What Does a Single-Item Measure of Job Stressfulness Assess?

Jonathan Houdmont, Liza Jachens, Raymond Randall, Sadie Hopson, Sean Nuttall and Stamatia Pamia
Additional contact information
Jonathan Houdmont: Centre for Organizational Health and Development, Division of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, B Floor, Yang Fujia Building, Jubilee Campus, Wollaton Road, Nottingham NG8 1BB, UK
Liza Jachens: Psychology, Sociology and Professional Counselling, Webster University, 1293 Geneva, Switzerland
Raymond Randall: Management School, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 1FL, UK
Sadie Hopson: Centre for Organizational Health and Development, Division of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, B Floor, Yang Fujia Building, Jubilee Campus, Wollaton Road, Nottingham NG8 1BB, UK
Sean Nuttall: Centre for Organizational Health and Development, Division of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, B Floor, Yang Fujia Building, Jubilee Campus, Wollaton Road, Nottingham NG8 1BB, UK
Stamatia Pamia: Centre for Organizational Health and Development, Division of Psychiatry and Applied Psychology, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, B Floor, Yang Fujia Building, Jubilee Campus, Wollaton Road, Nottingham NG8 1BB, UK

IJERPH, 2019, vol. 16, issue 9, 1-15

Abstract: Single-item measures of global job stressfulness are increasingly used in occupational health research, yet their construct validity remains unexplored. This study used a qualitative approach to identify frames of reference that underlie self-ratings on such a measure. Data were collected from a convenience sample of 55 adults in full-time employment who completed a single-item measure inviting a rating of the extent to which their job is generally stressful. A cognitive interview schedule was used to explore the factors taken into account when providing a global rating, with thematic analysis applied to identify themes in the interview transcripts. The most common frames of reference were the presence of problematic psychosocial working conditions, particularly job demands. Health characteristics, predominantly poor psychological wellbeing, emerged as a further less dominant secondary theme. Almost half the sample cited four or more referents. In terms of the timeframe under consideration, most participants referred to a long timeframe such as their work in general, with some specifying their current job and, a few, recent weeks. These findings shed light on the frames of reference used to inform judgements on global job stressfulness elicited by a single-item measure and in doing so contribute to the evidence base to support the application of such measures in occupational health research and organisational psychosocial risk management activities.

Keywords: cognitive interview; psychosocial working conditions; psychological wellbeing; single-item measure; construct validity (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/9/1480/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/9/1480/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:9:p:1480-:d:226111

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().