Petra Nilsson1, H Ingemar Andersson, Göran Ejlertsson. 1. Centre of Public Health, School of Health and Society, Kristianstad University, Kristianstad, Sweden Department of Clinical Sciences, Malmö, Faculty of Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To present validity data for the Work Experience Measurement Scale (WEMS), an instrument measuring multifaceted work experience from a salutogenic health resource perspective as a contrast to the more common pathogenic risk perspective, by exploring WEMS relationship to established measurements that are positively related to health and work. A salutogenic perspective focuses on finding conditions and resources in life, for example at work, that can enhance the individual's health and strength, instead of those causing illness and weakness. METHOD: This study was carried out in 2009 at a Swedish hospital with a web-based survey (WEMS) to 770 employees. Different occupational groups at the hospital participated. Additional questionnaires used at the same time were the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9), the Salutogenic Health Indicator Scale (SHIS), the General Self-Efficacy scale (GSE), and three questions about self-rated health, general well-being, and quality of life. RESULTS: Cronbach's Alpha of WEMS sub-indices were in the interval of 0.85-0.96. Convergent validity and discriminant validity of WEMS and its sub-indices were shown to be satisfying by correlations. In addition, WEMS demonstrated the ability to discriminate between groups. WEMS sub-indices discriminated even better between groups than the total index. CONCLUSION: The WEMS proved to be a workplace health promotion questionnaire that was able to measure experiences of work from a salutogenic perspective. The WEMS has a potential of being a useful tool in workplace health promotion to enhance positive human capabilities and resources to improve work performance.
OBJECTIVE: To present validity data for the Work Experience Measurement Scale (WEMS), an instrument measuring multifaceted work experience from a salutogenic health resource perspective as a contrast to the more common pathogenic risk perspective, by exploring WEMS relationship to established measurements that are positively related to health and work. A salutogenic perspective focuses on finding conditions and resources in life, for example at work, that can enhance the individual's health and strength, instead of those causing illness and weakness. METHOD: This study was carried out in 2009 at a Swedish hospital with a web-based survey (WEMS) to 770 employees. Different occupational groups at the hospital participated. Additional questionnaires used at the same time were the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9), the Salutogenic Health Indicator Scale (SHIS), the General Self-Efficacy scale (GSE), and three questions about self-rated health, general well-being, and quality of life. RESULTS: Cronbach's Alpha of WEMS sub-indices were in the interval of 0.85-0.96. Convergent validity and discriminant validity of WEMS and its sub-indices were shown to be satisfying by correlations. In addition, WEMS demonstrated the ability to discriminate between groups. WEMS sub-indices discriminated even better between groups than the total index. CONCLUSION: The WEMS proved to be a workplace health promotion questionnaire that was able to measure experiences of work from a salutogenic perspective. The WEMS has a potential of being a useful tool in workplace health promotion to enhance positive human capabilities and resources to improve work performance.
Authors: Øystein Robertsen; Frank Siebler; Martin Eisemann; Marit N Hegseth; Solveig Føreland; Hans-Christian B Vangberg Journal: Front Psychol Date: 2018-08-08
Authors: U Lindmark; I Ahlstrand; A Ekman; L Berg; L Hedén; J Källstrand; M Larsson; H Nunstedt; L Oxelmark; S Pennbrant; A Sundler; I Larsson Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2020-02-14 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Robert Persson Asplund; Jesper Dagöö; Ida Fjellström; Linnea Niemi; Katja Hansson; Forough Zeraati; Masha Ziuzina; Anna Geraedts; Brjánn Ljótsson; Per Carlbring; Gerhard Andersson Journal: Occup Environ Med Date: 2017-08-30 Impact factor: 4.402