The Importance of Contextualized Psychosocial Risk Indicators in Workplace Stress Assessment: Evidence from the Healthcare Sector

First validation of the technical and administrative staff quality of life at work tool (TASQ@work) in academia

Introduction

Based on the job demands-resources (JD-R) model, the present study aimed to validate "The Technical and Administrative Staff Quality of Life At Work" (TASQ@work), a new tool to assess the quality of life at work in academia focused on technical and administrative staff.

Methods

This tool was developed by the QoL@Work research team, a group of expert academics in the field of work and organizational psychology affiliated with the Italian Association of Psychologists. The TASQ@work was elaborated in different steps. The first phase was aimed at the identification of the dimensions of the tool. The second phase was aimed to assess the psychometric properties of the tool. The validation process involved confirmatory analysis and measurement invariance of the various constructs selected. The analyses were performed in a convenience sample of two Italian universities in different regions (one in the Northwest and the second in Central Italy).

Results

The sample was composed of 1820 Administrative Staff, comprising 69.4% from University 1 (N = 1,263) and 30.6% from University 2 (N = 557). The TASQ@work presented satisfactory psychometric properties (normality of the items, reliability and content, construct and nomological validity) and measurement invariance across gender, seniority, and Athenaeum.

Discussion

The results indicate that the tool can be considered a reliable and valid instrument to assess job demands, job resources, and outcomes in the working life of technical and administrative academic staff. In this perspective, the present study represents the first contribution to the debate on the psychosocial risks in academic contexts by presenting a new tool, the TASQ@work, aimed at contextualizing the JD-R model to understand the role played by psychosocial aspects in affecting the well-being of the academic employees.

Workplace Bullying and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Symptomology: The Influence of Role Conflict and the Moderating Effects of Neuroticism and Managerial Competencies

Research has explored numerous consequences of workplace bullying, including a recent link to the exhibition of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptomology. Role conflict as a workplace stressor may contribute to instances of bullying from a passive perspective, which may lead to PTSD symptomology in victims. What remains less explored is if role conflict has a direct relationship to PTSD symptomology and how personality traits such as neuroticism and workplace factors such as managerial competencies may moderate the stress brought on by role conflict. Hence the present study seeks to examine this gap in the literature. This study utilizes a between-subjects, cross-sectional design with 159 participants, 39.6% male and 60.4% female. Most participants (60%) were Italian workers of a large social cooperative organization. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the measurement model was valid and had an adequate model fit. Results from two separate moderated mediation analyses found a positive, full mediation between the independent variable of role conflict, the mediator of exposure to bullying, and the dependent variable of PTSD symptomology. Furthermore, in this study, neuroticism strengthened the indirect effect while managerial competencies weakened it. The results highlight the importance of training competent managers and providing resources for more vulnerable employees to moderate employee work stress and its negative outcomes.

Psychological Distress and Psychosocial Factors in the Non-Formal Context of Basketball Coaches in Times of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Psychological distress and psychosocial factors are studied in the sports context in players of various specialties, but are only little studied with coaches who carry out their work with these athletes; that is where we put the emphasis, trying to determine the perception of coaches on psychological distress and psychosocial risk factors that may influence their sports work in times of a pandemic. It is an ex post facto study with a single-group retrospective design, with a representative sample of 94 coaches out of a possible 109. The Kessler Psychological Distress Scale and the short version of the ISTAS21 Psychosocial Risk Assessment at Work Questionnaire were adapted to the sports context. The results show that the youngest, those with the least experience and level 1 and level 2 coaches show the highest levels of stress. According to the psychosocial risk assessment, level 1 and 2 coaches, with experience between 6 to 10 years, are in the risk zone. Therefore, it is important to work with a group of coaches who are in the psychosocial risk zone and with high levels of psychological discomfort in order to avoid mental, emotional and physical stress, for the good performance of their work in the best possible conditions.