Figure 13 presents mean ratings on scales of obesity and self-assessment of
one's health state for the IUPA and NIOSH sample respondents. The ratings for
obesity are in the mid-range in both samples, with the mean rating for the
combined groups not too dissimilar from that reported in 23-occupation survey.
The self-reported health ratings suggest that patrol officers believe themselves
in relatively good health. In fact, over 75% of the patrol officers' ratings in
both samples fell in the more favorable categories to describe their health
while less than 42% of this group gave judgments in the opposite or less

favorable direction.

Relations Between Stressors and Strains

A series of regression analyses was performed to establish the extent to which
the different strain measures, termed outcome variables in such analyses, could
be predicted by one or more of the stressor and contextual factors, termed

predictor variables. Essential features of these analyses are enumerated below.

1. Since high intercorrelation between predictor variables limits the power of
regression in isolating factors moet associated with changes in the dependent or
outcome measure, a test for collinearity, using prccedures outlined by Belsley,
Kuh, and Welsch (1980), was conducted before beginning the regression analyses.
This test served as an added check on the independence of the predictor
variables. Two colliniarity problems were found. One involved the factors,
Relations with Supervisor, Inter-Officer Communication and Sharing of
Information Across Shifts. To correct the problem, these three factors were
combined for purposes of the regression analyses into a single predictor
entitled Interpersonal Relations/Communications with Fellow Officers and

Supervisor. The second problem involved different factors comprising the

52


60. How important do you think your department considers it that an officer go to school in
order to be promoted?

1. Very unimportant 4. Slightly important
2. Moderately unimportant 5S. Moderately important
3. Slightly unimportant —____ 6. Very important
61. How many children do you now support? — Children
“«

62. Other than your spouse and children, how many people depend upon you as their primary source
of support?
Persons

This completes the questionnaire. Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any comments about
the questionnaire or its contents please write those comments below.

- 20 -

1» US GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1984 - 759-103/L0911


Tabl

e2

IUPA Sample Response by Department

Returns from

Total Questionnaires Questionnaires Response Patrol Officers

Department Force Distributed Returned Rate (%) Only
Albuquerque, NM 509 305 110 36.1 65
Bellevue, WA 88 65 28 43.1 16
Buffalo, NY 1288 765 213 27.8 137
Cleveland, OH 2211 740 127 17.2 98
Detroit, MI 5404 876 266 30.4 245
Joplin, MO 74 78 15 19.2 ll
Toledo, OH 704 501 130 25.9 109
Trenton, NJ 313 350 123 35.1 73
Memphis, TN 1316 628 233 37.1 154
Minneapolis, MN 840 665 225 33.8 107
St. Louis, MO 2173 820 273 33.3 189
San Francisco ,CA 1745 783 227 29.0 161
Seattle, WA 1035 730 268 36.7 169
Unidentified* - - 85 - 57

Total 17,750 7306 2312 31.6 1591

* Returned questionnaires from police officers whose departments could not be

ascertained.

18


STRESS AMONG POLICE OFFICERS

Joseph J. Hurrell, Jr. Anthony Pate
National Institute for Occupational Police Foundation
Safety and Health

Robert Kliesmet
International Union of Police Associations

With the Technical Assistance of:

Robert A. Bowers
Shiu Lee
JeAnne Burg

U.S. DEPARIMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Public Health Service
Centers for Disease Control
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
Division of Biamedical and Behavioral Science
Cincinnati, Ohio 45226
October 1984


the past six months, please check the corresponding box.

Check below if you have had

Below is a list of illnesses you may or may not have had. For every illness you have had in

; For every illness you have had in the past six months, please

the illness in the past six nswer_each of these questions:
ecatee check the | 9 eI this OS b. enzo aboot any c. gor illness
right for every illness you tor, please check this in the past nade worse S
have had. id y
below. six months, please your job, please
check below. check below.
a. Asthma O}e Ol» O » me
b. Hay fever {f| # Oo» oO» ms
c. Thyroid trouble or goiter Ty} ov Os CG»
d. Bronchitis O]}* O 2 J Ey O
e. Repeated skin trouble |» iJ 3 Cs C2
f. corte or shaking oO a oO » im 0 G m
g. Gall bladder trouble QO] # Oo» QO * mes
h. Trouble with your spine CG (a) 2 fi * oOo»
** Geouble with joints) Oy O* as ae
j. Heart disease or anyheart trouble [jj “ FW 46 Oo« oa
k. Hypertension or high blood pressure []| oO «# oOo» 7 2
1. Diabetes (sugar) Oj 2 O » Gs Os
m, Ulcers (stomach) oO} “ os ao oO»
n. A cold or the flu oO! « Oa oe 0 «
0. A stroke fy; « Os 3 4 O«
p. Epilepsy {| « Oe Qe Oa
q. Cancer Ol 2 co] G* oO.
tr. Tuberculosis QO} » [e) o* oO»
8. Hernia or rupture T7377 | * Oo» oO» oO»
t. Trouble with seeing 7] 2 O » tf] [a] ©
u. Trouble with hearing O} » ov fs oO»
v. Trouble in the urinary tract Ci] = Oa oO 2 Os
we Trouble in the gastrointestinal | = oO ss oO * O #
x. Trouble with teeth or gums O| = oO» Ga» Qo
y- Hypoglycemia (low blood sugar) (]| * oa» ml & oj} 8
2. Migraine (or severe headaches) [| TM Oo» =) oo
aa. Liver trouble oO} Oa uj @ Us
bb. Venereal disease a] 4 = Qs
cc. Kidney trouble ij} # as a oa
dd. Gout Gy 2 z| © & qos
ee. Whiplash injuries Gc) * ” ee io»
££. Mental illnéss or nervous breakdown QO hed 3 a fm}
gg. Other (s) (PLEASE SPECIFY)
a} « “s ao « Ooa
val rr) rey ee) Toa

-16-


Boredom, and relations with citizens were predictors of three of the five states.
Those officers reporting more boredom tended to report more depression and
irritability and less placidity. By contrast, officers who reported good police/

citizen relations generally reported less anxiety, irritability and irritation.

Seven factors were found to be related to two of the five states. In general,
those officers who reported more support from their spouse/closest friend of the
opposite sex reported less depression and more placidity. Those officers who
reported higher levels of satisfaction with their promotion system tended to
report less depression and less irritation. However, officers who reported that
their departments had rigid policies and those who reported poor fit with respect
to quantitative workload reported more irritability and irritation. Similarly,
those officers who reported higher levels of workload dissatisfaction and job
dissatisfaction tended to report more depression and less placidity. Likewise,
officers who reported poor fit with respect to role ambiguity reported more

anxiety and less placidity.

c. Behavioral Strains as Outcome Variables - As Table 13 indicates, anxiety was

a significant predictor or five of the nine behavioral strains. In general,
officers who reported higher levels of anxiety in their jobs tended to report
more alcohol, coffee and cigarette consumption as well as more frequent use of
medications. Satisfaction with management was a predictor of four of the nine
strains and depression a predictor of three of the nine. Here, officers
reporting more satisfaction reported more cigarette smoking and marital dis-
harmony. Depression as might be expected, was positively associated with sleeping

pill and tranquilizer use as well as martial disharmony.

Five factors, general social support from spouse/friend of opposite sex, job
related social support from other than spouse/closest friend of opposite sex,

court leniency, relations with citizens, and P-E fit with respect to variance

61


Another aspect of role conflict relates to the fact that the law enforcement
officer is inheriting many of society's major problems —- poverty, overcrowding,
urban decay, drug and alcohol abuse, domestic instability and related concerns.
These problems defy immediate, simple solution and have become matters of
containment for the police, who in turn, are blamed for not doing enough to
control the spiralling crime rate. As seen in Table 17, problematic relations
with citizens are associated with negative affective states and behavioral

strains reported by the police officers surveyed.

Given the above results, it would appear that major problems of stress among
police officers involve needs for greater clarification of their job roles
which must take account of perceptions and expectations of others with whom
they interact both on and off the job. Freer discussions and interactions
with police management on matters of mutual concern can be beneficial

here in reducing bureaucratic indifference. Special training or counseling
in developing strategies for better dealing with conflicts which bear on
professional and familial responsibilities also have merit. Duty
assignments allowing more positive kinds of contact between patrol officers
and the public can also do much to reduce the apparent estrangement now
felt. An updated equivalent to the "cop on the beat" and co-mingling with

the community needs study in this regard.

Job Related Strains

Few strain measures showed deviant ratings or other indications of significant
problems among the police officers surveyed in this study. To the contrary,

most of the overall group ratings fell in the mid-range of the different

72


Teports focusing on police work. These factors are classified under the
headings of Organizational/Career Sources, Aspects of Work Routines,
Interpersonal Relationships/Communications, Job Schedule Carry Over Problems,
and Person-Environment Fit. The latter category is reserved for those stressors
measured in terms of differences between preferred and existing work conditions

as presently perceived.

Situational, Demographic, Personality and Social Support & Family
Characteristics are listed in the same column as the Job Environment Stressors
and represent contextual types of factors. Either directly or through
interaction with the aforementioned job stressors, they may affect the amount of

strain an individual experiences.

Various responses to stress or strains are listed and include negative attitude
and emotional problems, behavioral problems (e.g. excessive drinking, smoking,
poor sleep and familial problems). Accidents could also be viewed as a
behavioral consequence though placed in a separate category. Problems secondary
to these behavioral measures include an assortment of somatic complaints and

illnesses of presumed stress origin.

In the scheme described in Figure 1, Job Related Attitudes and Affective States
are treated as intermediate responses to the consequences of job stressors.
Such reactions signify initial stressful experience and become the basis for the

more specific strains which follow.

