hkr.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Psychometric properties concerning four instruments measuring job satisfaction, strain, and stress of conscience in a residential care context
Lund University.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0918-2958
Kristianstad University, School of Health and Society, Avdelningen för Hälsovetenskap. Kristianstad University, Research Platform for Collaboration for Health.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-0161-4795
Kristianstad University, School of Health and Society, Avdelningen för Hälsovetenskap. Kristianstad University, Research Platform for Collaboration for Health.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7790-6906
Lund University.
2013 (English)In: Archives of gerontology and geriatrics (Print), ISSN 0167-4943, E-ISSN 1872-6976, Vol. 57, no 2, p. 162-171Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

There are many instruments assessing the wellbeing of staff, but far from all have been psychometrically investigated. When evaluating supportive interventions directed toward nurse assistants in residential care, valid and reliable instruments are needed in order to detect possible changes. The aim of the study was to investigate validity in terms of data quality, construct validity, convergent and divergent validity and reliability in terms of the internal consistency and stability of the Job Satisfaction Questionnaire, the Psychosocial Aspects of Job Satisfaction, the Strain in Dementia Care Scale (SDCS), and the Stress of Conscience Questionnaire (SCQ) in a residential care context. The psychometric properties of the instruments were investigated in terms of data quality, construct validity, convergent and divergent validity and reliability, including test-retest reliability, in a residential care context with a sample consisting of nurse assistants (n=114). The four instruments responded with different psychometric-related problems such as internal missing data, floor and ceiling effects, problems with construct validity and low test-retest reliability, especially when assessed on the item level. These problems were however reduced or disappeared completely when assessed for total and factor scores. From a psychometric perspective, the SDCS seemed to stand out as the best instrument. However, it should be modified in order to reduce floor effects on item level and thereby gain sensitivity. The Job Satisfaction Questionnaire seemed to have problems both with the construct validity and test-retest reliability. The final choice of instrument must, however, be made dependent on what one intends to measure.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2013. Vol. 57, no 2, p. 162-171
Keywords [en]
Psychometric properties, Questionnaires, Work satisfaction, Job stress, Nurse assistants, Long-term care
National Category
Nursing
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hkr:diva-10818DOI: 10.1016/j.archger.2013.04.001ISI: 000320584000006PubMedID: 23643346OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hkr-10818DiVA, id: diva2:639188
Available from: 2013-08-06 Created: 2013-08-06 Last updated: 2017-10-18Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records BETA

Orrung Wallin, AnneliEdberg, Anna-KarinBeck, Ingela

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Orrung Wallin, AnneliEdberg, Anna-KarinBeck, Ingela
By organisation
Avdelningen för HälsovetenskapResearch Platform for Collaboration for Health
In the same journal
Archives of gerontology and geriatrics (Print)
Nursing

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 194 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf