Psychometric study of the Mentallypro Scale for the evaluation of exposure to psychological risk factors in the work environment.

  1. Guardia i Olmos, Joan 1
  2. Peró-Cebollero, Maribel 2
  3. Carbó-Carreté, Maria 3
  4. Cañete-Massé, Cristina 4
  1. 1 Universitat de Barcelona
    info

    Universitat de Barcelona

    Barcelona, España

    ROR https://ror.org/021018s57

  2. 2 Departament de Psicología Social & Psicología Quantitativa. Facultat de Psicología. Universitat de Barcelona (Spain)
  3. 3 Departament de Cognició, Desenvolupament i Psicologia de l'Educació. Facultat de Psicología. Universitat de Barcelona (Spain)
  4. 4 Facultat de Psicologia, Ciències de l’Educació i de l’Esport, Blanquerna, Universitat Ramon Llull (Spain)
Revista:
Anales de psicología

ISSN: 0212-9728 1695-2294

Ano de publicación: 2024

Título do exemplar: May - September

Volume: 40

Número: 2

Páxinas: 310-322

Tipo: Artigo

DOI: 10.6018/ANALESPS.579231 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDIGITUM editor

Outras publicacións en: Anales de psicología

Resumo

Background: This paper presents the new Mentallypro Scale for the Assessment of Exposure to Psychological Risk Factors in the Work Environment. Its appearance comes to solve some of the limitations of the current scales that either do not present updated scales or have mismatches to the current work environment. Method: 6881 workers distributed in 11 different sectors of activity completed the final scale, obtained after a test scale. The final scale consists of 56 ipsative items presented in blocks of four, so that the respondent can order them based on their highest to lowest identification with the item's content. The items define 14 factors and standardized scores have been obtained for each factor and sector of activity based on the distribution of Intellectual Quotients (IQ) [μ = 100 and σ = 15]. Results: All the psychometric indicators show a high degree of validity and reliability. Additionally, scores have been corrected for Age and Gender to remove the item differential effect. Conclusions: The scale presented meets the psychometric requirements and resolves the limitations of other scales in terms of ease, speed, and utility in the work environment.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Abad, F. J., Olea, J., Ponsoda, V. & García, C. (2011). Medición en ciencias sociales y de la salud [Measurement in social and health sciences]. Síntesis.
  • Anderson, L. M., Reilly, E. E., Gorrell, S., Schaumberg, K. & Anderson, D. A. (2016). Gender-based differential item function for the difficulties in emotion regulation scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 92, 87-91.
  • Barber, L. K., Barnes, C. M. & Carlson, K. D. (2013). Random and systematic error effects of insomnia on survey behavior. Organizational Research Methods, 16(4), 616-649. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428113493120
  • Browne, M.W. & Cudeck, R. (1992). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research, 21, 230-258.
  • Cedeño Bravo, A. P. & Chávez Carrillo, R. A. (2020). Comparative analysis of ISTAS 21 and FPSICO tools in financial sector personnel. Revista San Gregorio, (39), 143-162.
  • Ergashev Farrux Alijon Ugli,& Turdiev Pakhlavon Kakhramonovich (2022). Epidemiology of Psychiatric Disorders. Texas Journal of Medical Science, 12, 102–105.
  • Ferrando, P. J., Lorenzo-Seva, U., Hernández-Dorado, A. & Muñiz, J. (2022). Decalogue for the factor analysis of test items. Psicothema, 34(1), 7. doi: 10.7334/psicothema2021.456
  • Galanis, P., Vraka, I., Fragkou, D., Bilali, A. & Kaitelidou, D. (2021). Nurses' burnout and associated risk factors during the COVID‐19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 77(8), 3286-3302.
  • Hazell, C. M., Chapman, L., Valeix, S. F., Roberts, P., Niven, J. E. & Berry, C. (2020). Understanding the mental health of doctoral researchers: a mixed methods systematic review with meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. Systematic Reviews, 9(1), 1-30.
  • Hossain, MM., Tasnim, S., Sultana, A., Faizah, F., Mazumder, H., Zou, L., McKyer, ELJ., Ahmed, HU. & Ma, P. (2020). Epidemiology of mental health problems in COVID-19: a review. F1000Research, 23(9), 636. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.24457.1.