Overall, the framework suggests a causal sequence of stress-strain events.
However, this study, while defining and evaluating relationships between
stressors and strains offers no basis for inferring causality. In its overall

intent, it seeks to characterize: (1) stressful elements in police work as


DISCUSSION

As stated at the outset of this report, the purpose of the present study was to
identify those aspects of policing which are perceived as major sources of
stress by patrol officers, and to examine the impact of these percetyed stressors
on their health and well-being. The results provide two bases for making these
determinations. One is through acknowledging the highest mean levels of
perceived stress and strain evident in the responses of the police officers
surveyed in the study, The other is through the regression analyses, emphasizing
those factors which appear to exert the greatest influence on the different
strain measures as well as noting those strains most readily affected. The

most salient outputs from both approaches are summarized in Tables 16 and 17.
Specifically, shown in Table 16 are those stressors, contextual factors, and
strain measures whose mean response deviated substantially from the mid-range

or other reference levels used for gauging significance. The criteria used for

the purpose of sorting out such factors were:

(1) Combined sample mean levels for either stressors or strains differing
from the mid-point of the designated scaled measures hy the equivalent
of one or more standard deviations, and/or-

(2) Differences of more than 25% from responses to similar items found
in other surveys of work populations, and/or

(3) Items reflecting strain indications in 70% or more of the combined
sample respondents.

The signs coupled to the different factors shown in Table 16 are mostly negative
in acknowledging the adverse direction of the stress and strain levels observed.

In some instances, a given factor shows a positive and negative sign suggesting

a dual influence or consequence or mixed extreme results as explained below.

In Table 17, are noted the frequency of significant relations found between each
of the predictor stressor/contextual factors and the individual measures comprising
the six different categories of strain (e.g., job related attitudes,

67


Patrol officers in the NIOSH and IUPA samples show little differences in their
individual characteristics as depicted in Table 5. The typical officer is a
white married male, 32 years of age, weighing 189 pounds, 5 feet 11 inches in
height, having one dependent, and almost 8 years of service in his current
department. Figure 2 plots the mean ratings for patrol officers in the NIOSH
and IUPA samples on two personality scales which were components of the
questionnaire. Also shown is the mean and standard deviation for the combined
IUPA-NIOSH samples on these scales. The NIOSH and IUPA respondents show similar
scores in terms of socially desired behavior, and are near the middle of the
scale. Near identical ratings are also seen for both samples of respondents to
the Type A personality scale. In this instance, however, the ratings show some
deviation from the mid-range and in a direction which suggests the average
officer to have a hard-driving temperament, a suspected risk factor in coronary

heart disease.

2. Job Environment Stressors. Figures 3-9 and Tables 6 summarize responses to

questionnaire items depicting assorted job elements which may act as real or
potential sources of stress in police work. These factors are treated in groups

or subcategories as noted below.

a. Organization/Career Elements - Separate and combined sample ratings

expressing degree of satisfaction of IUPA and NIOSH respondents to questionnaire
items dealing with management, rigidity of department policies, pay, promotion
plan, opportunity for expression, union activity, training, job future security,
departmental communication policy and equipment are shown in Figures 3a and 3b.
In all cases, the average IUPA ratings show more dissatisfaction with these
different elements than those from the NIOSH group. Such differences are most

marked for response to the management, promotion plan and departmental

25


3.

INSTRUCTIONS

Most questions can be answered by filling in the
appropriate numbers in the spaces provided. If you
do not find the exact answer which.fits your case,
choose the one which comes the closest to it. For
some questions, you will fill in the blank 9

Please answer all question in order.

Ignore the small numbers to the side or under the
responses; these numbers are for later use in computer
analyses.

The value of the study depends on your being honest
in answering this questionnaire. Remember, you will
not be identified with your answers.



responses than the IUPA respondents on three of the four scales but these mean
differences are not substantial. Overall, the mean ratings seem to fall in the

mid-range of each scale.

d. Personal Factors - Figure 6 plots the mean officer ratings on questionnaire
items and scales designed to measure the effect of job schedules on various
psycho-social and related aspects of their lives. The IUPA and NIOSH means are
almost identical but show results that are somewhat mixed if not inconsistent.
While officers in both samples see the least harmful effect of job hours or days
worked on friendships with other police officers, they view these work schedules
as most detrimental to their social life. The mean ratings here, however, all

hover around the middle of the scale suggesting no extreme reaction.

e. Person-Environment Fit - Shown in Figures 7a and 7b are the scaled ratinge of
the person-environment fit measures for a number of job features as extracted
from the questionnaire responses of the IUPA and NIOSH respondents. On each
scale, a positive value indicates that the job situation provides more of the
specified feature than the person desires; a negative score means that the
officer wishes to have more of that job feature than actually provided or
perceived. Only minor differences appear between the mean ratings of P-E fit
measures for the NIOSH and IUPA samples on the designated job characteristics.
Job participation shows the most discrepant P-E measure, the police officers
indicating too little opportunity to determine the way they should carry out
their job. Responsibility for others also shows notably less of this
characteristic than desired by the police officers. Repetitiousness is
considered to be greater than desired with there being similar feelings about
role ambiguity but to a lesser extent. Other job features such as variance in
workload, job complexity, and amount of workload reveal smaller divergencies in

terms of the mean P-E fit measures for the respondent police officers.

32


1. Results and Multivariate Analyses: A significant (p<.0l) relationship was

found between each of the sets of predictor variables shown in Figure 14 and
their corresponding sets of outcome variables. Hence, all of the variables
comprising each of the predictor sets were used in the univariate multiple

regression analyses.

2. Results and Univariate Multiple Regression: The univariate multiple

regression results are presented below for each set of outcome measures,
starting from Job Related Responses followed by Affective States, Behavioral
Strains, Somatic Complaints, Health and Illness and Auto Accidents. Tables
summarizing the results of the analyses for all but the Auto Accident measures
(which as will be seen was unnecessary) are provided. These tables indicate
which factors were found to be significant (pe.01) predictors of individual

outcome measures along with the direction of the relationship.

a. Job Related Attitudes as Outcome Variables - As seen in Table 11, two

factors were significant predictors of both job dissatisfaction and work related
self-esteem. These were the Sales Type A personality measure and boredom. In
terms of the direction of the relationships, officers reporting higher scores

on the Type A measures tended to report less job dissatisfaction and higher levels
of work related self-esteem. Those officers who reported high levels of boredom
tended to report more job dissatisfaction. and lower levels of work related

self-esteem.

Six additional factors were found to be significantly related to job

dissatisfaction. Officers reporting higher levels of satisfaction with

57


communication scaled items. Ratings reflecting most dissatisfaction for either
the IUPA or NIOSH respondents involve management, promotion, opportunity for
expression and equipment issues. For the other job elements, the mean ratings
for either sample or the combined one fall in the mid-range of the scale,

suggesting no extreme reactions either favorable or unfavorable.

b. Work Routines - This subcategory included elements encompassing overtime and
rotating shifts, and time spent in court plus certain perceptions of job
routines (Table 6 and Figure 4). The latter included ratings of satisfaction
with workload, use of skills, court work, and other job attributes. Most
dissatisfaction among respondents in both samples was directed to court leniency
to offenders and to a lesser extent court delays. Otherwise, the IUPA and NIOSH
officers held positive views about their work. Both groups indicated that their
work was neither boring nor subject to conflicting responsibilities,
underutilization of their abilities or problematic workloads. The only major
differences between the two samples of respondents appeared to be in Table 6
where it was shown that nearly twice as many IUPA officers worked rotating
shifts. Whereas the NIOSH officers were subject to more overtime, both groups

of respondents registered about the same amount of unwanted overtime hours.

c. Inter-Personal Relations/Communication - This subcategory covered items

pertaining to the nature and quality of patrol officer interactions or contacts
between themselves, their supervisors and the public. Communications across
shifts was also examined in this context. Figure 5 describes mean ratings on
scales of these elements as obtained for the IUPA and NIOSH respondents, both
separate and combined. The most negative ratings are indicated for police-
citizen relations, and the most positive ratings for supervisory relations and

communication across shifts. The NIOSH sample of officers give more favorable

28


923021puy 1129 Kaduo uy -dyyeuorqejes anyqeBau quv9151UB}9 @ Gareo;pUy UBS antaeBaU e pue diysuo}ze1a1 aalaisod 3UeD}

spunog sen diysuoqejas quess3yu818 ou 3843
® p93vo1puy UZ1e enjd y :320N

|

+

a

'

haaisa 2798 O7iV17a WOM
NOILOVASILYSSIG dor
SqNLILIV GalViaw Gor

GVOTIOH AALLVLIINVAD

SSANSNOILLILadaa

NOTLVAIOILUVd

ALINDIARV_ 3108

SUAHLO HOA ALITIGISNOASTU

ALIXa1dHOO GOF

GYOTAUOM N1 AONVIEVA

11d INGWNOWLANZ-NOSad  *|
TSHA1GOUd WAAO AWUVD AINGAHOS BOF

SNAZILID HLIA

+

S$¥d914d0 4017134 KLIS
?SNOLLVOINARHOD/SNOLLV198 ‘IVNOSHSdYaINI *
191714N09 3108

él

ted

+

‘HOGauOd

SAV1ad_LUN0D

XONGINAT LaN0d

BALL BONVUVaddv LYNOD

ALITIGY 40 NOLLVZI11iN

NOILOVASILVSSIG GVOTXION

BRILUAO

WIOMLALNS

TSANIINOW WUOM 40 SLOFdSV

inanainda
KOTI0a INAALUVAa 40 NOLLVIINAHHOD
‘AlTunogs @or

—|—

SNINIVEL

60

dIHSYRGHaN NOIND
NOISSH¥dXa YO ALINALUOAdO
WILSAS “IVNOTLOHOUd

Wd

$319170d INARLYVdad dO ALIGISIY
ANZWASVNVR
?SHOUNOS BFAUVO/TVNOLLVZINVSUO
SUOSSHHLS INAHNOUIANA Or

‘ALAAVS $8391440 WOA NWAONOD ATINVA

@SNOdS NON WOUA “ddNS “90S “dOUd TWNOSYad
MAS ALISOddO 40

GNa1U4/3SNOdS NVHL BAHLO “ddNS “90S "Iau aor
XaS

BL1SO0dd0 40 GNAlWA/aSNOdS-*ddNS *90S_1,Na9
WOSTAUAANS ROWA LOANS “IVID0S ‘WuaNad

SOLISTUALOVEVHD ATINVA GNV LuOddns 1VID0S

+
+

wl]

ALITVROSUSd V ddA1 Sa71VS
ALITIGVGISAd TWI90S HO THVH-ANKOWD

SOLISTWALOVUVHD ALT IVNOSSad

8u0} 38194 JO 29quN_ 1070,

|ALIGIOVId NOLLVLIGUL

ALIVIGVLIGSL

NOISSHad3a

ALOIXNV

SHLVIS BATLOGAAV

SuOLOIGHad
SaRO:

