COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Psychosocial and ergonomic survey of office and field jobs in a utility company.

INTRODUCTION: The effect of different kinds of work on the psychosocial assessment of workers under the same management and organizational environment is investigated.

METHODS: A voluntary assessment in a utility company was carried out using the short version of the Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire (CoPsoQ) on two occasions, 1.5 years apart. Initially, 25 office workers (11 men and 14 women) participated, while 14 of those workers (8 women and 6 men) participated in the second assessment together with 32 field workers. The sewage, water treatment and maintenance workers, totaling 32 men, also participated in a field ergonomics assessment using the Washington State Department of Labor and Industries field work ergonomic checklist.

RESULTS: The longitudinal outlook was fairly stable, with sustained severe scores in many CoPsoQ subscales and intensification of severity of workers' control over work and esteem for men. A significantly higher esteem score resulted for field rather than office workers. Workers subjected to foul odors showed similar severity of psychosocial factors.

DISCUSSION: For most psychosocial dimensions, the organizational design and management system in place, as well as the overall cultural environment in which it operates, create a much stronger and more decisive impact than job-specific factors.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app