Suppr超能文献

验证具有代表性的德国样本的刺激量表:新的规范数据。

Validation of the irritation scale on a representative German sample: new normative data.

机构信息

Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Clinical Center, Ulm University, Albert-​Einstein-Allee 23, 89081, Ulm, Germany.

Institute of Psychology, Work- and Organizational Psychology, University of Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg, Germany.

出版信息

Sci Rep. 2023 Sep 16;13(1):15374. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-41829-4.

Abstract

The irritation scale is a widely used and reliable self-report scale for measuring cognitive and emotional strain related to the work environment. It extends existing measures by providing a sensitive assessment for pre-clinical stress at work. Existing normative data are based on convenience samples and are therefore not representative. This study provides new normative data for the irritation scale based on a representative German sample (N = 1480). The new normative data indicate that the overall level of irritation in the German workforce is significantly lower compared to previously published data. Convergent and discriminant validity is confirmed by correlations with depression and anxiety (Patient Health Questionnaire-4 for Depression and Anxiety), somatic symptom scales (Bodily Distress Syndrome 25 checklist, Somatic Symptom Scale-8, Giessen Subjective Complaints List-8, comorbidity), psychological functioning (Mini-ICF rating for activity and participation disorders in mental illness), work-related stressors (overcommitment and bullying) and individual resources (self-efficacy). The results confirm the utility of the irritation scale and provide new benchmarks that avoid an underestimation of the levels of irritation in future studies.

摘要

刺激量表是一种广泛使用且可靠的自评量表,用于测量与工作环境相关的认知和情绪压力。它通过对工作中的临床前压力进行敏感评估,扩展了现有测量工具。现有的规范数据基于方便样本,因此不具有代表性。本研究基于具有代表性的德国样本(N=1480),提供了刺激量表的新规范数据。新的规范数据表明,与之前发表的数据相比,德国劳动力的整体刺激水平显著降低。与抑郁和焦虑(患者健康问卷-4 抑郁和焦虑)、躯体症状量表(身体不适综合征 25 清单、躯体症状量表-8、吉森主观抱怨清单-8、合并症)、心理功能(精神疾病活动和参与障碍的迷你 ICF 评定)、与工作相关的压力源(过度承诺和欺凌)和个体资源(自我效能)的相关性证实了其具有良好的聚合效度和区分效度。研究结果证实了刺激量表的实用性,并提供了新的基准,避免了未来研究中对刺激水平的低估。

相似文献

1
Validation of the irritation scale on a representative German sample: new normative data.
Sci Rep. 2023 Sep 16;13(1):15374. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-41829-4.
4
Validation of the German version of the Bodily Distress Syndrome 25 checklist in a representative German population sample.
J Psychosom Res. 2020 May;132:109991. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2020.109991. Epub 2020 Mar 3.
5
Development and validation of the Inventory of Depression and Anxiety Symptoms-II-German version.
Psychol Assess. 2022 Dec;34(12):e88-e99. doi: 10.1037/pas0001185.
7
No evidence for interactions between modern health worries, negative affect, and somatic symptom distress in general populations.
Psychol Health. 2021 Nov;36(11):1384-1396. doi: 10.1080/08870446.2020.1841761. Epub 2020 Nov 2.
8
Early response in cognitive-behavior therapy for syndromes of medically unexplained symptoms.
BMC Psychiatry. 2017 May 25;17(1):195. doi: 10.1186/s12888-017-1351-x.

引用本文的文献

2
Resilience as Safety Culture in German Emergency Medical Services: Examining Irritation and Burnout.
Healthcare (Basel). 2024 Sep 15;12(18):1860. doi: 10.3390/healthcare12181860.

本文引用的文献

3
Validation of the German version of the Bodily Distress Syndrome 25 checklist in a representative German population sample.
J Psychosom Res. 2020 May;132:109991. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2020.109991. Epub 2020 Mar 3.
5
[Inclusive Research: Validation of the General Self-Efficacy Scale in Simple Language in a Sample of Students with Special Educational Needs].
Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol. 2019 Oct;69(9-10):398-406. doi: 10.1055/a-0831-2270. Epub 2019 Feb 7.
6
The effects of daily stress on positive and negative mental health: Mediation through self-efficacy.
Int J Clin Health Psychol. 2016 Jan-Apr;16(1):1-10. doi: 10.1016/j.ijchp.2015.08.005. Epub 2015 Oct 30.
8
Anomalous results in G-factor models: Explanations and alternatives.
Psychol Methods. 2017 Sep;22(3):541-562. doi: 10.1037/met0000083. Epub 2016 Aug 15.
9
Workplace bullying and sickness absence: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the research literature.
Scand J Work Environ Health. 2016 Sep 1;42(5):359-70. doi: 10.5271/sjweh.3579. Epub 2016 Jun 15.
10
The Problem with Having Two Watches: Assessment of Fit When RMSEA and CFI Disagree.
Multivariate Behav Res. 2016 Mar-Jun;51(2-3):220-39. doi: 10.1080/00273171.2015.1134306. Epub 2016 Mar 25.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验