SBLVIS AALLO@AAV BOA THATT 10° AKL LV INVOIAINDIS SYOLOIGAUd NAAALIG

71 alava

Sa1HSNOLLVIaY 40 AUVHHAS


For what police department do you work?

tifs337

How long have you worked for your present department? Years a Months
Have you ever worked as a police officer in any other department (s)? —___ 1. No a
___ 2. Yes
a. If Yes, for how long? = Years re Months
What is your present rank? (CHECK ONE OF THE FOLLOWING)
—__ (01) Recruit Officer ——_. (06) Lieutenant
——— (02) Probationary Officer ——— (07) Detective
—____. (03) Patrol/Police officer —___ (08) Investigator
___ (04) corporal _____ (09) Inspector WG
____._ (05) Sergeant —__. (10) Other (SPECIFY)
a. How long (if at all) have you served in each of the following ranks in your present department?
Years Months Years Months
1. Recruit Officer _—__ ‘4. Ldeutenane Ce
is a » a
2, Probationary Officer _ sc 7. Detective ap =
3. Patrol/Police Officer —_ cc 8. Investigator — ee
7 a7 ro
4. Corporal ~- ee LL 9. Inspector — _
u cy a ss
5. Sergeant SSS 10. Other (SPECIFY) __ —
a 7 s 7
Which of the following describes your present regular duty assignment? (CHECK ONE)
—— (01) Patrol — (11) Property
——— (02) Staff Planning ——. (12) Communications
—— (03) Tactical Unit —— (13) Records
—— (04) Crimes Against Persons —— (14) Personnel
—— (05) Crimes Against Property —_— (15) Training or Education
— — (06) Traffic ——_. (16) Narcotics B@
____ (07) Staf£ Inspection ____ (17) Canine
_—____ (08) vice —_ (18) Jai
—____ (09) Internal Affairs ———— (19) Other (SPECIFY)
____ (10) Juvenile


DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL
NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH
ROBERT A. TAFT LABORATORIES
4676 COLUMBIA PARKWAY, CINCINNATI, OHIO 45226

OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300

Redistribution using indicia is illegal.

Special Fourth Class -Book

POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HHS
HHS 396

DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 84-108


aig

1 [eidwes

:

+,

i

wot

WW
180004

ai Wl

7_at

cccc

oe

ssausnonnedey

wd
1808

uonedinyuedg

38


Kahn et al (1964) have discussed the effects of role conflict and role ambiguity
on organizational members, specifying such outcomes as an increase in internal
conflicts, reduced job satisfaction, and decreased confidence in superiors and
in the organization. They further suggest that the problem of role definition
and acceptance are likely to increase with the size and complexity of the
organization. This appears to be the case in the present study with the IUPA

sample generally reporting a greater degree of stress than the NIOSH sample.

These differences are primarily quantitative rather than qualitative, however,
in that both samples reported the same types of stressors as common to police
work. One notable exception involved the officers' satisfaction with the manner
in which department policies are communicated and the quality of his/her
interactions with supervisory personnel. On this issue, the NIOSH and IUPA
samples differed not only in degree but in direction, with the NIOSH officers
expressing general satisfaction with the status quo and the IUPA sample,
dissatisfaction. This difference could reflect the escalating problems of
communication and interpersonal harmony and sensitivity as a function of
organizational size, or it could be viewed as a primary cause (or effect) of
unionization in the IUPA cities. The present study design does not allow for a
resolution of these alternative explanations. Neverthelesa, the dissatisfaction
with supervisory relations and organizational climate expressed by the IUPA
officers is consistent with Kahn's (1965) discussion of the effects of

bureaucratization and organizational size on the individual member.

The discrepancy in size between the IUPA and NIOSH sampled cities could also
partially account for the observed differences in response rates between these
two sources. Presumably, the smaller departments (i.e., those in the NIOSH

sample) posed fewer problems in terms of distributing and collecting the

80


INTRODUCTION

Over the years, many researchers, administrators, and clinicians have issued
ominous statements concerning stress in policing. For example, one psychologist
has asserted, "it is an accepted fact that a police officer is under stress and
pressure unequaled by any other profession." (Somodevilla, 1978, p. 21). He
claims that as a result of this stress, police officers have a 75 percent
divorce rate, a 20 percent rate of "problem drinking" and have a suicide rate
six and one half times that of the average population. A dissertation (Hageman,
1977) echoes this theme by citing that the divorce rate of police officers
ranges from 60 to 80 percent. Likewise, a psychiatrist states that
",...alcoholism among police is one of the most common and most devastating

problems facing communities today." (Shev and Hewes, 1977, p. 133).

While the aforementioned statements carry shock value, documentation for each
claim remains obscure. Somodevilla (1978) and Shev and Hewes (1977), for
example, offer no data base for their contention (though it is possible that
they have been taken from their own case files, admittedly, a limited sample).

The citation in Hageman's dissertation is similarly unsupported.

Some evidence does exist for high rates of police divorce (e.g., Durner, 1975;
Hageman, 1977; Reiser, 1972; Whitehouse, 1965), police alcoholism (e.g.,
Dishlacoff. 1976; Dunne, 1973; Unkovic and Brown, 1978); and police suicide rate
(e.g., Danto, 1976; Dash & Reiser, 1978; Heinman, 1975; Lester, 1978) but the
findings represent small sample observations, and thus must be regarded as only

suggestive in nature.

Information on how policing compares with other occupations in terms of

prevalence of disease commonly accepted as stress related is also sparse. For


ABSTRACT

An attempt was made to furnish a broad-based empirical evaluation of job
elements in police work which were perceived as stress producing to patrol
officers, and to examine the relationships between these alleged stressors and
various strains reflecting attitudinal, emotional, behavioral and health
problems. For this purpose, patrol officers in 19 police departments,
representing samples of unionized and non-unionized groups, and varying in size,
Beographic location, and crimes per officer, received self-report type
questionnaires for rating job stressors and consequent strains plus personal and
family factors of relevance. In all, more than 2,200 officers returned

completed forms, with response rates for individual departments ranging from 19%

to 90% to a one-time selicitation. The overall rate of response was 37%.

The data analysis took two forms. Determining those job elements and strain
measures revealing the most negative or problematic ratings among the patrol
officers surveyed, and through regression analyses, identifying those factors
which were best predictors of the different strain outcomes. Few of the more
than 25 job environment factors displayed overall group ratings suggestive of a
significant stress level among the population surveyed. Those features
receiving the higher stress ratings related primarily to organizational and management
practices, notably lack of participation and expression in job decisions,
frustration with court leniency, and too much repetitiousness in work routines.
Correlations between the different job elements and strain measures, however,
revealed other factors to be more influential as potential stress producers in
police work. In this regard, job future insecurity and role conflict

Showed the most significant associations with negative health

iv


iso |W eso [nN
a2 Vest | Za coat [1
v- b-
| |
&- &
| |
z a
| |
r
en oft
ta) wor sibs " 1
by (a) rr 4
z be
| |
€ €
| |
’ v
PeOT- 0M

SaeyueND ssauannneday

rated

fo) 061-

cr

pepe

4

9 [W] ozs
ist ft aides

pe  Paviseg ueyL
| $s97] yonw

t-

= 961-1
| ari-

pauisag ue)

0
|
t
|
z
|
€
|
» a0W YONW

vonedioed

35


+punoy evn dyyevojzeje3 3uR2}3}UBye ov 3643
e0geoppuy Loo Aadeo uy *dyysvop eyes vapqeSou uesyypuBye w ogvD}puy suS;9 enuze pow dyysoopaejoa oapa}eod quesjj}us}e w ore2}pUy suT}e anid R108
+ = 5

z = ‘AAIGIOVTA

ROILVLTGOI

Mrnievareat

T = rE wolssauaaa

ry + + + _ Mai

SalVis ZA119—42V

Waaisa 418 Guiviay eon

(wOLLOVaSILVSSIC TOF

Saaniiiiv caivise or
GVOIMION BALIVITLNVD
‘SSaNSNOILILaaz8

NOLLVaIDILaVa
‘AindiaNy F108

Baal0 BOs ALI Tidisnoasaa
‘ALixw1an09 sor

GVOTIEOR M1 DONVIEVA

FEid_ INweO I Ata-NOsEaa
TekaTeows BIAO AWNVO Tihaaios Gor

SuaziLID WIA
eos iaaadns-seso1dd0 MOTIZA KLIA
I:

TBHOTIVOINANNOD/SNOILVISE TVHOSURIERIAT

491'14M09_2708
noazsoa

‘Saviga 14009
TOugIMET_13n09
L = WAL _TouvEvaday_2aN09
AIYGV_40 WOILVZ17110
WOLLDvas1ivEs1G aVOTHION
‘aM11800
WeOnLALNS

TEwTINON WEOR gO s100asv ~E
T = “unmainba
251s InwEvaDd 20 ROLIVOINMOOD
aiienogs wor
SIMI VEL
c + + + ‘a1nse20xaN NOINA
woIssaEeaXa wos ALIunIEOd20
aisAS_TYROLLONOEd
uw Ava
Sai91 od INwuavasd 20 ALiaIo1e
SHERRI

TSE9E00S BAMEVO/TVNOLLVZINYIO ~¥

SAossmais InweOELANa Or

+

ALWAYS 88991440 204 WEBINOD ATINVA
‘WSN0AS MON WONA “dans “508 “oud IVNOsUad
‘W38 B11804d0 40
Jonalua/asnoas uvHI wai ‘dans 903 “178 Gor

138
31190440 40 anuI¥4/s800d8-"aans_*D03_T.NE9
WOSTANTANS HORA 180aaNS TV1903 TVEaNTD

SOTISTERISVEVAD ATINVA ONY LBOdaNs “IVID08

T = Airivnosead V sal Sa1ve
RATTIEVETSRO “IVI908 FAOTEVN-FHROED

SoTisTasovavED ALTTvNOSWaa

TROTLVTNG BTLva| saacTOGTA | uaauCSTa] SuacaOsTG BaTaTOSTO | SaTGTOSTO | SusTOGTA | saTTeCsTa| seaaNoeTa| —AITEHIO ‘BwoLoiaRed

om ‘viol fixivan |ivisisxs | AevNIEN | *IszLKT Ago. | ‘ivinza19/ snoanaa | sNIeOQNE] =IVZ02
ats _}-o1nosan ~ousv9 |-velasae

SANCHOSIG ONY HLIVEH WOd THAT] 10° FAL LV ANVOIAINSIS SUOLDIGEA MIBALTE SALRSNOLLVITE 20 AUVHNS
S1 weve

66


Job security, job schedule carry over problems and role conflict were
predictive of these kinds of reactions. The former finding is consistent with
the results of a study by Cobb and Kasl (1976) in which the anticipation of
job loss and uncertainty about the future resulted in a higher incidence of
health complaints than the actual loss of the job itself. The apprehension
surrounding an anticipated aversive event may deplete coping reserves and

heighten individual susceptibility to psychosomatic ailments (Selye, 1950).