  • Hu, L. T. & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural equation modeling: a multidisciplinary journal, 6(1), 1-55.
  • Huarcaya-Victoria, J. (2020). Consideraciones sobre la salud mental en la pandemia de COVID-19 [Considerations about mental health in the CO-VID-19 pandemic]. Revista peruana de medicina experimental y salud pública, 37, 327-334.
  • Instituto Nacional de Seguridad y Salud en el Trabajo (INSST) (2022a). FPSICO. Factores psicosociales. Método de evaluación. Versión 4.1 [Psychosocial factors. Evaluation method. Version 4.1](Publicación AIP.29.1.22). Ministerio de Trabajo y Economía Social de España. https://www.insst.es/documentacion/catalogo-de-publicaciones/fpsico-factores-psicosociales-metodo-de-evaluacion-version-4.1
  • Instituto Nacional de Seguridad y Salud en el Trabajo (INSST) (2022b). FPSICO. Factores psicosociales. Método de evaluación. Versión 4.1. Adaptación del método FPSICO a diversos idiomas [FPSICO. Psychosocial factors. Evaluation method. Version 4.1. Adaptation of the FPSICO method to various languages] (Publicación AIP.29.6.22). Ministerio de Trabajo y Economía Social de España. https://www.insst.es/documents/94886/2927460/ FPSICO+4.1+Adaptaci%C3%B3n+a+diversos+idiomas.pdf/dce9dcf 4-ade8-d411-079c-df46d46b0ce5?t=1660117706405
  • Kisely, S., Warren, N., McMahon, L., Dalais, C., Henry, I. & Siskind, D. (2020). Occurrence, prevention, and management of the psychological effects of emerging virus outbreaks on healthcare workers: rapid review and meta-analysis. BMJ, 369. doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m1642
  • López‐López, I. M., Gómez‐Urquiza, J. L., Cañadas, G. R., De la Fuente, E. I., Albendín‐García, L. & Cañadas‐De la Fuente, G. A. (2019). Prevalence of burnout in mental health nurses and related factors: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 28(5), 1035-1044.
  • Martínez, L. M. (2020). Riesgos psicosociales y estrés laboral en tiempos de COVID-19: instrumentos para su evaluación. [Psychosocial risks and work stress in times of COVID-19: instruments for evaluation]. Revista de comunicación y salud, 10(2), 301-321.
  • Moncada i Lluís, S., Llorens Serrano, C., Salas Nicás, S., Moriña, D. & Navarro Giné, A. (2021). La tercera versión de COPSOQ-ISTAS21. Un instrumento internacional actualizado para la prevención de riesgos psicosociales en el trabajo [The third version of COPSOQ-ISTAS21. An updated international instrument for the prevention of psychosocial risks at work]. Revista Española de Salud Pública, 2021, 95.
  • Montalvo Sánchez, E., Guerrero Barona, E., Rodríguez Jiménez, M., Agudo Osuna, J., Moreno Manso, J. M. & Paredes Gómez, D. (2020). Prevalencia y niveles de exposición a factores y riesgos psicosociales a través del ISTAS-21 [Prevalence and levels of exposure to psychosocial factors and risks through the ISTAS-21]. Siglo Cero, 51(1), 53–72. https://doi.org/10.14201/scero20205115372
  • Muñoz del Carpio-Toia, A., Ramos-Vargas, L. F., Ames-Guerrero, R. J. & Yuli-Posadas, R. Á. (2022). Riesgos psicosociales en personal de salud del Perú: análisis de propiedades psicométricas del ISTAS 21 [Psychosocial risks in health personnel in Peru: analysis of psychometric properties of ISTAS 21]. Índex de Enfermería, 31(2), 115-119.
  • Seguridad Social (2023). Sistema de Seguridad Social Datos Cierre 2022 [Social Security System Closing Data 2022]. Ministerio de Inclusión, Seguridad Social y Migraciones de España. https://www.seg-social.es/wps/portal/wss/internet/EstadisticasPresupuestosEstudios/ Estadisticas/EST45/EST46/46f9f9ea-3122-40af-a1ea-1575083f3e80
  • Schumacker, R. E. & Lomax, R. G. (1996). A beginner's guide to SEM, Manwah Ed.
  • Stanislaw, H. & McCreary, J. (2023). Identifying Core Values with a Hierarchical, Ipsative, Preference Assessment. Journal of Personality Assessment, 105(3), 329-341. doi: 10.1080/00223891.2022.2090369
  • Syed, S., Ashwick, R., Schlosser, M., Jones, R., Rowe, S. & Billings, J. (2020). Global prevalence and risk factors for mental health problems in police personnel: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 77(11), 737-747.