Enter your email address
Submit
Write your message
Volume 11, Issue 2 (Iranian Journal of Ergonomics 2023)
Iran J Ergon 2023, 11(2): 110-120 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Salmaninejaad A, Hasani M, Rezaian S. Investigating Psychometric Properties, the Workers’ Psychological Burden from the Perspective of Occupational Safety and Health. Iran J Ergon 2023; 11 (2) :110-120
URL: http://journal.iehfs.ir/article-1-977-en.html
URL: http://journal.iehfs.ir/article-1-977-en.html
1- Department of Environmental Engineering, Safety, Health and Environmental Engineering (HSE), Shahrood Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahrood, Iran
2- Department of Food Science and Technology, Shahrood Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahrood, Iran ,mhasani81@yahoo.com
3- Department of Environmental Engineering, Shahrood Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahrood, Iran
2- Department of Food Science and Technology, Shahrood Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahrood, Iran ,
3- Department of Environmental Engineering, Shahrood Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shahrood, Iran
Abstract: (1573 Views)
Objectives: Psychological load, such as workload, not only disrupts work performance but can also directly affect employee safety leadin to accidents. However, despite this issue, not much effort has been made to develop an assessment tool to measure the psychological burden related to the occupational safety and health of employees. Therefore, the present study was designed to validate the psychological burden scale of workers by Kim et al. (2018) from the perspective of occupational health and safety.
Methods: The statistical population of the research consisted of all the workers employed in the Eastern Alborz Company of Shahroud city, and 349 workers participated in the research using a simple random sampling method. In the present study, the mental load scale by Kim et al. (2018), the Copenhagen psychosocial scale (COPSOQ), and the occupational stress scale (HSE) were used. The data were analyzed using Pearson's correlation coefficient tests and confirmatory factor analysis using SPSS version 22 statistical software and Lisrel version 8.5.
Results: The results showed that all the components of workers' psychological burden including the overall score and the psychosocial scale and occupational stress scale have a positive and significant relationship. The results of the confirmatory factor analysis also indicated a good fit of the model in determining the factors in the initial form as proposed by Kim et al. (2018). To determine the reliability of the scale, the value of Pearson's correlation coefficient was obtained at 0.82 in the test and retest phases. Additionally, the results of this study showed that 26.1 percent of workers experienced low psychological burden, 49.6 percent experienced moderate psychological burden, and 24.4 percent experienced severe psychological burden.
Conclusion: Based on the results of the current research, the workers' mental burden scale (Kim et al., 2018) is a valid and reliable tool that can be used to evaluate the psychological burden of workers in research and intervention studies.
Methods: The statistical population of the research consisted of all the workers employed in the Eastern Alborz Company of Shahroud city, and 349 workers participated in the research using a simple random sampling method. In the present study, the mental load scale by Kim et al. (2018), the Copenhagen psychosocial scale (COPSOQ), and the occupational stress scale (HSE) were used. The data were analyzed using Pearson's correlation coefficient tests and confirmatory factor analysis using SPSS version 22 statistical software and Lisrel version 8.5.
Results: The results showed that all the components of workers' psychological burden including the overall score and the psychosocial scale and occupational stress scale have a positive and significant relationship. The results of the confirmatory factor analysis also indicated a good fit of the model in determining the factors in the initial form as proposed by Kim et al. (2018). To determine the reliability of the scale, the value of Pearson's correlation coefficient was obtained at 0.82 in the test and retest phases. Additionally, the results of this study showed that 26.1 percent of workers experienced low psychological burden, 49.6 percent experienced moderate psychological burden, and 24.4 percent experienced severe psychological burden.
Conclusion: Based on the results of the current research, the workers' mental burden scale (Kim et al., 2018) is a valid and reliable tool that can be used to evaluate the psychological burden of workers in research and intervention studies.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Industrial and Organizational Psychology
Received: 2023/10/22 | Accepted: 2023/09/17 | ePublished: 2023/09/17
Received: 2023/10/22 | Accepted: 2023/09/17 | ePublished: 2023/09/17
References
1. Kim KW, Lim HC, Park JH, Park SG, Park YJ, Cho HH. Developing a basic scale for workers' psychological burden from the perspective of occupational safety and health. Safety and Health at Work. 2018;9(2):224-31. [DOI:10.1016/j.shaw.2018.02.004] [PMID]
2. Lee WY. The interacting effects of cognitive failure, consciousness and job stress on safety behavior and accidents. Korean Journal of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. 2006;19(3):475-97.
3. Kim SJ, Chung EK. The effect of organizational justice as perceived by occupational drivers on traffic accidents: Mediating effects of job satisfaction. Journal of safety research. 2019;68:27-32. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jsr.2018.11.001] [PMID].