Job-related strains involving specific health disorders and auto accidents
show the fewest occurrences of co-variation with the job stressor/contextual
variables listed in Table 17. Hence, controlling factors for these kinds of
problems would appear more obscure. With regard to health disorders, as well
as the somatic complaint and behavioral strain categories, the separate
regression analyses show affective status, primarily level of anxiety or
depression, to play an important corollary role. While the present study
design does not permit a temporal analysis for these kinds of effects, one
might speculate that the appearance of a negative affective state is an

intermediate step in the causal chain leading to these kinds of outcomes.

Contextual Factors - Personality and Social Support

Personality factors and aspects of social support are known to modify
relations between stress and consequent strain experience. As shown in
Table 16, ratings on a Type-A personality scale suggested it to be a strong
factor among the police officers surveyed. As many of the hard-driving,

results-oriented attributes of Type-A individuals are believed important

75


Nish

TECHNIGAL REPORT

STRESS AMONG POLICE OFFICERS

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Public Health Service

Centers for Disease Control

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health


13. (continued) 1 = Rarely

14.

15.

2 = Occasionally

3 = Sometimes

4 = Fairly often

5 = Very often
How often would you like to:

Be -ertain about what your job responsibilities were

eo
Do different things each day

Work in the same location
Know how well you did at the end of the day

a
Be certain about what others expect of you on the job

Experience a marked increase in the amount of concentration required on your job
Repeat the same activities over and over

See the results of your work

@
In th. foilowing questions. use this code: 1 = Very little
2 = Little
3 = A moderate amount
4 = Much
5 = Very mch

If you could have the job you would most like to have, how mich:

= Would you like to decide with others what part of a task you will do

—— Responsibility would you like to have for the morale of other officers

——— Time would you like to have to do all your work

——— Responsibility would you like to have for the well-being of other officers

— Time would you like to have to think and contemplate

——— Would you like to participate with others in making decisions that affect you

—_.. Free time between heavy work load periods would you like to have

——— Would you like to participate with others in determining the way things are done on your job
Freecom would you like to have in setting your own work hours and days off

=ar-

How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the following elements of your job as a police
officer? Use the following code:

1 = Very dissatisfied 4 = Slightly satisfied

2 = Moderately dissatisfied -§ = Moderately satisfied ie

3 = Slightly dissatisfied 6 = Very satisfied TIsTst7
— Job security = Equipment maintenance a System of determining work schedules
—___ Fellow officers ____ Top administration __ Personal appearance code
______ Promotion system _—____ Immediate supervisor —_._ Method of determining days-off
—___ Academy training — Disciplinary system — Performance evaluation system
_ Overtime pay _—____. Middle management —_. Freedom to make decisions
——— Excitement —____ Invservice training ______ Method of determining assignments
— Salary =r Amount of overtime — Recognition from supervisors

-5-


PREFACE

As this report presents findings from a survey actually conducted in
1976, the time lag between the data collection and reporting requires
some explanation. This project, representing a merger of research aims
and efforts by three separate interest groups, was encumbered by a
number of administrative problems which took added time to resolve even
after the survey work was started. The solutions themselves proved
troublesome in that they meant foregoing certain aspects of the study
design that weakened the representativeness of the data set. This
limitation combined with turnover or reduced availability of key
personnel involved in this project further complicated the completion of
this work. Not withstanding the above difficulties, the array of
variables included in the study and the breadth of the survey sample
argued for its being reported. It bears mention too that some findings
from unpublished preliminary reports of this project have already found
their way into the literature. It would seem incumbent then to supply a
more complete and accurate portrayal of this work, even with its

shortcomings, if only to place such results in proper perspective.

iii


16.

17.

18.

19.

Below are some questions about the future of your job as a police officer. Use the following
code: .
1 = Very uncertain
2 = Moderately uncertain
3 = Slightly uncertain

4 = Slightly certain.
5 = Moderately certain
6 = Very certain

How certain are you about:

What your future career picture looks like
9

The opportunities for promotion and advancement which will exist in the next few years

Whether your job skills will be of use and value five years from now

What your responsibilities will be six months from now

Please read the pairs of descriptions below.

Then describe your present job and the job you
would most like to_have.

JOB_A

In this job, you are required to be around
people constantly. You work and talk with
people most of the time.

JOB B

In this job, you are not required to work
with anyone else. You work alone and
rarely deal with other people

Use the following code to describe your present job and the job you would most like to have:

1 = Very mich like JOB A
2 = Somewhat like JOB A
3 = Slightly like JOB A

Your present job is
pr 43 =

The job you would most like to have would be

4 = Slightly like JOB 8
5 = Somewhat like JOB B
6 = Very mich like JOB B

JOB C

In this job, you are required to work with
people from several different groups. You
have to handle each group differently be-
cause they have different needs and objectives.

JOB _D

In this job, your contact is strictly with
the people in your own group. You do not
need to deal with different groups.

Use the following code to describe your present job and the job you would most like to have:

1 = Very much like JOB C
2 = Somewhat like JOB C
3.= Slightly Like JOB C

Your present job is

The job you would most like to have would be

4 = Slightly like JOB D
5 = Somewhat like JOB D
6 = Very much like JOB D

JOB _E

In this job, you are required to work on many
different tasks which are all in different
stages of completion. Some things are just
being started while others are halfway finished,
and others may be finished by someone else.

JOB F

In this job, you’are required to work on one

job at a time. When that task is completed,

you start work on another. Two or more tasks

are never worked on at the same time. You always
finish one task before starting on another.

Use the following code to describe your present job and the job you would most like to have:

1 = Very much like JOB E
2 = Somewhat like JOB E
3= Slightly like JOB E

Your present job is

The job you would most like to have would be

4 = Slightly like JOB F
5 = Somewhat like JOB F
6 = Very much like JOB F



Table 5

Demographic Characteristic Means

VARIABLE NAME NIOSH IUPA TOTAL
< SAMPLE SAMPLE SAMPLE
Age (in years) 30.4 33.2 32.4
Weight (in pounds) 186.1 190.3 189.1
(males only)
Height (in inches) 71.2 71.3 71.3
(males only)
Percent Male 96.9 98.7 98.1
Percent Married 82.3 84.1 83.2
Percent White 90.7 93.4 92.5
Number of Dependents 1.1 dbo} 1.3
Years in Department 5.8 8.9 8.0

a

23



experiencing the most severe problems, have the highest expectancy that the
union will help to resolve their distress. This may be indicative of the
operation of demand characteristics such that union officers feel compelled to
report more serious strains in an attempt to confirm the perceived hypotheses.
Yet another explanation is that the larger, more bureaucratic and stressful
departments are more likely to unionize. While the present study design does
not permit a resolution of these alternatives, it does appear that unionization
plays a role in understanding the stress-strain relationships in certain depart-

ments, and should be examined more closely in future research.

As a final point to close out this discussion of different issues bearing on the
study results, one needs to mention the limitations of self-report measures of
strains and to emphasize again that the data represent only perception of job
stress factors. More objective appraisals of the work conditions coupled with
clinical or medical findings would be essential to validating such findings. At
best, the current findings can be considered as offering only more suggestive

evidence.

SUMMARY

The purpose of this study was to provide a broad-based empirical investigation
of job elements in policing deemed stressful by police patrol officers and to
examine the relationship between these stressors and emotional, behavioral and
health difficulties. For this purpose, officers in some twenty-nine different
police departments throughout the United States were administered self report
type questionnaires yielding rating levels on various job environment stressors

and strain measures related to one's health and well being, and personal and

82


for, family expressions of concern may actually heighten the officer's
strain perhaps out of feelings of guilt for jeopardizing the family's
security. Obviously, much research is needed regarding the efficacy and

dynamics of family coping styles in response to police stress.

Relations with Union and Other Issues

A major issue yet to be addressed in the present report has to do with

the impact of the union on the study outcomes. Union influence was apparent
at two levels. One involved the intervention and cooperation of the national
union in securing survey sites, distributing questionnaires, and collecting
the results. The other involved the day-to-day activities of the local
union in moderating and conditioning the quantity and quality of stressors
experienced hy police officers on the job. Relevant to the last point is
whether or not the stressors encountered by an officer in a unionized
department are different in nature and/or frequency from those affecting an
officer in a non-union department. ‘These two issues will be addressed in

order.

As previously described, the questionnaire survey was conducted in two
samples of police departments. In one, NIOSH targeted and surveyed a

number of non-union police departments, while in the other, the IUPA
independently distributed the identical questionnaire to a sample of
unionized departments. Both samples only included departments from which
m-tual consent to participate had been secured from both police management as
well as officer représentatives. Neither the NIOSH nor IUPA sampled

departments were randomly selected, and it ts possible that some

77


Job Stress

That job demands or other aspects of the work environment can serve as major
sources of stress and strain has been well documented (see Cooper & Payne, 1978
for a comprehensive review). In this regard, role ambiguity (e.g., Kahn, 1964)
role conflict (e.g., French & Caplan, 1972), job complexity (e.g., Caplan, Cobb,
French, Harrison & Pinneau, 1975), work overload or underload (e.g., Caplan et
al., 1975; Rose, Jenkins, and Hurst, 1978), boring, repetitive job routines
(e.g., Margolis, Kroes and Quinn, 1974), lack of participation in determining
one's work (e.g., Caplan et al., 1975) and responsibility for people (e.g.,
Cobb, 1974) all loom as important stressors with significant strain consequences
ranging from emotional problems through health complaints and disease processes.
A separate body of research has elaborated on health and safety effects owing to

shift work routines (see Tasto & Colligan, 1978).

