Advanced

Testing two methods to create comparable scale scores between the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) and JCQ-Like questionnaires in the European JACE study

Karasek, Robert; Choi, BongKyoo; Östergren, Per-Olof LU ; Ferrario, Marco and De Smet, Patrick (2007) In International Journal of Behavioral Medicine 14(4). p.189-201
Abstract
Background: Scale comparative properties of "JCQ-Iike" questionnaires with respect to the JCQ have been little known. Purpose: Assessing validity and reliability of two methods for generating comparable scale scores between the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) and JCQ-like questionnaires in sub-populations of the large Job Stress, Absenteeism and Coronary Heart Disease European Cooperative (JACE) study: the Swedish version of Demand-Control Questionnaire (DCQ) and a transformed Multinational Monitoring of Trends and Determinants in Cardiovascular Disease Project (MONICA) questionnaire. Method: A random population sample of all Malmo males and females aged 52-58 (n = 682) years was given a new test questionnaire with both instruments (the... (More)
Background: Scale comparative properties of "JCQ-Iike" questionnaires with respect to the JCQ have been little known. Purpose: Assessing validity and reliability of two methods for generating comparable scale scores between the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) and JCQ-like questionnaires in sub-populations of the large Job Stress, Absenteeism and Coronary Heart Disease European Cooperative (JACE) study: the Swedish version of Demand-Control Questionnaire (DCQ) and a transformed Multinational Monitoring of Trends and Determinants in Cardiovascular Disease Project (MONICA) questionnaire. Method: A random population sample of all Malmo males and females aged 52-58 (n = 682) years was given a new test questionnaire with both instruments (the JCQ and the DCQ). Comparability-facilitating algorithms were created (Method I). For the transformed Milan MONICA questionnaire, a simple weighting system was used (Method II). Results: The converted scale scores from the JCQ-Iike questionnaires were found to be reliable and highly correlated to those of the original JCQ. However, agreements for the high job strain group between the JCQ and the DCQ, and between the JCQ and the DCQ (Method I applied) were only moderate (Kappa). Use of a multiple level job strain scale generated higher levels of job strain agreement, as did a new job strain definition that excludes the intermediate levels of the job strain distribution. Conclusion: The two methods were valid and generally reliable. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
kappa, reliability, validity, job strain, instruments, scale comparability
in
International Journal of Behavioral Medicine
volume
14
issue
4
pages
189 - 201
publisher
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
external identifiers
  • wos:000251550600001
  • scopus:37049008722
ISSN
1070-5503
DOI
10.1080/10705500701638336
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
e431dd33-6790-4a0c-a307-0ae2f5d3c6ae (old id 965926)
date added to LUP
2008-01-30 08:22:44
date last changed
2017-10-08 03:24:59
@article{e431dd33-6790-4a0c-a307-0ae2f5d3c6ae,
  abstract     = {Background: Scale comparative properties of "JCQ-Iike" questionnaires with respect to the JCQ have been little known. Purpose: Assessing validity and reliability of two methods for generating comparable scale scores between the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) and JCQ-like questionnaires in sub-populations of the large Job Stress, Absenteeism and Coronary Heart Disease European Cooperative (JACE) study: the Swedish version of Demand-Control Questionnaire (DCQ) and a transformed Multinational Monitoring of Trends and Determinants in Cardiovascular Disease Project (MONICA) questionnaire. Method: A random population sample of all Malmo males and females aged 52-58 (n = 682) years was given a new test questionnaire with both instruments (the JCQ and the DCQ). Comparability-facilitating algorithms were created (Method I). For the transformed Milan MONICA questionnaire, a simple weighting system was used (Method II). Results: The converted scale scores from the JCQ-Iike questionnaires were found to be reliable and highly correlated to those of the original JCQ. However, agreements for the high job strain group between the JCQ and the DCQ, and between the JCQ and the DCQ (Method I applied) were only moderate (Kappa). Use of a multiple level job strain scale generated higher levels of job strain agreement, as did a new job strain definition that excludes the intermediate levels of the job strain distribution. Conclusion: The two methods were valid and generally reliable.},
  author       = {Karasek, Robert and Choi, BongKyoo and Östergren, Per-Olof and Ferrario, Marco and De Smet, Patrick},
  issn         = {1070-5503},
  keyword      = {kappa,reliability,validity,job strain,instruments,scale comparability},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {4},
  pages        = {189--201},
  publisher    = {Lawrence Erlbaum Associates},
  series       = {International Journal of Behavioral Medicine},
  title        = {Testing two methods to create comparable scale scores between the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) and JCQ-Like questionnaires in the European JACE study},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10705500701638336},
  volume       = {14},
  year         = {2007},
}