IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v22y2025i3p386-d1607147.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Cross-Sectional Association of Scales from the Job Content Questionnaire 2 (JCQ 2.0) with Burnout and Affective Commitment Among German Employees

Author

Listed:
  • Maren Formazin

    (Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (BAuA), Division “Work and Health”, 10317 Berlin, Germany)

  • Peter Martus

    (Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Applied Biometrics, University Hospital Tübingen, 72076 Tübingen, Germany)

  • Hermann Burr

    (Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (BAuA), Division “Work and Health”, 10317 Berlin, Germany)

  • Anne Pohrt

    (Institute of Biometry and Clinical Epidemiology, Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Corporate Member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, 10117 Berlin, Germany)

  • BongKyoo Choi

    (Center for Work and Health Research, Irvine, CA 92620, USA
    Department of Medicine, University of California, Irvine, CA 92617, USA)

  • Robert Karasek

    (Department of Work Environment, University of Massachusetts Lowell, Lowell, MA 01854, USA
    Department of Psychology, Copenhagen University, Denmark & Øresund Synergy, 1353 Copenhagen, Denmark)

Abstract

The Job Content Questionnaire JCQ 2.0 (JCQ 2.0) thoroughly revises the well-known JCQ 1, based on an expanded Demand/Control theory-consistent platform with new scales, the Associationalist Demand Control (ADC) theory. This study tests the JCQ 2.0 in an urban population in Germany ( N = 2326) for concurrent validity of each specific task and organizational-level scale and the relative importance of the task and organizational-level scales, using burnout and commitment as outcome measures. Cross-sectional regression analyses in the test and validation samples were run after multiple imputation. Five JCQ 2.0 task-level scales explain 44% of burnout variance; three JCQ 2.0 task-level scales explain 25% of commitment variance. Adding organizational-level scales, organizational disorder and rewards, increases the explained variance for burnout by five percentage points; consideration of workers’ interests and reward add four percentage points of variance for commitment. Organizational-level scales alone explain 33% and 28% of the variance in burnout and commitment, respectively, due to three and five organizational-level scales for both outcomes. Thus, the JCQ 2.0 task and organizational-level scales show substantial relations to work- and health-related outcomes, with task level more relevant for burnout and organizational level more relevant for commitment. The most strongly related JCQ 2.0 scales have evolved from new ADC theory, confirming its utility.

Suggested Citation

  • Maren Formazin & Peter Martus & Hermann Burr & Anne Pohrt & BongKyoo Choi & Robert Karasek, 2025. "The Cross-Sectional Association of Scales from the Job Content Questionnaire 2 (JCQ 2.0) with Burnout and Affective Commitment Among German Employees," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 22(3), pages 1-18, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:22:y:2025:i:3:p:386-:d:1607147
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/22/3/386/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/22/3/386/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johnson, J.V. & Hall, E.M., 1988. "Job strain, work place social support, and cardiovascular disease: A cross-sectional study of random sample of the Swedish Working Population," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 78(10), pages 1336-1342.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Hannah Carver & Tracey Price & Danilo Falzon & Peter McCulloch & Tessa Parkes, 2022. "Stress and Wellbeing during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Mixed-Methods Exploration of Frontline Homelessness Services Staff Experiences in Scotland," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-20, March.
    2. Nicola Magnavita & Igor Meraglia, 2024. "Poor Work Ability Is Associated with Workplace Violence in Nurses: A Two-Wave Panel Data Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(9), pages 1-13, August.
    3. Rémi Colin-Chevalier & Bruno Pereira & Amanda Clare Benson & Samuel Dewavrin & Thomas Cornet & Frédéric Dutheil, 2022. "The Protective Role of Job Control/Autonomy on Mental Strain of Managers: A Cross-Sectional Study among Wittyfit’s Users," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-10, February.
    4. Sebastiano, Antonio & Belvedere, Valeria & Grando, Alberto & Giangreco, Antonio, 2017. "The effect of capacity management strategies on employees' well-being: A quantitative investigation into the long-term healthcare industry," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 563-573.
    5. Suzuki, Etsuji & Takao, Soshi & Subramanian, S.V. & Komatsu, Hirokazu & Doi, Hiroyuki & Kawachi, Ichiro, 2010. "Does low workplace social capital have detrimental effect on workers' health?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(9), pages 1367-1372, May.
    6. 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.
    7. Georges Steffgen & Philipp E. Sischka & Martha Fernandez de Henestrosa, 2020. "The Quality of Work Index and the Quality of Employment Index: A Multidimensional Approach of Job Quality and Its Links to Well-Being at Work," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-31, October.
    8. Huizing, Anna R. & Hamers, Jan P.H. & de Jonge, Jan & Candel, Math & Berger, Martijn P.F., 2007. "Organisational determinants of the use of physical restraints: A multilevel approach," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(5), pages 924-933, September.
    9. Rosie Mulholland & Andy McKinlay & John Sproule, 2013. "Teacher Interrupted," SAGE Open, , vol. 3(3), pages 21582440135, September.
    10. Cäker, Mikael & Siverbo, Sven, 2018. "Effects of performance measurement system inconsistency on managers’ role clarity and well-being," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 256-266.
    11. Bubonya, Melisa & Cobb-Clark, Deborah A. & Wooden, Mark, 2017. "Mental health and productivity at work: Does what you do matter?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 150-165.
    12. Sader, Myra & Chollet, Barthélemy & Brion, Sébastien & Trendel, Olivier, 2021. "Supported, detached, or marginalized? The ambivalent role of social capital on stress at work," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 768-778.
    13. Lea Sell & Bryan Cleal, 2011. "Job Satisfaction, Work Environment, and Rewards: Motivational Theory Revisited," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 25(1), pages 1-23, March.
    14. Fujishiro, Kaori & Xu, Jun & Gong, Fang, 2010. "What does "occupation" represent as an indicator of socioeconomic status?: Exploring occupational prestige and health," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(12), pages 2100-2107, December.
    15. Alexander Matros & Vladimir Smirnov & Andrew Wait & Helen Zhang, 2023. "Microfoundations of work intensification and burnout," Working Papers 2023-02, University of Sydney, School of Economics.
    16. Grimani, Katerina, 2014. "Labor earnings and Psychological well-being: An Empirical Analysis," MPRA Paper 57098, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Lutz Bellmann & Olaf Hübler, 2022. "Personality traits, working conditions and health: an empirical analysis based on the German Linked Personnel Panel, 2013–2017," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 283-318, February.
    18. Petri Böckerman & Alex Bryson & Antti Kauhanen & Mari Kangasniemi, 2020. "Does job design make workers happy?," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 67(1), pages 31-52, February.
    19. Cecilie Schou Andreassen & Ståle Pallesen & Torbjørn Torsheim, 2018. "Workaholism as a Mediator between Work-Related Stressors and Health Outcomes," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, January.
    20. Sara Lourenço & Filomena Carnide & Fernando G Benavides & Raquel Lucas, 2015. "Psychosocial Work Environment and Musculoskeletal Symptoms among 21-Year-Old Workers: A Population-Based Investigation (2011-2013)," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-15, June.

    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:22:y:2025:i:3:p:386-:d:1607147. 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.