Ando E, Kawakami N, Shimazu A, Shimomitsu T, Odagiri Y. Reliability and validity of the
English version of the New Brief Job Stress Questionnaire. Presented at the 31st
International Congress on Occupational Health, Seoul, Korea, May 31-June 5, 2015

Reliability and validity ofthe English version ofthe New Brief Job StressQuestionnaire
E. Ando1, N. Kawakami1, A.Shimazu1,T. Shimomitsu2,3, Y. Odagiri3
1.Department of Mental health, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo
2. Japan Health Promotion and Fitness Foundation
3. Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Tokyo Medical University

Backgrounds: Development of The Brief
Job Stress Questionnaire(the New BJSQ)
Inoue A, et al. Industrial Health (2014a, 2014b)

The Brief Job Stress Questionnaire (the BJSQ) (Shimomitsu T, et al. 2000)
Effort-Reward Imbalance(ERI) model
Global need ofmultidimensional andcomprehensive scale
for psychosocial factors
and outcome

Organizational factors
Work-family interference
The positive psychology
Workplace bullying and harassment

1.Review of current
scales

2. Collection of scales anditems based on theories

3. Collection of scales and items
from previous questionnaire

4. Proposal of additional
scales from stakeholder
meetings

The New Brief Job Stress Questionnaire (the New BJSQ)(Inoue A, et al. 2014)

The purpose of this study:

To develop & test the reliability and validityof the English version of the New BJSQ

Backgrounds→Methods→Results→Discussion

2

Methods :List of scales in the New BJSQ
Standard version: 49 scales (141 items) Short version: 42 scales (80 items)

Backgrounds→Methods→Results→Discussion

3

Methods: Framework of the New BJSQ
Kawakami N, et al. 2012
Job demands/psychosocial factors

Job demands
Job resources
Task-level
Workgroup-level
Job resources
Organizational level

Health/psychosocial outcomes
Healthdisturb
ance/Healthpromotion

HealthoutcomeWork
engagement
Activati
on ofIndividu
al/organizationalHarassment
prevention

Backgrounds→Methods→Results→Discussion

Furtherachievement

Socialcontribution
Productivity
Innovation

Iki-iki(active)
workplaceNoharassment

Satisfaction

Happiness4

Methods: Scale development
protocolStep 1: Translation(Japanese → English)
Step 2: Back translation(E→J) & Finalization
Step 3: Ethical approval @Utokyo(10003-(3))

Step 4: Internet survey in the US(2013 Feb.)
Step 5: Statistical analyses
Reliability: Internal consistency reliability(Cronbach’s α)
Validity: Principal component analysis and explanatory factor analysis of scales for
Job demands and Job resources.
5Backgrounds→Methods→Results→Discussion

Methods: Demographic data of samples
Inclusion criteria:
1: Be a native English speaker
2: Was working during the survey period

Internet Survey in the US (N=311)
SexAgeRace
Occupation
Employment Contract

Men=170 Women=141
20s: 23.5% 30s: 25.1% 40s: 27.0%
White: 83.6%
Private company employees: 70.0%Full-time: 84.6%

Backgrounds→Methods→Results→Discussion

6

Results: Internal consistency of scales- Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of each scale
showed sufficient value (α=0.70-0.94)
Relatively lower coefficient scales (α=0.59-0.65) :“Interpersonal conflict”“Role clarity”“Economics/status reward”“Stability rewards”“ Reward esteem”
Backgrounds→Methods→Results→Discussion

7

Results: Validity of Questionnaire• In principal component analysis, contribution
ratios of the first principal component of eachscale were sufficiently high (52.2-91.1%)• In factor analysis with varimax rotation,
extracted five factors in standard version andsix factors in short version regarding the Job
demands and Job resources factors in theNew BJSQ, respectively.
(cf. 4 factors in the Japanese version)
Backgrounds→Methods→Results→Discussion

8Discussion
Reliability of each scale-

Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of nearly all scales showed high values (α=0.70-0.94)⇒ Sufficient internal consistency.

Validity of grouping of job demands/job resources-Contribution ratio of principal component among nearly all scales were also high(52.2~91.1%).
⇒ Sufficient factorial validity.
- Five factors in standard ver. and six factors in short ver. were confirmed respectively⇒ Some cultural differences between Japan and the US?
cf.) Four factors in original version of the New BJSQ

Limitation- Two items from “Meaningfulness of job” were dropped in the internet survey.
⇒ Supplementary survey confirmed that internal consistency was acceptable.

Backgrounds→Methods→Results→Discussion

9Conclusion• This study demonstrated an acceptablelevel of reliability and a partly satisfactory
level of validity of the New BJSQ – theEnglish version among workers in the US.
• Some culture related differences in theconcept of job-demand and job-resources
may be implied between two countries,
thus the questionnaire may be useful for across-country comparison of job stress.
10

Acknowledgement
This study was conducted as an industryuniversity joint research project between theUniversity of Tokyo and Fujitsu Software
Technologies, Co. Ltd., and financially
supported by Fujitsu Software Technologies,
Co. Ltd.

11