Enter your email address
Submit
Write your message
Volume 11, Issue 4 (Iranian Journal of Ergonomics 2024)
Iran J Ergon 2024, 11(4): 272-282 |
Back to browse issues page
Ethics code: IR.USWR.REC.1402.032،
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rafat Z, Mokhtarinia H, Vahedi M. Translation, Cross-cultural Adaptation, and Evaluation of Psychometric Properties of the CarMen-Q Mental Workload Questionnaire into Persian. Iran J Ergon 2024; 11 (4) :272-282
URL: http://journal.iehfs.ir/article-1-991-en.html
URL: http://journal.iehfs.ir/article-1-991-en.html
1- Department of Ergonomics, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2- Department of Ergonomics, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran , hrmokhtarinia@yahoo.com
3- Department of Statistics and Epidemiology, Psychosis Research Center, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2- Department of Ergonomics, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran , hrmokhtarinia@yahoo.com
3- Department of Statistics and Epidemiology, Psychosis Research Center, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Abstract: (515 Views)
Objectives: Changes in mental workload are related to performance and level of fatigue, stress, human error, and job dissatisfaction. Questionnaires are simple, accessible, and valid tools for the assessment of mental workload. Therefore, the present study aimed at translation, cultural adaptation, and evaluation of psychometric properties of the Carmen-Q mental workload questionnaire.
Methods: This study was conducted on 296 subjects (100 women and 196 men) with a mean age of 38.59±7.61 years, working in industrial and administrative sectors in several centers in Saveh. The process of translation and cultural adaptation was carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and included the stages of forward and backward translation, synthesizing and preparing a final version, piloting, and then final approval of the Persian version. Psychometric properties, including face validity (simplicity and readability), content validity (through content validity index), convergent validity (through correlation with NASA-TLX questionnaire), and internal consistency (using Cronbach's alpha coefficient) were assessed.
Results: The translation, cultural adaptation, and face validity assessment were carried out according to related guidelines, and the text underwent some minor changes. The Content Validity Index values for each of the items and its total (0.914) were acceptable. Cronbach's alpha value was acceptable for all items (0.91) and each subscale (above 0.8). Pearson's correlation coefficient displayed a moderate to good relationship between Carmen-Q and NASA task load index.
Conclusion: The Persian version of the Carmen-Q questionnaire is a valid and reliable tool for evaluating mental workload in Iranian society.
Methods: This study was conducted on 296 subjects (100 women and 196 men) with a mean age of 38.59±7.61 years, working in industrial and administrative sectors in several centers in Saveh. The process of translation and cultural adaptation was carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and included the stages of forward and backward translation, synthesizing and preparing a final version, piloting, and then final approval of the Persian version. Psychometric properties, including face validity (simplicity and readability), content validity (through content validity index), convergent validity (through correlation with NASA-TLX questionnaire), and internal consistency (using Cronbach's alpha coefficient) were assessed.
Results: The translation, cultural adaptation, and face validity assessment were carried out according to related guidelines, and the text underwent some minor changes. The Content Validity Index values for each of the items and its total (0.914) were acceptable. Cronbach's alpha value was acceptable for all items (0.91) and each subscale (above 0.8). Pearson's correlation coefficient displayed a moderate to good relationship between Carmen-Q and NASA task load index.
Conclusion: The Persian version of the Carmen-Q questionnaire is a valid and reliable tool for evaluating mental workload in Iranian society.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Cognitive Ergonomics
Received: 2023/12/10 | Accepted: 2024/01/30 | ePublished: 2024/01/30
Received: 2023/12/10 | Accepted: 2024/01/30 | ePublished: 2024/01/30
References
1. Schwartz A, Gerberich SG, Albin T, Kim H, Ryan AD, Church TR, et al. The association between janitor physical workload, mental workload, and stress: The SWEEP study. Work. 2020;65(4):837-46. [DOI: 10.3233/WOR-203135] [PMID]
2. Zare S, Hasheminezhad N, Dehesh T, Hasanvand D, Ahmadi S, Hemmatjo R. The relationship between mental workload and prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders among welders of Tehran heavy metal structures company in 2016. Journal of Biology and Today’s World. 2016;5(12):218-3. [DOI: 10.15412/J.JBTW.01051203]
3. Kamari Ghanavati F, Choobineh A, Keshavarzi S, Nasihatkon AA, Jafari Roodbandi AS. Assessment of mental workload and its association with work ability in control room operators. Med Lav. 2019;110(5):389-97. [DOI: 10.23749/mdl.v110i5.8115] [PMID]
