The Survey Measure of Psychological Safety and Its Association with Mental Health and Job Performance: A Validation Study and Cross-Sectional Analysis

Natsu Sasaki, Akiomi Inoue, Hiroki Asaoka, Yuki Sekiya, Daisuke Nishi, Akizumi Tsutsumi and Kotaro Imamura ()
Additional contact information
Natsu Sasaki: Department of Mental Health, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan
Akiomi Inoue: Institutional Research Center, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, Kitakyushu 807-8555, Japan
Hiroki Asaoka: Department of Psychiatric Nursing, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan
Yuki Sekiya: Department of Mental Health, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan
Daisuke Nishi: Department of Mental Health, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan
Akizumi Tsutsumi: Department of Public Health, School of Medicine, Kitasato University, Sagamihara 252-0374, Japan
Kotaro Imamura: Department of Mental Health, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 19, issue 16, 1-14

Abstract: Objectives: This study validated the Japanese version of O’Donovan et al.’s (2020) composite measure of the psychological safety scale and examined the associations of psychological safety with mental health and job-related outcomes. Methods: Online surveys were administered twice to Japanese employees in teams of more than three members. Internal consistency and test–retest reliability were tested using Cronbach’s α and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), respectively. Structural validity was examined using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Convergent validity was tested using Pearson’s correlation coefficients. Multiple linear regression analyses were conducted to examine the relationship between psychological safety and psychological distress, work engagement, job performance, and job satisfaction. Results: Two hundred healthcare workers and 200 non-healthcare workers were analyzed. Internal consistency, test–retest reliability, and convergent validity were acceptable. CFA demonstrated poor fit, and EFA yielded a two-factor structure, with team leader as one factor and peers and team forming the second factor. The total score showed significant and expected associations with all outcomes in the adjusted model for all workers. Conclusions: The Japanese version of the measure of the psychological safety scale presented good reliability and validity. Psychological safety is important for employees’ mental health and performance.

Keywords: occupational health; leadership; mental health; workplace climate; worksite (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/16/9879/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/16/9879/ (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:19:y:2022:i:16:p:9879-:d:885336

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 ().