The second version of the Copenhagen psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ II)

Transcription

1 The second version of the Copenhagen psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ II) Jan Hyld Pejtersen, Tage Søndergaard Kristensen, Vilhelm Borg and Jakob Bue Bjorner

2 Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire Kristensen et al. Scand J Work Environ Health 2005;31: First version introduced in 1997 Cited by 59 studies Translated to several languages Great interest from Companies

3 The second version of the Copenhagen psychosocial Questionnaire The Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire February 2010, Volume 38, No. 3 Suppl Guest editors: Jakob B Bjorner and Reiner Rugulies Pejtersen et al. Scand J Public Health 2010;38(Suppl 3):8 24

4 Construction of COPSOQ II 41 dimensions Researchers Long and medium 3-4 items per dimension 28 dimensions 23 dimensions Work environment professionals Workplaces Short 2 items per dimension

5 Major changes and additions Social capital Trust, justice Social inclusiveness Health and well-being Stress, burnout, sleepi ng troubles, depressive symptoms Recognition (Reward) Work-family conflict Variation Work pace Social support from colleagues, separate scale Social support from supervisor, separate scale

6 The main topics in COPSOQ II Demands at work Work organization & job contents Collaboration & Leadership Work-indiv. interphase Values, workplace Health & Well-being Offensive behaviour Quantitative demands Work pace Cognitive demands Emotional demands Demands for hiding emotions Influence Possibilities for development Variation Meaning of work Commitment to the workplace Predictability Recognition (Reward) Role clarity Role conflicts Quality of leader ship Social support from supervisor Social support from colleagues Social community at work Job insecurity Job satisfaction Work family conflict Family work conflict Trust regarding management Mutual trust between employees Justice Social inclusiveness Self-rated health Burnout Stress Sleeping troubles Depressive symptoms Somatic stress symptoms Cognitive stress symptoms Sexual harassment Threats of violence Physical violence Bullying Unpleasant teasing Conflicts and quar rels Gossip and slander

7 The main topics in COPSOQ II Job Individual Demands at work Work organization & job contents Collaboration & Leadership Quantitative demands Work pace Cognitive demands Emotional demands Demands for hiding emotions Influence Possibilities for development Variation Meaning of work Commitment to the workplace Predictability Recognition (Reward) Role clarity Role conflicts Quality of leadership Social support from supervisor Social support from colleagues Social community at work Department Work-indiv. Company Work-indiv. interphase Job insecurity Job satisfaction Work family conflict Family work conflict Values, workplace Trust regarding management Mutual trust between employees Justice Social inclusiveness Health & Well-being Self-rated health Burnout Stress Sleeping troubles Depressive symptoms Somatic stress symptoms Cognitive stress symptoms Offensive behaviour Sexual harassment Threats of violence Physical violence Bullying Unpleasant teasing Conflicts and quarrels Gossip and slander

8 Validation of scales related to job factors: Variation scale Mailman 27 Bus driver Food, drink and tobacco w orkers Cleaners Slaughterhouse w orkers Academics, social sciences and humnities Graduate engineers and architects Academics, natural science Manager, private sector Manager, public sector employees, COPSOQ II

9 Validation of scales related to the company level: Justice, Recognition 10,600 care workers/home helpers 310 organisational units Self-reported sickness absence per unit Scale (10 point differences) Risk of being Sickness absence OR Justice 1.66 CI: Recognition 1.58 CI:

10 Validation of scales related to the individual: Stress, Depression National register on social transfer payment (DREAM) Long-term sickness absence Scale (10 point differences) Risk of being long-term sick absence HR Stress 1.16 CI: Depression 1.16 CI:

11 Conclusion The COPSOQ concept has been further developed and new validated scales have been introduced Further Information: Scand J Public Health 2010;38, Suppl 3