Cargando…
Workplace Assessment Scale: Pilot Validation Study
First responders, such as police officers, paramedics, and firefighters are at an increased risk of experiencing negative mental health outcomes compared to the general population. This predisposition can partially be attributed to common occupational stressors, which may provoke strong feelings of...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9566622/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36231726 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191912408 |
_version_ | 1784809195053252608 |
---|---|
author | Huang, Eileen Edgar, Nicole E. MacLean, Sarah E. Hatcher, Simon |
author_facet | Huang, Eileen Edgar, Nicole E. MacLean, Sarah E. Hatcher, Simon |
author_sort | Huang, Eileen |
collection | PubMed |
description | First responders, such as police officers, paramedics, and firefighters are at an increased risk of experiencing negative mental health outcomes compared to the general population. This predisposition can partially be attributed to common occupational stressors, which may provoke strong feelings of betrayal and humiliation. The Workplace Assessment Scale (WAS) was developed as there is currently no appropriate measure to assess such feelings in the first responder population. Initial development of the WAS included a Betrayal Subscale and the Humiliation Subscale, each comprised of 5 Likert scale questions which ask participants to report the frequency at which they experience specific feelings associated with their workplace. This pilot validation study was conducted to determine if there is preliminary evidence to support a large-scale validation study. To determine this, we assessed the internal structure and the convergent, concurrent, and predictive validity of the WAS. Based on 21/22 (95%) participant responses, a factor analysis did not support the two-factor model we anticipated, with only one factor and seven items retained from the original version of the scale. However, the internal consistency of the remaining items was strong. The validity analysis found moderate convergent validity and weak predictive validity based on correlations between the WAS and other psychometric scales. Minimal concurrent validity was noted. Additional research is needed for further analysis and validation of the WAS. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9566622 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-95666222022-10-15 Workplace Assessment Scale: Pilot Validation Study Huang, Eileen Edgar, Nicole E. MacLean, Sarah E. Hatcher, Simon Int J Environ Res Public Health Article First responders, such as police officers, paramedics, and firefighters are at an increased risk of experiencing negative mental health outcomes compared to the general population. This predisposition can partially be attributed to common occupational stressors, which may provoke strong feelings of betrayal and humiliation. The Workplace Assessment Scale (WAS) was developed as there is currently no appropriate measure to assess such feelings in the first responder population. Initial development of the WAS included a Betrayal Subscale and the Humiliation Subscale, each comprised of 5 Likert scale questions which ask participants to report the frequency at which they experience specific feelings associated with their workplace. This pilot validation study was conducted to determine if there is preliminary evidence to support a large-scale validation study. To determine this, we assessed the internal structure and the convergent, concurrent, and predictive validity of the WAS. Based on 21/22 (95%) participant responses, a factor analysis did not support the two-factor model we anticipated, with only one factor and seven items retained from the original version of the scale. However, the internal consistency of the remaining items was strong. The validity analysis found moderate convergent validity and weak predictive validity based on correlations between the WAS and other psychometric scales. Minimal concurrent validity was noted. Additional research is needed for further analysis and validation of the WAS. MDPI 2022-09-29 /pmc/articles/PMC9566622/ /pubmed/36231726 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191912408 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Huang, Eileen Edgar, Nicole E. MacLean, Sarah E. Hatcher, Simon Workplace Assessment Scale: Pilot Validation Study |
title | Workplace Assessment Scale: Pilot Validation Study |
title_full | Workplace Assessment Scale: Pilot Validation Study |
title_fullStr | Workplace Assessment Scale: Pilot Validation Study |
title_full_unstemmed | Workplace Assessment Scale: Pilot Validation Study |
title_short | Workplace Assessment Scale: Pilot Validation Study |
title_sort | workplace assessment scale: pilot validation study |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9566622/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36231726 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191912408 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT huangeileen workplaceassessmentscalepilotvalidationstudy AT edgarnicolee workplaceassessmentscalepilotvalidationstudy AT macleansarahe workplaceassessmentscalepilotvalidationstudy AT hatchersimon workplaceassessmentscalepilotvalidationstudy |