Yucel,
Be careful about people's perception of stress per se. If you ask them
about how stressful aspects of their work are, you are not sure what meaning
THEY give to the word "stress" and they are likely to describe their work as
stressful. Your assessment needs to be cognitively opaque (as they say in
the business), hence the need to get them to assess degrees of demand,
etc.,
The assessment of mental strain should be by a separate set of questions I
tend to use the Crown Crisp Experiential Index (CCEI) which is published by
Hodder and Stoughton.
Best wishes
Kevin
-----Original Message-----
From: yucel demiral [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 25 May 2001 8:21 am
To: Maguire, Kevin
Subject: Re: Occupational Stress
Thank you for your bright answer and advices . As far as understood you
saying that stressors would be assessed more objectively (job content and
control over it) but perceiving of this stress might changed individually
have a nice day
yucel
----- Original Message -----
From: Maguire, Kevin <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: 23 Mayıs 2001 Çarşamba 12:08
Subject: Occupational Stress
> Yucel,
>
> I strongly advise you to read chapter 1 of Fletcher's book "Work Stress,
> Disease, and Life Expectancy". While the book is now quite old (it came
out
> about 1991 and may not be in print anymore but you should be able to get
it
> from a national library collection ), it contains a good examination of
all
> models of stress. You will see that Fletcher has a good grip on
theoretical
> matters and thinks more widely than Karasek's model.
>
> It is important that you consider two aspects (and therefore two models)
of
> the job. One aspect is the demands supports and constraints inherent in
the
> job. The other is the degree of fit between the individual and the job.
> Both pick up on stressful aspects of work. David MacPherson and I
developed
> a questionnaire originally for public sector workers which, by looking at
> both aspects, was able to pick up stressors that may not have been
obvious.
> For example in a study of one public sector body, we found that some
> managers considered that certain of their work demands, etc. were not
> excessive. Despite this we found a gap between how they rated those
> aspects in the job and what they sought for themselves. This was
> significantly associated with the degree of mental strain.
>
>
> You need also to consider that there may be limitations to the
universality
> of the models. For example Pearson and Chong (1997) found that among a
> group of nurses in Malaysia, autonomy was not such a big issue. In
relation
> to this, MacPherson and I found indications (I would put it no stronger
> since there were not not many and therefore not enough numbers to test
this
> significantly) that, for those who did not want want much autonomy, too
much
> autonomy might be linked to mental strain.
>
> One last word of advice: adapt the detail of any model to the organization
> into which you are enquiring. Standard questionnaires can make it
difficult
> to give practical feedback to the organzation.
>
> Good luck with your study.
>
> Kevin
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: yucel demiral [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 22 May 2001 6:20 pm
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject:
>
>
> I am a PhD student in Occ. Health. I am interested work related stress. As
> far as know Karasek's job strain model is the most used model in the area.
I
> am wondering if Karasek's job content questionnaire is unique or there are
> several questionnaire which based on same model. If so which one is
usefull
> for field studies?
> yucel demiral
> dokuz eylul univ. school of med.
> dept. of public health
>
|