1 / 18

European Academy of Occupational Health Psychology 6 th Annual Conference

European Academy of Occupational Health Psychology 6 th Annual Conference 24 November 2004, Oporto Research priorities in Occupational Health Psychology. Michiel Kompier Radboud University Nijmegen The Netherlands. The psychosocial work environment and health. What do we know?

micheleb
Download Presentation

European Academy of Occupational Health Psychology 6 th Annual Conference

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. European Academy of Occupational Health Psychology6th Annual Conference 24 November 2004, OportoResearch priorities in Occupational Health Psychology Michiel Kompier Radboud University Nijmegen The Netherlands

  2. The psychosocial work environment and health • What do we know? • Where should we not go? • Where should we go? Literature: Campbell The role of theory in industrial and organizational psychology (1992) Cox et al. Research on work related stress, Bilbao (2000) Kompier Scand J Work Environ Health (2002) 28 (1) 1-4 Kompier & Taris Scand J Work Environ Health (2004) 30 (2) 81-83 NORA/NIOSH The changing organization of work and the safety and health of working people:knowledge gaps and research directions Schaufeli Applied Psych: Int Review 53 (4) 502-517 (2004) Taris & Kompier Scand J Work Environ Health (2003) 28 (1) 1-4

  3. Work-Person-Stress-HealthWhat do we know? • Occupational stress major problem for both health and productivity • Good general theories • Which factors in work are major risk factors • (Inter)national legislation: Risk assessment and risk management

  4. European legislation: Job design and well-being (European Framework Directive on Health and Safety at Work, 1993) The employer has ‘a duty to ensure the safety and health of workers in every aspect related to the work, following general principles of prevention’: • Evaluating risks which cannot be avoided • Avoiding risks • Combating risks at source • Adapting work to the individual • Developing coherent overall prevention policy

  5. Job design and well-being: 7 theories, critical job characteristics(Kompier, 2003) • Job Characteristics Model • Michigan-Organizational-Stress Model • Job Demands-Job Control Model • Sociotechnical approach • Action-Theory • Effort-Reward-Imbalance Model • Vitamin Model

  6. Job design and well-being: 7 theories, critical job characteristics(Kompier, 2003) • Job demands (6) • Skill variety (6) • Autonomy (6) • Social support (4) • Feedback (3) • Task identity (3) • Job future ambiguity (3) • Pay (2)

  7. Where should we not go? • No more general research! • Do not expand cross-sectional ‘cause-effect studies’ & self-reports-only studies ‘The plethora of hopeless cross-sectional studies which attack extremely complex issues with the weakest of research designs’Kasl (1978, p.3) Epidemiological contributions to the study of work stress

  8. B B B C A C C A A ‘normal causation’ ‘reverse causation’ ‘reciprocal causation’ = ‘Direct’ A= Job demands B= Work-home imbalance C= Fatigue = ‘Indirect’

  9. Where should we not go? • Do not try to compensate for weak study designs by increasing the number of sophisticated statistical analyses

  10. Where should we go? • Learn from the past • ‘While it is difficult to judge whether the current amount of high-quality research is excellent, reasonable, barely adequate, or less than adequate, it seems relatively obvious that we do a poor job of summarizing, storing and retrieving what we do know’ (Campbell, 1992) • Better ideas: Good and original thinking • Better designs and better data • Analytical parsimony principle (APA 1996) Progress in OHP will more likely come from simple analyses of good data than from sophisticated analyses of poor data

  11. Research priorities: 4 types of studies1. High-quality review studies Example: De Lange, Taris, Kompier, Houtman & Bongers (2003) The very best of the millennium: Longitudinal research andthe Demand-Control-(Support) model, Journal Occupational Health Psychology, 8, 282-305 Research question:How much evidence for strain hypothesis in longitudinal high quality studies?

  12. (De Lange et al., 2003) Method: Methodological quality: type of design, length of time lags, quality of measures, method of analysis, non-response analysis Results: • 45 longitudinal studies: 19 (42%) acceptable scores on all criteria • Only modest support for high strain hypothesis (‘combi’) • Good evidence for lagged causal effects of work characteristics (‘separate’)

  13. 2. Monitor-studies Cross-sectional studies are adequate for studying: • Prevalences • Trends • First ‘test’ of new ideas Example: Beckers, van der Linden, Smulders, Kompier, van Veldhoven, van YperenWorking overtime hours: relations with fatigue, work motivation and the quality of work, Jr. Occup. Envir. Med. (in press) Research question: Prevalence of overtime work? Related to fatigue, work motivation, quality of (overtime) work: demands, job variety, decision latitude?

  14. (Beckers et al., in press) Method: Survey study Representative sample Dutch full-time workforce (n=1807) • Results: • 67% worked overtime (y = 3.5 hours) • Overtime workers: non-fatigued, motivated workers with favourable work characteristics • Psychosocial work characteristics much stronger related to fatigue than overtime

  15. 3. Aetiology and causality Open up “the black box”: How questions / mechanisms / pathways • Longitudinal studies • (Quasi)Experimental studies Example: De Lange, Taris, Kompier, Houtman & Bongers (2004) The relationships between work characteristics and mental health: Examining normal, reversed and reciprocal relationships in a 4-wave study, Work and Stress, 18, 149-166

  16. (De Lange et al., 2004) Research question: Three types of causality, and, if so, which type is dominant? Method: Survey study, 4 wave study, heterogeneous sample of 668 Dutch employees, structural equation modelling • Results: • Evidence for reciprocal causal relationships between work characteristics and mental health • Effects of work characteristics on mental health stronger than vice versa Follow-up: De Lange et al. (SJWEH, in press) studied 4 mechanisms that might underlie these reversed effects

  17. 4. Prevention and intervention Example: Kompier et al. (1998, 2000a, 2000b), Taris et al. (2003) Research question: How well, why and how do stress prevention programs work? Method:Cases, research design rating, comparison • Results: • Reduction occupational stress possible • If 3 types of quality criteria are met: • Content, Context, Design of the study

  18. Conclusions • A lot of progress: knowledge and knowledge infrastructure • We have learned a lot • And enough to advocate interventions in the psychosocial work environment • There still are important challenges, both applied and theoretical: • Learn from the past • Monitoring • Opening up the black box • Prevention and intervention • Thus: Think, but Keep it simple!

More Related