IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i22p8675-d449214.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Benchmarks for Evidence-Based Risk Assessment with the Swedish Version of the 4-Item Psychosocial Safety Climate Scale

Author

Listed:
  • Hanne Berthelsen

    (Centre for Work Life and Evaluation Studies (CTA), Malmö University, 205 06 Malmö, Sweden
    Section 4, Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University, 205 06 Malmö, Sweden)

  • Tuija Muhonen

    (Centre for Work Life and Evaluation Studies (CTA), Malmö University, 205 06 Malmö, Sweden
    Department of School Development and Leadership, Faculty of Education and Society, Malmö University, 205 06 Malmö, Sweden)

  • Gunnar Bergström

    (Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, Department of Occupational Health Sciences and Psychology, University of Gävle, 801 76 Gävle, Sweden
    Unit of Intervention and Implementation Research for Worker Health, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institute, 171 77 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Hugo Westerlund

    (Department of Psychology, Stress Research Institute, Stockholm University, 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Maureen F. Dollard

    (PSC Observatory, Centre for Workplace Excellence, Justice and Society, University of South Australia, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia)

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to validate the short version of The Psychosocial Safety Climate questionnaire (PSC-4, Dollard, 2019) and to establish benchmarks indicating risk levels for use in Sweden. Cross-sectional data from (1) a random sample of employees in Sweden aged 25–65 years ( n = 2847) and (2) a convenience sample of non-managerial employees from 94 workplaces ( n = 3066) were analyzed. Benchmarks for three PSC risk levels were developed using organizational compliance with Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) regulations as criterion. The results support the validity and usefulness of the Swedish PSC-4 as an instrument to indicate good, fair, and poor OSH practices. The recommended benchmark for indicating good OSH practices is an average score of >12.0, while the proposed cutoff for poor OSH practices is a score of ≤8.0 on the PSC-4. Scores between these benchmarks indicate fair OSH practices. Furthermore, aggregated data on PSC-4 supported its reliability as a workplace level construct and its association with quantitative demands, quality of leadership, commitment to the workplace, work engagement, job satisfaction, as well as stress and burnout. Thus, the Swedish version of PSC-4 can be regarded as a valid and reliable measure for both research and practical use for risk assessment at workplaces.

Suggested Citation

  • Hanne Berthelsen & Tuija Muhonen & Gunnar Bergström & Hugo Westerlund & Maureen F. Dollard, 2020. "Benchmarks for Evidence-Based Risk Assessment with the Swedish Version of the 4-Item Psychosocial Safety Climate Scale," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-18, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:22:p:8675-:d:449214
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/22/8675/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/22/8675/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hanne Berthelsen & Hugo Westerlund & Gunnar Bergström & Hermann Burr, 2020. "Validation of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire Version III and Establishment of Benchmarks for Psychosocial Risk Management in Sweden," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-22, May.
    2. Irene Houtman & Marianne van Zwieten & Stavroula Leka & Aditya Jain & Ernest de Vroome, 2020. "Social Dialogue and Psychosocial Risk Management: Added Value of Manager and Employee Representative Agreement in Risk Perception and Awareness," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-18, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Akiomi Inoue & Hisashi Eguchi & Yuko Kachi & Sarven S. McLinton & Maureen F. Dollard & Akizumi Tsutsumi, 2021. "Reliability and Validity of the Japanese Version of the 12-Item Psychosocial Safety Climate Scale (PSC-12J)," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-14, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Katarina Wijk & Eva L. Bergsten & David M. Hallman, 2020. "Sense of Coherence, Health, Well-Being, and Work Satisfaction before and after Implementing Activity-Based Workplaces," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-15, July.
    2. Antonio José Carpio de los Pinos & María de las Nieves González García & José Antonio Soriano & Benito Yáñez Araque, 2021. "Development of the Level of Preventive Action Method by Observation of the Characteristic Value for the Assessment of Occupational Risks on Construction Sites," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-27, August.
    3. Joana Duarte & Hanne Berthelsen & Mikaela Owen, 2020. "Not All Emotional Demands Are the Same: Emotional Demands from Clients’ or Co-Workers’ Relations Have Different Associations with Well-Being in Service Workers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-15, October.
    4. Antonio José Carpio-de los Pinos & María de las Nieves González-García & Ligia Cristina Pentelhão & J. Santos Baptista, 2021. "Zero-Risk Interpretation in the Level of Preventive Action Method Implementation for Health and Safety in Construction Sites," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-23, March.
    5. Teresa P. Cotrim & Pedro Bem-Haja & Anabela Pereira & Cláudia Fernandes & Rui Azevedo & Samuel Antunes & Joaquim S. Pinto & Flávio Kanazawa & Isabel Souto & Elisabeth Brito & Carlos F. Silva, 2022. "The Portuguese Third Version of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire: Preliminary Validation Studies of the Middle Version among Municipal and Healthcare Workers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-14, January.
    6. Andrea Eriksson & Lotta Dellve & Anna Williamsson & Katrin Skagert, 2022. "How Conditions and Resources Connected to Digital Management Systems and Remote Work Are Associated with Sustainable Work," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-11, November.
    7. Anabela Pereira & Elisabeth Brito & Isabel Souto & Bruno Alves, 2022. "Healthcare Services and Formal Caregiver’s Psychosocial Risk Factors: An Observational Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-10, April.
    8. Işıl Karatuna & Mikaela Owen & Hugo Westerlund & Hanne Berthelsen, 2022. "The Role of Staff-Assessed Care Quality in the Relationship between Job Demands and Stress in Human Service Work: The Example of Dentistry," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-13, October.
    9. Francesco Seghezzi, 2023. "Negotiation of psycho-social risks of remote working. An enterprise-level comparison in Italy and France," European Journal of Industrial Relations, , vol. 29(2), pages 141-158, June.
    10. Frida Pilgaard & Anette Agardh & Per-Olof Östergren & Gisela Priebe, 2022. "Association between Experiences of Different Types of Harassment or Derogatory Treatment and Sexual Harassment among Employees at a Large Swedish University," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-16, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:22:p:8675-:d:449214. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.