Objectives. The assessment of work-related stress has been an issue that has attracted attention of Italian psychologists for a long time, but only in recent years it has been remarked in the laws protecting workers. In fact, it has just been recalled the need, in a legislative decree, to place special emphasis on psychological well-being of the worker and not just on his security. The Italian professionals (Work, Organizational or Personnel Psychologists) who worked on the assessment of psychological risks of work-related stress, used instruments to assess the organizational climate primarily, by integrating qualitative methodologies (such as focus group) with quantitative instruments. These instruments are able only indirectly to measure the well-being of the subjects on the workplace. For that, they were integrated with others instruments (e.g. STAI, PANAS, GHQ etc.) built to assess the individual well-being of subjects but little adjusted to the working environments. The strong demand for action on these issues, has recently led Avallone and Paplomatas (2005) to develop an instrument (MOHQ) for the Italian population, able to integrate the organizational themes with the perception of stress levels and, in general, with the well-being of employees. Van Veldhoven and Meijman (1994) developed a questionnaire (QEEW, Questionnaire on Experience and Assessment of Work) which proposed a similar approach. This instrument includes a series of steps to assess some critical aspects of work organizations (Ambiguities about work, Communication, Relationships with colleagues etc.), aspects connected to the task (Pace and amount of work, Mental load, etc.. ) and issues related to a broader and articulated conception of well-being (Need for Recovery, Sleep quality, etc.). The aim of this study is to test the possibility of Italian adapting of the QEEW, through a first survey conducted in Sicily. We are going to inquiry on internal consistency of scales and some evaluations on their concurrent validity. Method. The English version of the QEEW was translated and back-translated in Italian language, and a first version of the questionnaire was distributed to a pilot group of workers, as an evaluation of the content validity. We have contacted 8 companies (2 public/state-owned companies and 6 private companies, representing different economic sectors and productive); we will submit in these companies the QEEW Italian version with some instruments that have similar purposes, such as MOHQ and M_DOQ10 (Majer and D'Amato, 2005). Results. Data collection is currently in progress. We are evaluating the factorial structure and the internal consistence of the QEEW scales and subscales; we’re also evaluating the concurrent validity of the measure, using other similar questionnaires. Conclusions. The QEEW, based upon preliminary analysis of the data, seems to show a good internal consistence of the scales and a good degree of correlation with the different instruments considered conceptually overlapping.
|Publication status||Published - 2010|