4.5 Article

Student ERI: Psychometric properties of a new brief measure of effort-reward imbalance among university students

Journal

JOURNAL OF PSYCHOSOMATIC RESEARCH
Volume 94, Issue -, Pages 64-67

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2017.01.008

Keywords

Effort-reward imbalance; Over-commitment; Validity; Medical students; University settings

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Psychosocial stress among university students, particularly medical students, is considered a widely prevalent problem. There is a need for valid measurement of an adverse psychosocial stress environment in university settings. The aim of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of a newly developed short student version of the effort-reward imbalance (ERI) questionnaire in a sample of medical students. Methods: A cross-sectional survey with a self-administrated questionnaire containing three scales was conducted among 406 medical students. Item-total correlations and Cronbach's alpha were calculated to assess the internal consistency of the scales. Confirmatory factor analysis was applied to test factorial validity of the questionnaire structure. Results: The student version of the ERI questionnaire provides acceptable psychometric properties. The Cronbach's alpha coefficients for effort, reward, and over-commitment were 0.67, 0.65, and 0.79, respectively. Confirmatory factor analysis displayed a satisfactory fit of the data structure with the theoretical concept (GFI > 0.94). Conclusions: This student version of the ERI questionnaire provides a psychometrically tested tool for studies focussing on psychosocial environment in university settings. Further applications of this approach in other student groups are needed, in addition to prospective studies assessing associations with health outcomes. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc.All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available