Psychometric analysis of the German version of the management standards indicator tool (MSIT-D)

IF 2.4 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH International Journal of Workplace Health Management Pub Date : 2023-12-26 DOI:10.1108/ijwhm-07-2023-0089
Ekaterina Uglanova, Rosanna Cousins, Jan Dettmers
{"title":"Psychometric analysis of the German version of the management standards indicator tool (MSIT-D)","authors":"Ekaterina Uglanova, Rosanna Cousins, Jan Dettmers","doi":"10.1108/ijwhm-07-2023-0089","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>This study aims to develop a reliable and valid German/Deutsch version of the management standards indicator tool (MSIT-D) to broaden the pool of instruments available to practitioners and to support international collaborations regarding this workplace management issue.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>The MSIT-D was translated from English to German, then its psychometric properties examined using data from British employees (n = 321) and German employees (n = 358). Confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) were used to evaluate the internal structure and measurement invariance, and Cronbach’s alpha was used to assess internal consistency. Comparisons were made with the German language risk assessment tool Fragebogen zur Gefährdungsbeurteilung psychischer Belastungen (FGBU) to examine concurrent and incremental validity. Criterion validity was checked using established measures of work-related health.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>The MSIT-D has an equivalent seven-factor structure (demands, control, managerial support, peer support, relationships, role and change) as the original; the analyses confirmed configural and metric measurement invariance with the original scale. The internal consistency of the scales ranged from 0.82 to 0.91. Regarding criterion validity, the MSIT-D was positively correlated with emotional exhaustion and psychosomatic complaints and negatively correlated with work engagement and workability. The analyses yielded meaningful correlations between the MSIT-D dimensions and the FGBU.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>This is the first study to develop a German version of the MSIT and confirm metric measurement invariance. This will allow a comparison of MSIT scores with related constructs between German- and English-speaking samples. As a reliable and valid instrument for assessing work-related stressors, the outcome of this study presents opportunities for developing a unified surveillance system for work-related stress at the European level.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":45766,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Workplace Health Management","volume":"121 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Workplace Health Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ijwhm-07-2023-0089","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to develop a reliable and valid German/Deutsch version of the management standards indicator tool (MSIT-D) to broaden the pool of instruments available to practitioners and to support international collaborations regarding this workplace management issue.

Design/methodology/approach

The MSIT-D was translated from English to German, then its psychometric properties examined using data from British employees (n = 321) and German employees (n = 358). Confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) were used to evaluate the internal structure and measurement invariance, and Cronbach’s alpha was used to assess internal consistency. Comparisons were made with the German language risk assessment tool Fragebogen zur Gefährdungsbeurteilung psychischer Belastungen (FGBU) to examine concurrent and incremental validity. Criterion validity was checked using established measures of work-related health.

Findings

The MSIT-D has an equivalent seven-factor structure (demands, control, managerial support, peer support, relationships, role and change) as the original; the analyses confirmed configural and metric measurement invariance with the original scale. The internal consistency of the scales ranged from 0.82 to 0.91. Regarding criterion validity, the MSIT-D was positively correlated with emotional exhaustion and psychosomatic complaints and negatively correlated with work engagement and workability. The analyses yielded meaningful correlations between the MSIT-D dimensions and the FGBU.

Originality/value

This is the first study to develop a German version of the MSIT and confirm metric measurement invariance. This will allow a comparison of MSIT scores with related constructs between German- and English-speaking samples. As a reliable and valid instrument for assessing work-related stressors, the outcome of this study presents opportunities for developing a unified surveillance system for work-related stress at the European level.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
德文版管理标准指标工具(MSIT-D)的心理测量分析
目的 本研究旨在开发可靠有效的德语/德文版管理标准指标工具(MSIT-D),以扩大可供从业人员使用的工具库,并为有关这一工作场所管理问题的国际合作提供支持。设计/方法/途径 MSIT-D 已从英语翻译成德语,然后使用英国员工(n = 321)和德国员工(n = 358)的数据对其心理测量特性进行了检验。确认性因子分析(CFA)用于评估内部结构和测量不变性,Cronbach's alpha 用于评估内部一致性。与德语风险评估工具 Fragebogen zur Gefährdungsbeurteilung psychischer Belastungen (FGBU) 进行了比较,以检查并发效度和增量效度。研究结果MSIT-D与原量表具有相同的七因素结构(要求、控制、管理支持、同伴支持、关系、角色和变化);分析证实了其与原量表在配置和度量测量上的不变性。量表的内部一致性介于 0.82 和 0.91 之间。在标准效度方面,MSIT-D 与情绪衰竭和心身不适呈正相关,与工作投入度和工作能力呈负相关。分析结果表明,MSIT-D 各维度与 FGBU 之间存在有意义的相关性。这将有助于在德语和英语样本之间对 MSIT 分数和相关结构进行比较。作为评估工作相关压力源的可靠有效工具,本研究成果为在欧洲层面开发统一的工作相关压力监测系统提供了机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Workplace Health Management
International Journal of Workplace Health Management PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
22.70%
发文量
37
期刊介绍: Coverage includes, but is not restricted to: ■Best practice examples of successful workplace health solutions ■Promoting compliance with workplace health legislation ■Primary care and primary prevention ■Promoting health in the workplace ■The business case for workplace health promotion ■Workplace health issues and concerns, such as mental health, disability management, violence and the workplace, stress, workplace hazards, risk factor modification and work-life balance ■Workplace Culture ■Workplace policies supporting healthy workplace ■Inducing organizational change ■Occupational health & safety issues ■Educating the employer and employee ■Promoting health outside of the workplace
期刊最新文献
“Happyfly” – an online intervention to improve the art-of-living and well-being among flight attendants How a United States Air Force wing built a hybrid work model that balances organizational needs and employee wellbeing Discriminations in remote work contexts: the pivotal role of diversity and equality management Home-office implementation: challenges and changes in people management Healthy, healthier, hybrid work: the burnout-reducing potential of remote work and the mediating effect of work autonomy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1