2016
DOI: 10.15171/hpp.2017.03
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Iranian version of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ) for assessment of psychological risk factors at work

Abstract: Background: The Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ) is a widely used tool for evaluation of psychosocial risk factors at work. The aims of this study were to describe the short version of Farsi COPSOQ and to present its psychometric properties. Methods: A total of 427 administrative health care staff participated in this descriptive methodological study. Forward–backward procedure was adopted to translate the questionnaire from English into Farsi. Content validity was assessed by a panel of 10 expe… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
11
0
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(15 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
(24 reference statements)
2
11
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…A lower rating for each of the factors indicates better and ergonomic psychosocial conditions of the work environment ( 19 , 20 ). The reliability and validity of the Persian version of this questionnaire have been determined through Cronbach's alpha and the values of 0.75 and 0.89 have been reported for them ( 21 ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A lower rating for each of the factors indicates better and ergonomic psychosocial conditions of the work environment ( 19 , 20 ). The reliability and validity of the Persian version of this questionnaire have been determined through Cronbach's alpha and the values of 0.75 and 0.89 have been reported for them ( 21 ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Also, the five main constructs measured by means of the instrument showed significant and coherent correlation sizes and directions, when compared with both the theoretical background of the questionnaire and with several other versions/applications of it (Kristensen et al, 2005; Aminian et al, 2017; Berthelsen et al, 2018). Also, there was a good coherence in the significant associations observed between the five factors of the scale and the psychological health indicator provided by the Goldberg’s GHQ-12 (i.e., psychological distress ), used as a CV for assessing convergent validity.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…Two other studies identi ed four-dimensional models, which diverges from our ndings where six dimensions were identi ed in the Peruvian population. A Persian study by COPSOQ evaluated the short version of the instrument [27], nding through con rmatory factor analysis a total of 4 dimensions (32 items): quality of leadership, social support from supervisors, rewards, justice and respect, trust, and predictability (dimension 1), self-rated health, burnout, stress, work-family con ict and emotional demands (dimension 2), the meaning of work, commitment to the workplace, in uence at work and role clarity (dimension 3), and offensive behavior (dimension 4). Unlike the CENSOPAS-COPSOQ (our study), the Persian study by Aminian et al, collapses dimensions to achieve a more stable factorial solution.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%