4. Tao D, Tan H, Wang H, Zhang X, Qu X, Zhang T. A Systematic Review of Physiological Measures of Mental Workload. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(15):2716. [DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16152716] [PMID]
5. Khandan M, Mirshekari F, Koorsani E, Mosaferchi S, Koohpaei A. Subjective workload and musculoskeletal disorders among workers of a manufacturing company in Iran. Biotech Health Sci. 2018;5(1):e13599. [Link]
6. Longo L. Subjective usability, mental workload assessments and their impact on objective human performance. in IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Springer. 2017:202-23. [DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-67684-5_13]
7. DiDomenico A, Nussbaum MA. Interactive effects of physical and mental workload on subjective workload assessment. International journal of industrial ergonomics. 2008;38(11-12):977-83. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ergon.2008.01.012]
8. Rubio-Valdehita S, López-Núñez MI, López-Higes R, Díaz-Ramiro EM. Development of the CarMen-Q Questionnaire for mental workload assessment. Psicothema. 2017;29(4):570-76. [DOI: 10.7334/psicothema2017.151]
9. Charles RL, Nixon J. Measuring mental workload using physiological measures: A systematic review. Appl Ergon. 2019;74:221-32. [DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2018.08.028]
10. Cain B. A review of the mental workload literature. DTIC Document. 2007. [Link]
11. Rubio S, Díaz E, Martín J, Puente JM. Evaluation of subjective mental workload: A comparison of SWAT, NASA‐TLX, and workload profile methods. Applied psychology. 2004;53(1):61-86. [DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2004.00161.x]
12. Gawron VJ. Human performance and situation awareness measures. Crc Press. 2019. [DOI: 10.1201/9780429001024]
13. Ghanbary Sartang A, Ashnagar M, Habibi E, Sadeghi S. Evaluation of Rating Scale Mental Effort (RSME) effectiveness for mental workload assessment in nurses. Journal of Occupational Health and Epidemiology. 2016;5(4):211-7. [DOI: 10.18869/acadpub.johe.5.4.211]
14. Longo L. A defeasible reasoning framework for human mental workload representation and assessment. Behaviour & Information Technology. 2015;34(8):758-86. [DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2015.1015166]
15. Lu C, Hu Y, Fu Q, Governor S, Wang L, Li C, Deng L, Xie J. Physician mental workload scale in China: development and psychometric evaluation. BMJ open. 2019;9(10):e030137. [DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-030137]
16. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000;25(24):3186-91. [DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014] [PMID]
17. Li G, Buckle P. Current techniques for assessing physical exposure to work-related musculoskeletal risks, with emphasis on posture-based methods. Ergonomics. 1999;42(5):674-95. [DOI: 10.1080/001401399185388] [PMID]
18. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, Bouter LM, De Vet HC. COSMIN checklist manual. Amsterdam: University Medical Center. 2012.
19. Hart SG, Staveland LE. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. InAdvances in psychology. 1988; 52:139-183. [DOI: 10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62386-9]
20. Waltz CF, Bausell BR. Nursing research: design statistics and computer analysis. Davis Fa. 1981.
21. Dychawy-Rosner I, Eklund M. Content validity and clinical applicability of the Irena Daily Activity assessment measuring occupational performance in adults with developmental disability. Occup Ther Int. 2003;10(2):127-49. [DOI: 10.1002/oti.181] [PMID]
22. Lynn MR. Determination and quantification of content validity. Nurs Res. 1986;35(6):382-5. [PMID]
23. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34-42. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012] [PMID]
24. Souza AC, Alexandre NMC, Guirardello EB. Psychometric properties in instruments evaluation of reliability and validity. Epidemiol Serv Saude. 2017;26(3):649-59. [DOI: 10.5123/S1679-49742017000300022] [PMID]
25. Robin K Henson. Understanding Internal Consistency Reliability Estimates: A Conceptual Primer on Coefficient Alpha, Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development.2001; 34:3, 177-189. [DOI: 10.1080/07481756.2002.12069034]
26. Godwin M, Pike A, Bethune C, Kirby A, Pike A. Concurrent and convergent validity of the simple lifestyle indicator questionnaire. ISRN Family Med. 2013;2013:529645. [DOI: 10.5402/2013/529645] [PMID]
27. Kempen GI, Todd CJ, Van Haastregt JC, Zijlstra GA, Beyer N, Freiberger E,et al. Cross-cultural validation of the Falls Efficacy Scale International (FES-I) in older people: results from Germany, the Netherlands and the UK were satisfactory. Disabil Rehabil. 2007;29(2):155-62. [DOI: 10.1080/09638280600747637] [PMID]
28. Yardley L, Beyer N, Hauer K, Kempen G, Piot-Ziegler C, Todd C. Development and initial validation of the Falls Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I). Age Ageing. 2005;34(6):614-9. [DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afi196] [PMID]
29. Meltem AK, Yavuz M, Küçükoğlu MT. Zihinsel iş yükünün ölçümü: CarMen-Q ölçeğinin Türkçe’ye uyarlaması. Yaşar Üniversitesi E-Dergisi. 2020;15(60):675-91. [DOI: 10.19168/jyasar.708357]
30. Mestre CP. Adaptação e validação do carga mental questionnaire (CarMen-Q) para uma amostra de trabalhadores portugueses (Doctoral dissertation).2021. [Link]
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.
