Citation

Bowen P, Govender R, Edwards P. BMC Public Health 2018; 18(1): e1199.

Affiliation

School of Property, Construction and Project Management, RMIT University, Swanston Street, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2018, Holtzbrinck Springer Nature Publishing Group - BMC)

DOI

10.1186/s12889-018-6100-7

PMID

30355284

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study examined the construct validity and internal consistency of modified versions of the job autonomy and control, job pressure, work contact, work-family conflict, psychological distress, and sleep problems scales developed by Schieman and Young (2013) among construction professionals through confirmatory factor analysis and tests of internal consistency.

METHODS: Using a cross-sectional design, survey data were collected from 942 South African construction professionals, of which 630 responses were considered for analysis. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to examine construct validity. Cronbach's coefficient alpha was used to determine the internal consistency, and convergent validity was tested using correlation analysis.

RESULTS: The final CFA indicated very good model fit to the data (χ2 /df ratio = 2.11, IFI = .95, CFI = .95, RMSEA = .06, and Hoelter (95%) = 176). The scales demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency:.82;.91;.83;.90;.90; and.73, respectively. Convergent validity was largely demonstrated with respect to direction of association, but not in relation to magnitude. A limitation of the validation study was the lack of available data for a more robust examination of reliability beyond internal consistency, such as test-retest.

CONCLUSIONS: The six scales developed by Schieman and Young (2013) hold promise as measures of work contact, work-family conflict, psychological distress, and sleep problems in relation to working conditions of construction professionals.

Language: en

Keywords

Measurement scales; Psychological distress; Schieman and Young (2013); Sleep problems; Validation; Work contact; Work-family conflict