mdh.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • 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
Cross-cultural validity of the demand-control questionnaire: Swedish and Brazilian workers.
Show others and affiliations
2014 (English)In: Revista de Saude Publica, ISSN 0034-8910, E-ISSN 1518-8787, Vol. 48, no 3, p. 486-96, article id S0034-89102014000300486Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the cross-cultural validity of the Demand-Control Questionnaire, comparing the original Swedish questionnaire with the Brazilian version. METHODS We compared data from 362 Swedish and 399 Brazilian health workers. Confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses were performed to test structural validity, using the robust weighted least squares mean and variance-adjusted (WLSMV) estimator. Construct validity, using hypotheses testing, was evaluated through the inspection of the mean score distribution of the scale dimensions according to sociodemographic and social support at work variables. RESULTS The confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses supported the instrument in three dimensions (for Swedish and Brazilians): psychological demands, skill discretion and decision authority. The best-fit model was achieved by including an error correlation between work fast and work intensely (psychological demands) and removing the item repetitive work (skill discretion). Hypotheses testing showed that workers with university degree had higher scores on skill discretion and decision authority and those with high levels of Social Support at Work had lower scores on psychological demands and higher scores on decision authority. CONCLUSIONS The results supported the equivalent dimensional structures across the two culturally different work contexts. Skill discretion and decision authority formed two distinct dimensions and the item repetitive work should be removed.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2014. Vol. 48, no 3, p. 486-96, article id S0034-89102014000300486
National Category
Social Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mdh:diva-46111DOI: 10.1590/s0034-8910.2014048005126PubMedID: 25119944OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mdh-46111DiVA, id: diva2:1370646
Available from: 2019-11-15 Created: 2019-11-15 Last updated: 2019-11-15

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Toivanen, Susanna
By organisation
School of Health, Care and Social Welfare
In the same journal
Revista de Saude Publica
Social Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • 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