A psychometric evaluation of the Job Demands-Resources Scale in South Africa
MetadataShow full item record
Although different occupations/organisations have unique work characteristics, it seems possible to divide them into two categories, namely job demands and job resources. A valid, equivalent and reliable instrument is needed to measure job demands and resources and to compare them among different occupations/organisations. The aim of this study was to investigate the construct equivalence, validity and reliability of a measuring instrument of job demands and resources and to assess the differences between the job demands and job resources in various occupations/organisations in South Africa. A cross-sectional survey design was used. A stratified random sample (N = 2717) was taken from a population consisting of employees in various occupations and organisations. The occupations/organisations included academics (higher education institutions), staff at a university of technology, correctional officers. insurance staff and engineers. The Job Demands-Resources Scale (JDRS) was used to assess job demands and job resources in the different occupations/organisations. Descriptive statistics, exploratory factor analysis, reliability analysis and multivariate analysis of variance were used to analyse the data. Five reliable factors were extracted using principal component analysis, namely: overload, growth opportunities, organisational support, advancement and job insecurity. The results showed that the structure of job demands and job resources in the different occupations/organisations were equivalent. with the exception of one factor, namely organisational support. Engineers showed higher scores on overload and growth opportunities than Occupations/organisations. Academics in higher education institutions also experienced more growth opportunities than other groups. Engineers, academics in higher education institutions and employees in the insurance industry reported higher levels of organisational support than correctional officers and employees at a university of technology. Engineers obtained the highest score on advancement, while academics in higher education institutions obtained the lowest scores. Job insecurity was the highest for correctional officers and employees of a university of technology, and the lowest for engineers. Recommendations for future research were made.
- ETD@PUK