This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Calnan, M. Articles by Wainwright, D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Calnan, M. Articles by Wainwright, D. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Stress Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Job strain, effort - reward imbalance, and stress at work: competing or complementary models?

MRC HSRC, m.w.calnan{at}bristol.ac.uk

Emma Wadsworth

Centre for Occupational Health Psychology, Cardiff University, Wales

Margaret May

Department of Social Medicine, University of Bristol, UK

Andrew Smith

Centre for Occupational Health Psychology, Cardiff University, Wales

David Wainwright

MRC HSRC

Background: The Demand Control Model (DCM) and the Effort - Reward Imbalance Model (ERI) offer putative explanations of the relationship between stressful working conditions, job strain, and psychological and physical ill health. Aims: The aims of this study are to: (a) compare the predictive powers of the two models for explaining perceived job stress and mental distress amongst workers as a whole, (b) identify whether a model which combines dimensions of the DCM and ERI might have more predictive power than either of them separately, and (c) ascertain whether the models make distinct contributions to explaining stress at work in specific occupational settings. Methods: Statistical analysis was carried out on data collected from a cross-sectional postal survey of a random sample (n=7,069), of the adult population in an urban area in Southern England. The analysis focused on the 4,135 respondents who were in paid employment. Results: There was little support for combining the models as the combined model was dominated by the predictive power of dimensions from the ERI. However, the results also showed that the models or dimensions of the models made distinct contributions to explaining perceived work stress in different types of occupation. Conclusions: There is little evidence to support a combined model of work characteristics. The ERI appears to be the stronger of the two models although the DCM has explanatory value for specific occupations.

Key Words: mental distress • work characteristics • work stress.

Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, Vol. 32, No. 2, 84-93 (2004)
DOI: 10.1080/14034940310001668


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Rostila The Swedish labour market in the 1990s: The very last of the healthy jobs? Scand J Public Health, March 1, 2008; 36(2): 126 - 134. [Abstract] [PDF]