Caplan et al. (1975) and Cooper and Marshall (1976) have offered frameworks for
organizing the numerous variables in dealing with issues of job stress and
strain. While there are some differences, common to both are certain classes of
stressor variables representing factors intrinsic to the job (e.g., workload,
time pressure, physical danger), organizational factors (e.g., restrictive job
policies, responsibility for people, participation in job decisions), career
factors (e.g., job insecurity, thwarted aspirations), and work relationships
(e.g., problems with supervisors or co-workers). Other similarities are in the
treatment of individual/personal or situational factors as moderator influences
in the process by which the job stressors result in various strain outcomes.
Included here are such factors as social support from one's co-workers,
supervisor and family which have been shown (see Cobb, 1976) to affect the
amount of strain experienced by workers including the incidence of health

problems.


log toy sdunEY apduus pourqtuos pur FSOIN ‘Vd Ueopy eZ) Nip

zo [N 9 | N 73 |W v9 [0 759 |W
2 | vez 2 | zee 2 | eee tee Tee as.
BI anti] La afr] 2 sist | 1 zp r | Le be] |etdues
I | | | uayjo
e- e- e- e- e-
——esz UN
—zez to) vez]
6) stz——
z- z- z- z- z-
j——sz+ w be pet (w
I = 66 - - -
fo) seo et 60 ( t t t
= 850 IW)
ta) eo] Ivo
—— 610 tn wo Wl
0 0 0 0 (9) e90-—-9== 290 UH
| | | JOAIN
sayoy suneans s yen sayoeyoeg

yoewioys

47


McGrath, J.B. Settings, measures and themes: An intigrative review of some
research on psychosocial factors in stress. In A. Monat and R.S. Lazarus

(Eds.) Stress and Coping. New York: Columbia University Press, 1977.

McQuade, W. and Aikman, A. Stress: What it is, what it can do to your health
and how to fight back. New York: E.P. Dutton, 1974.

Margolis, B.L., Kroes, W.H. and Quinn, R. Job stress: An unlisted occupational
hazard. Journal of Occupational Medicine. 1974, 16 (10), 654-661.

Mason, J.W. A historical view of the stress field. Part II. Journal of Human
Stress. 1975, 1, 23-26.

Phelps, L. Police tasks and related stress factors from an organizational

perspective. In W.H. Kroes and J.J. Hurrell, Jr. (Eds.) Job Stress and

The Police Officer. HEW Publication No. (NIOSH) 76-187. Washington, D.C.:

U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976.

Pinneau, S.R., Jr. Complimentarity and social support. Unpublished manuscript,
Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, 1972.

Quinn, R.P. and Shepard, L.J. The 1972-73 Quality of Employment Survey:
Descriptive statistics with comparison data from 1969-70. Survey of

Working Conditions. Ann Arbor: Survey Research Center, 1974.

Reiser, M. The police department psychologist. Springfield, Illinois:

Charles C. Thomas, 1972.

Rose, R.M. and Levine, M.L. (Eds.) The crisis in stress research: A critical
reapprisal of the role of stress in hypertension, gastrointestinal illness

and female reproductive dysfunction. Journal of Human Stress. 1979,

5(2), 1-48.

89


affective states, behavioral strains, somatic complaints, health disorders, auto

accidents). The cell entries represent a collation of the regression analyses

reported in Tables 11-15. The above two tabular summaries form the basis for

discussing aspects of police stress and strain as observed in this study.

Job Related Stressors: Those job features receiving the most negative ratings

in Table 16 appear to relate to aspects of organizational and management

practice. The modern day police officer functions within a bureaucratic

organization which can mean devoting time to routine administrative chores.

This may have been the basis for the patrol officers perceiving too much

Table 16

Job Stressors, Contextual Factors and Strains

Showing Most Extreme Response

STRESSOR/CONTEXTUAL FACTORS

Job Environment Stressors:

. Opportunity for Expression (-)

. Court Obligations (-)

. Participation in job decisions (-)
. Repetitiousness in job routines (-)
. Responsibility for others (-)

« Boredom (+)

Social Support:

+ Relations with own children (+)
. Family concern for safety (+)

Personality

* Sales Type A personality (+)

STRAIN MEASURE

Job Attitudes:

- Work related self-esteem(+)
Behavioral Strains:

+ Divorce since joining
force (-)

Somatic Complaints:

« Backaches (-)
» Stomachaches (-)
. Headaches/Constipation (-)

Health Disorders (perceived
as job caused or worsened)

- Musculoskeletal (-)
« Hypertension (-)

Auto Accidents

+ Total number (-)

68


Table 6

Aspects of Work Routines

VARIABLE NAME NIOSH IUPA TOTAL

SAMPLE SAMPLE SAMPLE

Percent Who Work Rotating Shifts 20.2 48.1 40.2

Hours Overtime Worked Per Week 4.5 3.8 4.0
Hours Unwanted Overtime Worked

Per Week 1.5 1.6 1.5

2.1 2.6 2.4

Hours Spent in Court Per Week

29



[a[ soz

3

2

rs
"S WW)

i

t
{!

sz (I--—

f

L

wa9}s3 J19S
ayeiay 430M,

yoo | N azis

a] avez
zesrf a | "wes
Suney
| anyeban
1SOW
o-
s-
ro
|
|
|
!
———— (a
_
ih) b2—e- we
! }=—992 tN
1
1
1 2
]
1
we
Guney

b= annisog SOW °

uonseysnessig gor

41


a. How good a job does the union or association which represents lower ranking officers do
in the following areas? Use this code:

1 = Very bad job 4 = Slightly good job
2 = Moderately bad job 5 = Moderately good job
3 = Slightly bad job 6 = Very good job

______ Getting better benefits for members

—_ Improving relations between members and the department
_____ Making members’ jobs more satisfying and interesting
____ Improving members' working conditions

Representing the interests of its members
—y-

b. How good a job does the union or association which represents senior level officers do
in the following areas? Use this code:

1 = Very bad job 4 = Slightly good job
2 = Moderately bad job 5 = Moderately good job
3 = Slightly bad job 6 = Very good job

Getting better benefits for members
______ Improving relations between members and department administrators
_____ Making members' jobs more satisfying and interesting
______ Improving members' working conditions

Representing the interests of its members
a
(SKIP TO QUESTION 36)

c. How good a job does the union or association.do in the following areas? Use this code:

1 = Very bad job 4 = Slightly good job
2 = Moderately bad job 5 = Moderately good job
3 = Slightly bad job 6 = Very good job

Getting better benefits for members
Improving relations between members and the department

Making members' jobs more satisfying and interesting

Improving members' working conditions

Representing the interests of tts members

36. Are you a member of a police union or association? 1. No

“2. Yes

37. The following questions concern your health.

a. In an average week, how many hours do you spend in physical conditioning (jogging, weight
lifting, exercises, etc.)?

Hours per week
z= ee
b. In an average week, how many hours do you spend actively engaged in sports activities

(playing softball, tennis, golf, bowling, etc.)?
Hours per week

a
-16-


Table 8

Mean Number of Automobile Accidents
Within Past Year

SCALE NAME NIOSH IUPA TOTAL
SAMPLE SAMPLE SAMPLE

Total Automobile Accidents -63 57 58

Total Automobile Accidents
at Fault 19 212 «13

Total on Duty Automobile Accidents .42 42 ~42

On Duty Automobile Accidents
at Fault ll -09 +09

Total Off Duty Automobile
Accidents +21 +27 +26

Off Duty Automobile Accidents
at Fault «04 -06 -06

eee eee

46


2. Affective States: Different affective or emotional states of police
officers in the IUPA and NIOSH samples are characterized by the mean scale
scores shown in Figure 10. Overall, the results indicate quite low levels of
troubled conditions reflecting anxiety, depression or irritability. To the
contrary, most officers ratings were highest on the measure of placidity,

indicating calmness and composure.

Table 7

Behavioral Strain Indicators

NIOSH IUPA TOTAL
SCALE NAME SAMPLE SAMPLE SAMPLE
Mean Alcohol. Consumption
(units per day) -59 +62 -61
Mean Coffee Consumption
(cups per day) 3.79 4.70 4.42
Mean Cigarettes smoked
(per day) 11.32 13.88 13.83

Percent Divorced Since Joining
Department, Excluding those 17.1 16.1 16.2
Never Married, and those
Separated at Time of Joining

Percent Divorced Since Joining
Department, Excluding those 23.9 20.1 21.13
Never Married

Percent Ever Divorced Excluding
those Never Married 28.4 22.4 22.6

Percent Ever Divorced or
Separated, Excluding those 34.8 24.9 28.1
Never Married

42


reduction in force. It may also be attributed to dissatisfaction with opportunities

for career advancement within the department.

Role conflict is also a potentially important source of stress in policing as it is
in other jobs as well. Police work requires that one act as enforcer and
peacemaker, mediator and executor, authority figure and public servant. Social,
economic, political, legal and personal considerations must be weighed and
balanced in many of the decisions to be made by the patrol officer. Controversy
and contradictions here inevitably lead to the patrol officer feeling caught in
the middle of many disputes and criticized for whatever actions which he/she

would take.

As another form of role conflict, a patrol officer may perceive job-related
responsibilities to impede expectations in fulfilling other roles. Job

schedule carry over problems, involving competing work and domestic demands on
time seem typical of such conflicts and, as can be seen from Table 17, are
associated with both affective and somatic complaint problems. Certainly,
similar conflicts are experienced in other occupations as well, but it is
unlikely that such work involves the same degree of role involvement as policing.
Indeed, the dress code, the regimentation, the cohesive effects of shared
threats and experience, combine to produce mich intragroup solidarity and
identity among police officers. Unfortunately, however, such strong
identification can differentiate and isolate the officer from the surrounding
community, thus compounding problems of social roles apart from police work.
Moreover, behaviors which may evolve as effective ways in countering job-specific
stressors (assertiveness, detachment) may prove inappropriate in other role
situations (e.g., spouse, parent, neighbor), thereby increasing the possibilities
for conflict. It is not surprising then that familial problems, marital discord

in particular, are strongly connected with those in police work.

