140927
handle
http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-2140927
date created
2012-06-12 16:17:56
date last changed
2015-06-17 10:05:08
@article{2140927,
  abstract     = {The construct validity of the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) psychological demands scale in relationship to physical demands has been inconsistent. This study aims to test quantitatively and qualitatively whether the scale validity differs by occupation. Hierarchical clustering analyses of 10 JCQ psychological and physical demands items were conducted in 61 occupations from two datasets: one of non-faculty workers at a university in the United States (6 occupations with 208 total workers) and the other of a Belgian working population (55 occupations with 13,039 total workers). The psychological and physical demands items overlapped in 13 of 61 occupation-stratified clustering analyses. Most of the overlaps occurred in physically-demanding occupations and involved the two psychological demands items, 'work fast' and 'work hard'. Generally, the scale reliability was low in such occupations. Additionally, interviews with eight university workers revealed that workers interpreted the two psychological demands items differently by the nature of their tasks. The scale validity was occupation-differential. 
Practitioner Summary: The JCQ psychological job demands scale as a job demand measure has been used worldwide in many studies. This study indicates that the wordings of the 'work fast' and 'work hard' items of the scale need to be reworded enough to differentiate mental and physical job demands as intended, 'psychological.'},
  author       = {Choi, BongKyoo and Kurowski, Alicia and Bond, Meg and Baker, Dean and Clays, Els and De Bacquer, Dirk and Punnett, Laura},
  issn         = {0014-0139},
  journal      = {ERGONOMICS},
  keyword      = {interview,COEFFICIENTS,ALPHA,SUPPORT,VERSION,HEALTH,RELIABILITY,INTERNAL CONSISTENCY,DECISION LATITUDE,Belgium,PSYCHOSOCIAL WORK-ENVIRONMENT,PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES,reliability,clustering analysis,the United States},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {4},
  pages        = {425--439},
  title        = {Occupation-differential construct validity of the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) psychological job demands scale with physical job demands items: a mixed methods research},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2011.645887},
  volume       = {55},
  year         = {2012},
}

Chicago
Choi, BongKyoo, Alicia Kurowski, Meg Bond, Dean Baker, Els Clays, Dirk De Bacquer, and Laura Punnett. 2012. “Occupation-differential Construct Validity of the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) Psychological Job Demands Scale with Physical Job Demands Items: a Mixed Methods Research.” Ergonomics 55 (4): 425–439.
APA
Choi, BongKyoo, Kurowski, A., Bond, M., Baker, D., Clays, E., De Bacquer, D., & Punnett, L. (2012). Occupation-differential construct validity of the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) psychological job demands scale with physical job demands items: a mixed methods research. ERGONOMICS, 55(4), 425–439.
Vancouver
1.
Choi B, Kurowski A, Bond M, Baker D, Clays E, De Bacquer D, et al. Occupation-differential construct validity of the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) psychological job demands scale with physical job demands items: a mixed methods research. ERGONOMICS. 2012;55(4):425–39.
MLA
Choi, BongKyoo, Alicia Kurowski, Meg Bond, et al. “Occupation-differential Construct Validity of the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) Psychological Job Demands Scale with Physical Job Demands Items: a Mixed Methods Research.” ERGONOMICS 55.4 (2012): 425–439. Print.