4. Fournier É, Kilgus D, Landry A, Hmedan B, Pellier D, Fiorino H, et al. The impacts of human-cobot collaboration on perceived cognitive load and usability during an industrial task: an exploratory experiment. IISE Transactions on Occupational Ergonomics and Human Factors. 2022;10(2):83-90. [DOI: 10.1080/24725838.2022.2072021] [PMID].
5. Blaug R, Kenyon A, Lekhi R. Stress at work. The work foundation, London. 2007.
6. Sharples S, Megaw T. The definition and measurement of human workload. Evaluation of human work. 2015:516-44.
7. Zhang Y, Luximon A. Subjective mental workload measures. Ergonomia. 2005;27(3).
8. Carswell CM, Clarke D, Seales WB. Assessing mental workload during laparoscopic surgery. Surg Innov . 2005;12(1):80-90. [DOI: 10.1177/155335060501200112] [PMID]
9. Dehais F, Lafont A, Roy R, Fairclough S. A neuroergonomics approach to mental workload, engagement and human performance. Frontiers in neuroscience. 2020;14:268. [DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2020.00268] [PMID].
10. Koozekonan AG, Moshiran VA, Yarandi MS, Golmohammapour H, Sarbaz B, Zakerian SA. Study of the relationship between physical and mental workload with quality of work life of workers in the foundry industry.[in Persian]. J Health Saf Work. 2021;11(3):488-502.
11. Arassi M, Mohammadi H, Motamedzade M, Kamalinia M, Mardani D, Mohammadi Beiragani M, Shekari M, Akbarzadeh M. The association between psychosocial factors and occupational accidents among Iranian drilling workers.[in Persian]. Iran J Ergon. 2014;2(1):36-45.
12. Kim WI, Ahn KY. The effects of job characteristics and psychological stress response on accidents, and the mediating effect of psychological stress response. J Korea Saf Manag Sci 2013;15(1):41e9. [DOI: 10.12812/ksms.2013.15.1.41]
13. Ludwig DS, Kabat-Zinn J. Mindfulness in medicine. JAMA. 2008;300(11):1350-2. [DOI: 10.1001/jama.300.11.1350] [PMID]
14. Junaidi A, Sasono E, Wanuri W, Emiyati D. The effect of overtime, job stress, and workload on turnover intention. Management Science Letters. 2020;10(16):3873-8. [DOI: 10.5267/j.msl.2020.7.024]
15. Wiratna AY, Chei NE. The Influence of Workload Factors, Work Stress and Health Personnel Competency on the Implementation of Hospital Occupational Safety and Health Management Systems (SMK3RS). Journal Of Nursing Practice. 2022;5(2):281-93.
16. Afshari D, Amini P, Jafari B, Akbari G. Investigating the Relationship Between Psychosocial Factors with Productivity of a Food Distribution Industry Employees. Iran J Ergon. 2021;9(1):75-86. [DOI: 10.30699/jergon.9.1.75]
17. Munro BH. Statistical methods for health care research. lippincott williams & wilkins; 2005.
18. Arsalani N, Fallahi-Khoshknab M, Ghaffari M, Josephson M, Lagerstrom M. Adaptation of questionnaire measuring working conditions and health problems among Iranian nursing personnel. Asian Nurs Res. 2011;5(3):177-82. [DOI: 10.1016/j.anr.2011.09.004] [PMID]
19. Azad ME, Gholami FM. Effective factors on job stress in military personnel.[in Persian]. 2011:1-6.
20. Schumacker E, Lomax G. A Beginner's Guide to Structural Equation Modeling. 4th edtn.2016.
21. Soleimani M, Mollazadeh N. Assessing human error in the occurrence of occupational accidents (Case study: Pegah Golpayegan pasteurized Milk Company). [in Persian].Journal of Environmental Science Studies. 2022;7(2):4832-43. [DOI: 10.22034/JESS.2022.323923.1711]
22. Tamminga SJ, Emal LM, Boschman JS, Levasseur A, Thota A, Ruotsalainen JH, et al. Individual‐level interventions for reducing occupational stress in healthcare workers. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023; 5(5):CD002892. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002892.pub6] [PMID]
23. Haider S, Jabeen S, Ahmad J. Moderated mediation between work life balance and employee job performance: The role of psychological wellbeing and satisfaction with coworkers. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. 2018;34(1):29-37. [DOI: 10.5093/jwop2018a4].
24. Chang C, Putukian M, Aerni G, Diamond A, Hong G, Ingram Y, et al. Mental health issues and psychological factors in athletes: detection, management, effect on performance and prevention: American Medical Society for Sports Medicine Position Statement—Executive Summary. J Sports Med. 2020;54(4):216-20. [DOI: 10.1097/JSM.0000000000000817] [PMID]
25. Husain NA, Mohamad J. Validation of The COPSOQ and BDJD-24 as a Job Demand Scale For Assing Taxi Driver'safety Performance: Spcific Vs. General Job Demands. Journal of Health and Translational Medicine (JUMMEC). 2020:41-51.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Copyright Policy
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