71


questionnaires, handling communications relevant to the survey, and promoting
cooperation among the force to participate. The lower response rate among the
TUPA cities would thus not be due to the operation of any type of union bias but
would reflect the logistical problems of surveying large populations.

In summary, the survey conducted by the IUPA differed from that conducted by
NIOSH in several respects: (1) although the questionnaires were identical, they
were distributed and collected by different means; (2) the IUPA survey packet
contained a letter requesting officer participation from the national union
president; (3) the IUPA sampled cities were considerably larger than the NIOSH
sites; (4) the IUPA response rate was approximately half that of the NIOSH
sample; and (5) the officers in the IUPA sample teported quantitatively more
stress and strain than those in the NIOSH sample. Despite these qualifications,
the survey encompassed a broad spectrum of American cities and police
departments, and resulted in a body of findings which are internally logical and
consistent with existing theory. Thus, while the results of the present study
do not altogether allow for cross-sectional comparison of the stresses and
strains of police work relative to other occupations, they do permit an
identification of the relevant occupational problema of law enforcement as

perceived by the officers themselves.

Reflecting further on the union issue, an examination of Table 17 reveals

that union membership was a predictor of several straine, notably those

in the categories of somatic complaints and health disorders. Surprisingly, reference to
the individual associations between union membership and these strain measures
(Table 15) indicates that these relationships are generally positive, i.e., the

incidence of these self-reported strains is greater among union as opposed to non-

union officers. This may reflect an expectancy efféct such that those officers

81


Figures 8a and 8b show the scales of P-E fit measures for the same
aforementioned job features when scored using absolute values of the differences
between the amount offered by a job situation and the amount preferred. In this
scoring procedure, a value of '0' indicated no differences in P-E fit and a
walue of '4' (or '5' in the case of job complexity) represented the maximum
deviation between the desired and actual level of a given job feature (in either
direction, i.e., too much or too little). The results for this type of analysis
were quite comparable to those found when directional differences were taken
into account. That is, extent of participation was the job feature displaying
the most P-E fit discrepancy for the police officer respondents. P-E ratings
for responsibility for others, job repetitiousness and role ambiguity showed
some divergence but to a lesser extent. Overall, the mean P-E scores do not
suggest extreme mismatches in terms of preferred versus perceived amounts of a

given job characteristic.

3. Social Support/Family Environment - Figure 9 indicates the mean ratings

offered by the officers in the IUPA and NIOSH samples to scales of questionnaire
items concerned with social support including aspects of their familial
environment. Only small differences exist between the two samples and such data
shows that both sets of officers receive the highest level of social support
from their spouses or closest friends of the opposite sex. Ratings of job
support and help with personal problems from other sources, excluding one's
spouse or closest friend from the opposite sex, are notably lower. Of
particular interest here is the low level of job support perceived from one's
supervisor especially in the IUPA sample. The mean officers’ ratings convey
positive concerns on the part of their families for their safety and suggest

good relationships with their children.

36


27.

27.

28.

The following questions concern your relationships with other people. Use this code:

1 = Rarely

2 = Occasionally
3 = Sometimes

4 = Fairly often
5 = Very often

a. How often do the following people go out of their way to make your job easier for you?

Your immediate supervisor Other people at work
Fo) a
Your spouse, or if not married, your Other relatives

7% closest friend of the opposite sex

Close friends
oa

b. How often can you have meaningful talks with the following people about your personal

problems?
Your immediate supervisor Other people at work
Your spouse, or if not married, your Other relatives

3 closest friend of the opposite sex
Close friends
ny

Please think now about the type of work you do. Use this code:

1 = Very unlikely 4 = Slightly likely
2 = Moderately unlikely 5 = Moderately likely
3 = Slightly unlikely 6 = Very likely

—— Knowing what you know now, how likely is it that you would again take a job
3 police officer? again job as a

If a friend of yours expressed an interest in becoming a police officer, how likely
is it that you would advise against it?

Please indicate the degree to which you agree or disagree with the following statements.
Use this code:

1 = Strongly disagree 4 = Slightly agree
2 = Moderately disagree 5 = Moderately agree
3 = Slightly disagree 6 = Strongly agree

= My work is interesting to do

I often have to “bend” department policies and procedures in order to get my job done
_____ My family takes pride in the work I do

There's pretty good sharing of information among the officers on all three shifts

I like the amount of work I'm expected to do

To be married to a police officer is often difficult

Most of the time there is not much tension between me and my children

I feel bored with the work I have to do

The officers who work the same shift with me often get a chance to discuss common problems

a
Department policies are too strict to let me do my job properly

I am satisfied with the pace of my work

My family is often worried that something might happen to me while I'm at work
—

-10-


37.

59.

a. If you are now married, does your spouse currently hold a job? (CHECK ONE)

1. No

y
2. Yes, part time
3. Yes, full time
b. If Yes, how important is your spouse's income for the maintenance of your household?
(CHECK ONE)
1. Very unimportant 4. Slightly important
2. Moderately unimportant 5. Moderately important 3
3. Slightly unimportant 6. Very important

Before you joined the department, what was the highest level of formal education you had
completed? That is, when you became a police officer, was your education: (CHECK ONE)

(01) Eighth grade or le

(02) Some high school, but not a graduate

(03) Graduate from high school or General Education Diploma (G.E.D.)

(04) Some technical school, but not a graduate

(05) Graduate from ‘technical school aa
— a

(06) Some college courses, but did not graduate

(07) Graduate from junior college

(08) Graduate from college

(09) Some graduate courses in college

(10) Graduate degree

Since joining the department, how much additional formal education have you had? That is,
after you became a police officer, have you: (CHECK ONE)

(01) Had no additional formal education

(02) Taken some high school courses, but did not graduate

(03) Graduated from high school or General Education Diploma (G.E.D.)

(04) Taken some technical school courses, but have not graduated

——— (05) Taken some additional college courses, but have not graduated
(06) Graduated from technical school

——_— (07) Graduated from junior college

(08) Graduated from college

(09) Taken some graduate college courses, but have not received a graduate degree

(10) Obtained a graduate degree

-19 -


DISCLAIMER

The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not
necessarily convey the endorsement of their affiliated agencies or

organizations.

DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 84-108

di


lo.

b.

d.

If you work on a rotating/alternating shift, what are the work hours on your current

ahift? (USE MILITARY TIME)

Work begins at —__ hours
Work ends at —_— — hours
How long do you normally work this shift? (IN DAYS OR MONTHS) _— Days
.. . — Months
What will your work hours be on your next shift change? (USE MILITARY TIME)
Work will begin at —_—__ hours
Work will end at —-— hours
x —
How long will you work on that shift? (IN DAYS OR MONTHS) r— Days
a
Months

”
If your job has another shift rotation, what will your hours be on that shift? (USE

MILITARY TIME)

Work will begin at = hours

Work will end at a hours

How long will you work on that shift? (IN DAYS OR MONTHS) —— Days
Months

the last month approximately how many hours of overtime did you work per_week?
——-— Hours per week
oe

Of those overtime hours, about how many hours per week did you want to work?

Hours per week

How many hours of overtime would you like to work per week?

——— Hours per week
a

In addition to your job with the police department do you now:

b.

Attend school/university —— 1. No z
2. Yes
If Yes, how many hours per week? ——— Hours per week
70
Hold an off-duty police/security job? 1. No
2. Yes
If Yes, how many hours per week? ——— 4Hours per week
Er)
Hold another (non-police) off-duty job (including self-employed)?
1. No wy
2. Yes
If Yes, how many hours ber_week? ——— — Hours per week
6
oo

trftszy


management and pay tended to report less job dissatisfaction, Likewise, officers
reporting good police-citizen relations, job security, and those reporting

good fit with respect to job complexity tended to report less job dis-
satisfaction. Those officers who perceived their departments policies as

rigid, however, reported more dissatisfaction. Seven other factors showed
significant relationships with work related self-esteem. Officers who scored
high on the social desirability scale generally reported high levels of work
related self-esteem. Similarly, officers who reported high levels of social
support from their supervisors and satisfaction with their training also tended
to report higher levels of work related self-esteem. Officers reporting more
workload dissatisfaction, underutilization of abilities and role conflict, as well
as those reporting poor fit with respect to role ambiguity, reported lower levels

of work related self-esteem.

b. Affective States as Outcome Variables - Table 12 summarizes the results of

the regression analyses in which the Affective States measures served as the
dependent variables. As shown in the table, social desirability was related to
all five states. In general, officers who scored high on the social desirability
scale reported lower levels of anxiety, depression, irritability, and irritation

and higher levels of placidity.

The Sales Type A personality measure, role conflict, and work related self-esteem
were significant predictors of four of the five states. Officers scoring higher

on the Type A personality measure in general reported more depression, irritability,
irritation and more placidity. Officers reporting more role conflict generally
reported more anxiety, depression, irritability and less placidity whereas,
officers reporting high levels of work related self-esteem to report less anxiety,

depression, and irritation and more placidity.

59


with neighbors, 202 serious problems with their children, and almost 10% serious
drug problems. In addition, the officers reported knowing an average of 1.35
officers each who has attempted suicide and 4.85 officers who have had one or

more heart attacks, an average of 1.79 while on duty.

4. Automobile Accidents: Table 8 presents the mean number of automobile
accidents reported for patrol officers in the 1975 year prior to the survey.
The results indicate the average patrol officer may incur an accident
approximately every 7 months. While there are no comparable data, this accident
rate would seem high and possibly due to an officer's job which so often entails

driving.

5. Somatic Complaints: Rated occurrence of different somatic complaints for
the IUPA and NIOSH respondents are shown in Figures 12a and 12b. The most
recurrent complaints reported were those of feeling fidgety and tense during
both on- and off-duty hours, experiencing headaches and constipation, and
suffering backaches. These different problems would seem plausible if one
considers a police officer's job routines as necessitating long non-eventful
patrols, variable work shifts, and incessant use of patrol cars. Unfortunately,
no data exists for other occupational groups on these measures so that

comparisons cannot be made to assess their significance.

6. Health Disorders: Table 9 describes the frequency with which the combined
IUPA and NIOSH samples of patrol officers reported having various disorders
during the 6 month period prior to completing their questionnaires. Also shown
for comparison are the frequencies found for similar kinds of problems in a
representative sample of 1500 workers as reported in the Quality of Employment

survey (Quinn and Shepard, 1974) mentioned earlier. The overall impression from

45




NIOSH Sample Response by Department

Table 3

Returns from

Total Questionnaires Questionnaires Response Patrol Officers

Department Force Distributed Returned Rate (%) Only
Bensenville, IL 32 32 13 40.6 11
Berkeley, CA 185 185 101 54.6 78
Birmingham, AL 644 325 295 90.8 258
Charleston

County, SC 130 127 69 54.3 50
Fremont, CA 117 62 39 62.9 26
Gilroy, CA 38 38 20 52.6 14
Lakewood, CO 190 151 127 84.1 78
Los Gatos, CA 28 28 17 60.7 9
Mountain View, CA 67 34 23 67.6 16
Reno, NE 233 103 70 68.0 48
San Francisco

Airport, CA 25 25 18 72.0 18
San Jose, CA 723 97 23 23.7 19
Tuscaloosa, AL 138 76 26 34.2 25
Washoe County, NE 160 53 26 49.1 12
Wood Dale, IL 22 22 4 18.2 2
Unidentified* = = 16 = 3

TOTAL 2732 1358 887 64.9 667

* Returned questionnaires from police officers whose departments could not be

ascertained.

19


Table 1

Questionnaire Scales/Measures Used: Reliabilities and Sources

(continued)
Number Estimates of
of Internal
Description Items Consistency Source
BEHAVIORAL STRAINS
Alcohol Consumption 3 -61 Original
Coffee Consumption 1 - --
Usage of Cigarettes 1 -- --
Medication Used:
Aspirin, Cough/Cold Medicines
and Antacids 3 56 Original
Sleeping Pills, Tranquilizers,
Pep Pills, Laxatives and
Other Medications 5 a Original
Divorce Since Joining Department 1 -
Divorce or Separation Since
Joining Department 1 _ Original
Ever Divorced 1 _
Ever Divorced or Separated 1 _-
SOMATIC COMPLAINTS
Total Somatic Complaints 30 «88 Original
On-Duty Somatic Complaints 15 86 Original
Off-Duty Somatic Complaints 15 87 Original
Frequency of:
Fainting or Blacking Out 2 97
Backaches 2 +93
Spells of Dizziness 2 -88
Hands Sweating 2 292
Stomachaches or Nausea 4 84
Rapid Heart Beat and Fear of
Nervous Breakdown 4 84 Caplan et al. (1975)
Headaches and Constipation 4 +84 ~~
Hands Trembling 2 91
Being Fidgety, Tense of Nervous
While On-Duty 2 -76
Being Fidgety, Tense of Having
Trouble Sleeping While Off-Duty 2 57

15


a. How long have you been on your present assignment? — Years Months

b. In an average week, how many hours do you usually work.on the following types of assignment:

1. On foot patrol . — — Hours
2. In a marked police car — — Sours
3. In an unmarked police car _ _— Hours
4. On a motorcycle _ — Hours
5. In a helicopter a Hours
6. On a horse a —— Houra
a 7. In a police station or office _ — Hours
TIststF 7

c. In an average week, how many hours do you usually work:

1. Alone —_—— Hours
s

2. With an assigned partner — — Hours
to

3. With more than one other person —._ _ Hours.
ua

6. In your job, do you usually have direct supervisory responsibility over other officers or
civilian employees?

1. fo
ww — 2. Yes
a. If Yes, how many people do you usually supervise? (FILL IN THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE)
—_—_ People
1s
7. As a police officer, how often do you have weekends off? (CHECK ONE)
—___ 1. Rarely
———. 2. Occasionally
____ 3. Sometimes
WF —____ 4. Fairly often
—____ 5. Very often
8. As a police officer, do you usually:
____ 1. Work the same hours each day
w 2. Work on a rotating/alternating shift (that is, you work one schedule of hours for

a mmber of days and then change to another schedule). (SKIP TO QUESTION 8b)
a. If you work the same hours each workday, what are those hours? (USE MILITARY TIME)

Work begins at hours

Work ends at hours

(SKIP TO QUESTION 9)

-2-


6 pautique
1 Jo sur

a [8 19 [0 9 [8 zo | se] ] 9
2 | see 2| vee a sree 2 | svez IS
ble reny be map} El afr} LL vest fr] LA ron [a | ates
Gune!
t t b Y anneean
1soW
rz az z z z
1 i a i
1 1 1 !
! 1 1 !
| 7
—s92 U1) 1 I
tol wept in | H ! G uw H ®
/ ; Lye , oze
1 fae Wy oe gb ae tg iceged Oo veer \
t ~ r ~ loess TR se Tle
| ! ee w | LUiai= =o MW
ore IW 1
Lb ly | @ 1? ly
{ ! {
H 1 L 1
! Li
LY
s $ s s s
Guney
antisOd
9 9 9 1SOW
104 40
iy voneotunwwo9 Ayunoag im
uonoesyes yejuawyedeg eiumny gor uoHIeysHes uonsejysnes

27


29. (continued)

1 = Strongly disagree 4 = Slightly agree
2 = Moderately disagree 5 = Moderately agree
3 = Slightly disagree 6 = Strongly agree
*
16.
rrfasey I sometimes feel resentful whea I do not get my way

0
The more challenges I have, the better

I have to spend too many hours in court
a The courts are often too lenient with accused offenders
Court cases are usually scheduled at convenient times for me
____ I don't get enough compensation for my court appearances

I usually don't have to wait very long in court for a case to be called

I am sometimes irritated by people who ask favors of me

Most lawyers try to make officers look foolish
_____ Bail is usually set too high
I never hesitate to go out of my way to help someone in trouble
___ Most judges treat officers with respect
= Juries are often prejudiced against police officers

I have never deliberately said something that hurt someone's feelings
Plea-bargaining should be eliminated

There is a big difference between whether a person is really guilty and what the court
decides

_____ I am always courteous, even to people who are disagreeable
_____ My immediate supervisor keeps me well informed
a The officera I work with don't get much chance to talk to each other
___ My immediate supervisor is willing to listen to suggestions
I don't feel there is enough communication among the officers on different shifts
____ Officers in this department are quickly informed about policy changes

No matter who I am talking to, I am always a good listener

* My immediate supervisor will back me up when I need it
Department policies are communicated clearly to all members of the department
I don't feel totally comfortable talking to my immediate supervisor
3
30. In the past year, have you had any vehicular accidents while on police duty? _ 1. No
o 2. Yes
If Yes, a. How many accidents have you had on-duty? __ ___ Accidents
b. In how many accidents were you found to be at fault by the °
department? ed Accidents
¢. How many accidents involved emergency situations or high speed
chases? ap Mcidents

3 iho


Table 10

Percent of Disorders Judged té be Caused or Made Worse
by the Job - Total Patrol Officer Sample

Disorder

Percent Termed
Job-Related

Whiplash injuries
Trouble with spine

Hypertension or high blood pressure
Mental illness or nervous breakdown
Trouble in the gastrointestinal tract

Paralysis, tremor or shaking
Heart disease or heart trouble
Hernia or rupture

Bronchitis

Gall bladder trouble
Migraine or severe headaches
Arthritis or rheumatism
Tuberculosis

Trouble with seeing
Hypoglycemia

Repeated skin trouble
Trouble in the urinary tract
Epilepsy

A cold or influenza

Trouble with hearing

Kidney trouble

A stroke

Diabetes

Asthma

Liver trouble

Venereal disease

Cancer

Gout

Hay fever

Trouble with teeth or gums
Thyroid trouble or goiter

80.0
79.3
69.4
66.7
62.9
62.5
58.1
57.6
54.0
52.4
51.9
50.5
50.0
49.5
45.5
44.0
43.6
42.9
42.4
42.2
41.0
40.0
35.7
34.0
33.3
31.3
28.6
28.0
26.4
11.2

9.1

51



24,

25.

26.

On the next items, use this code: = Very little

= Little

= A moderate amount
= Much

13
Very much TRITTTT

UruNne

In your job as police officer, how much:

— Responsibility do you have for the morale of other officers

______ Do you participate with others in determining the way things are done on your job
______ Freedom do you have in setting your own work hours and days off

__ Time do you have to do all your work

—_ Responsibility do you have for the well-being of other officers
____ Do you decide with others what part of a task you will do

_____ Free time do you have between heavy work load periods

_._ Do you participate with others in making decisions that affect you

Time do you have to think and contemplate
ry

In answering each of the following questions, use this code:

1 = Very mch less than I ought to get 4 = Slightly more than I ought to get
2 = Somewhat less than I ought to get 5 = Somewhat more than I ought to get
3 = Sligatly less than I’ ought to get 6 = Very much more than I ought to get

ep Compared to other people where you work who do a job similar to yours, how fair is your
7 pay? .

Compared to other people where you work who do a job different from yours, how fair is
your pay?

Compared to other people who do, not work where you work but who have skills similar to
yours, how fair is your pay?

. _ Compared to other people where you work who do a job different from yours but who have
“®~ an educational background similar to yours, how fair is your pay?

Below are some phrases which indicate how you might see yourself in your work. For example,
if you think that you are very "successful" in your work, put a circle around the number
right next to the word "successful." If you think that you are not at all successful in
your work, circle the number next to the words "not successful." If you think you are some-

where in between, circle the appropriate number.

Successful 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not successful tr
Sad at work 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ‘Happy at work =
Not important at work 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Important at work a
Doing my best 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Not doing my best


ALIGIOVId

NOMLVLINUT

lol fe

ALTTIGVi1eaT

RE [selon

NOISSauaad

faa

‘ALIXNY
Saivis aA1Loasav

Waaisa 2138 agivigy muon

NOILOVASILVSSid Gor
Saqniiitv aaiviad Gor

GVOTMON FALLVITINVND

‘SSANSNOILIIaaTd

ROILVAIOILUVd

ALINSTARY 27108

‘SUINLO BOA ALITIGISNOASTY

‘AL1NG14HOO.

TeWaIGOud WAAO ABUVD AINGAHOS

~ SNaz1L19 WIA

a ea Bil cal Cod to ad GB nd ad

SUOSIANaANS-SeANTAdO MOTIS WLI

Ji
i

TENOILVOINNHHOD/SNOILVISU “TWNOSUadUaINT

LONTANOD 2108

to]

Mal

SAVIad 1Un09

‘AONBINAT LUN0D

WAIL gonvuvaddv Lun0d

ALIMIGY 40 NOILVZTIIN

lr betes! ho fo

ROILOVASIIVSSIG GVOTAUON

‘HILEINO

WYOALATHS

TSaNIINOW WOR 40 SLOadsY

ananainba

RoTI0d INBHLUVAAG JO _NOLLVIINAHHOD

let

‘Ainunoas gor

foo how fo ft ew

‘ONINIVEL

‘aTnswaGHaH_NOIND

NOIsSmUdKa BOA ALINDIBOAdO

WaLSAG “IVNOTLONOUT

avd

Sali 104 INwMLUVaad 20 ALIGISIG

he Jen}

ANGRASVNYH
YSROUNOS BAAVVI/TVNOILVZINVRUO _~
SUOSBAUIS INAHNOWLANA GOr

‘AigsVS _SWIITAIO BOA NUAONOD KITWVS
‘@SNOdS NON HOWA “ddNS “908 “dowd “IVNOSYAd

‘Was alTsoaao 40
Gualud/asn0as NYE ¥aHLO “ddns ‘908 “Tau aor

xas
BLISOddO JO GNAIUd/asNods “4dNS_* 908 ‘1,NA9

WOSTAWAANS WOdd LuOdaNs IVID0S “IvHINaD

SOTLSTUSLOVEVHD ATINVA GNV 1WOddNS IVI905

IL

ae

mle

ot

whe

ouo} 38108

‘SINaq199¥
oun

‘Suaquosia
any

MLV

SINIV1EROD
OLLVHOS

BNIVELS

‘TWeoLavuaa

salvis
@ALLOMaV

SR0NL1L1V
aaLviza_ gor

30 32qeEny 12301, |

‘ABOSALYS BSNOASAS BETIS

ALTivnosaad Vaal Saivs
ALTTIGVETSad “IVID0S aHOTHVH-aNMOUO

SOEISTUALOVEVHD ALT IVNOSUaa

suoLolaaud
sanooLno

69

AWOOBLVD FSNOdSTE SSTULS AC THAR 10° FHL LV SAINGNOLAVIZE INVOIAINDIS 40 UaCHNN
a. arava


Provisions for follow-up mailings to promote greater response among officers in
the IUPA sample could not be effected. Admittedly, a low response to a one-time
solicitation can place severe limitations on a meaningful analysis of survey
data. On the other hand, it can be argued that the response rates for strictly
patrol officers in this survey are, in actuality, higher than those listed in
Tables 2 and 3. Indeed, the indicated figures are based on the total police
roster for a given department which included other classifications of police
personnel whose returns comprised less than one-third of the total number
received. Cross~-comparing the data from the IUPA and NIOSH samples was also
seen as providing an added means for checking on the reliability of the survey

results.

The goal of the data analysis undertaken here was two-fold. First, it was to
measure the levels of stressors and strains among patrol officers as extracted
from their questionnaire responses. The second intent was to define

relationships between the apparent stressors and strain measures.

Levels of Stressors and Contextual Factors

1. Situational/Demographic/Personality Factors: Tables 4 and 5 and Figure 2

describe data obtained on certain situational and individual factors that may
influence one's perception and response to stress. For example, Table 4 shows
that the IUPA sample was drawn from cities/localities, of much larger population
than the NIOSH sample. On the other hand, the number of reported crimes per officer
per year was greater for the NIOSH sample than for the IUPA sample. The latter
suggests that patrol officers in the NIOSH sample could have a heavier workload.
Taken together, the cities/localities in the two samples range from small (e.2..
WoodDale, I11.) to those of moderate size (e.g., Detroit, MI.) and reflect diverse

regions of the continental United States. The combined sample median would
approximate a medium size city.

21


Durner, J.A. Divorce - another occupational hazard. The Police Chief. 1975,
42(11), 49.

French, J.R.P. Jr. and Caplan, R.D. Organizational stress and individual strain.

In A.J. Marrow (Ed.) The Failure of Success. New York: AMACOM, 1972.

Glass, D.C. and Singer, J.E. Urban stress and the adaptive process. In A. Monat
and R.S. Lazarus (Eds.) Stress and coping. New York: Columbia University Press,
1977.

Gore, S. The influence of social support and related variables in ameliorating the
consequences of job loss (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, 1973)
Dissertation Abstracts International. 1974, 34 5330A-5331A (University

Microfilms No. 74-2416.

Guralnick, L. Mortality by occupation and cause of death. Vital Statistics
Special Reports 53(3) U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare,

National Vital Statistics Division, Washington, D.C., 1963.

Gurin, G., Veroff, J. and Feld, S. Americans view their mental health.

New York: Basic Books, 1960.

Hageman, M.J.C. Occupational stress of law enforcement officers and marital
and familial relationships (Doctoral dissertation, Washington State

University, 1977).

Heiman, M.F. Police suicide. Journal of Police Science and Administration.

1975, 3(3), 267-273.

Hinkle, L. and Wolf, S. A summary of experimental evidence relating life stress

to diabetes mellitas. Journal of Mount Sinai Hospital, 1952, 19(4), 537-570.

87


example, the only U.S. figures on mortality by occupations and cause of death
are based on the 1950 census (Guralnick, 1963). The data show that for police
officers between the ages of 25 and 59, the risk of death (as measured by the
"proportionate mortality ratio") due to cardiovascular disease is significantly
higher than the average for U.S. males of similar age in all occupations.
However, it is questionable whether these figures are still representative. For
example, the 1950 census data show a risk profile for cardiovascular disease
among fire fighters similar to that of police officers. More recent morbidity
data collected in one large city (Los Angeles), discloses that fire fighters now
receive disability pensions for heart disease at more than twice the rate among

police officers (Bernard, Gardner, Deaco & Kattus, 1975).

Even with the still limited evidence that police officers display a
disproportionate number of stress related problems, numerous programs and
approaches to manage and reduce police stress have been suggested (see Kroes &
Hurrell, 1975). Though well intentioned, justification for and the efficacy of
such remedial efforts necessitate a more definitive study of the problem. In
the present investigation an attempt is made to determine factors in police work
that are perceived as most stress producing and to relate them to health/safety

consequences.

Conceptualizing Stress

In engineering terms, stress refers to an external force directed at some
physical object. The result of this force is strain, the temporary or permanent
alteration in the structure of the object. Many stress researchers have adopted
this engineering convention (stress being the external agent or stimulus and
strain being the resultant effect) because of the ease with which it seems to

fit into the concept of homeostasis (Lazarus, 1966).


repetitiousness in their job routines. Tempering this rating was the observation,
however, that the officers did not, on the average, consider their job to be boring.
Lack of opportunity for expression and participation in job decisions would appear
to stem from the quasi-military nature of police organizations. The supervisory
command structure invites directives from above with little opportunity for input
from pasorainacest Court experiences may be particular sources of frustration.

From the officers’ perspective, courts do not respect the efforts and risks

taken in apprehending offenders. Inability to prosecute offenders, and lenient
sentences mean repeated arrests in far to many cases. The desire to assume

more responsibility for other officers could be a manifestation of the strong

loyalty each officer feels toward his peers.

The above findings indicating patrol officers disaffection with an autocratic
management style typical of police organizations, increased bureaucratic
burdens, and court leniency confirms observations from smaller sample studies
(see Kroes and Hurrell, 1975). But while displaying the most extreme ratings,
these factors show relatively few significant associations with the different
strain indicators (Table 17). Consequently, their impact as stressors would seem
limited. It is, in fact, other factors, in particular, job security and role
conflict which show more frequent and widespread correlations with the different
categories of strain measures. As such they would appear to wield the greatest
influence as stress-producing elements in police work and command attention in

this regard.

Job security shows the greatest number and breadth of significant associations

with the different strains showing correlations with various somatic complaints,
job related attitudes, affective states and behavioral strains. To some extent,
this may reflect the precarious economic status of certain municipalities which

has necessitated freezes on promotions and salaries, and in some instances,

70


qualities for successful police officers, this result was not surprising.

In terms of relationships with strains, a Type-A personality is a double-
edged sword. While those scoring high on the Type-A scale report less job
dissatisfaction and greater work-related self-esteem, they also report higher
levels of irritability and irritation in terms of affective problems and more
somatic complaints of nervousness and tension. Social desirability as a
personality factor also seems to be an important shaping factor with respect
to emotional status. Greater expressed needs for social approval are linked
with lower levels of affective problems such as anxiety, depression, and

irritation.

Relations with one's children and family concern for safety represented two
social support type measures which received a strong positive response.

That warm, supportive family relationships can insulate the individual
against job-related strain would seem reasonable and possibly account for the
few strain measures showing any serious problems for the officers surveyed
in this study. In this regard, social support from one's spouse/friend of
the opposite sex looms as a particularly important source for moderating
problems, especially those manifesting themselves in affective states and

behavioral strains.

On the other hand, there exist associations between family concern for
safety and certain strain measures that doen't fit this view, For example,
those officers reporting greater family concern for their safety also
displayed higher levels of somatic complaints. It appears that, rather than

providing the officer with needed social support and feelings of being cared

76


Page No.

1. Disposition Toward Job 40
2. Affective States 42
3. Behavioral Strains 44
4, Automobile Accidents 45
5. Somatic Complaints 45
6. Health Disorders 45
Relations Between Stressors and Strains 52
1. Results of Multivariate Analyses 57
2. Results of Univariate Multiple Regression 57
a. Job Related Attitudes as Outcome Variables 37

b. Affective States as Outcome Variables 59

c. Behavioral Strains as Outcome Variables 6k

d. Somatic Complaints as Outcome Variables 63

e. Health and Disorders as Outcome Variables 65

£, Auto Accidents as Outcome Variables 65
DISCUSSION 63
Job Related Stressors 68
Job Related Strains 72
Contextual Factors-Personality and Social Support 75
Relations with Union and Other Issues 7h
SUMMARY Bz
REFERENCES 85
APPENDICES 92

villi


23. Now think about your present job as a police officer. Use the following code to describe

your job:
1 = Rarely
2 = Occasionally
3 = Sometimes
4 = Fairly often
5 © Very often
How often do you feel that you:
Are able to use your skills from your previous experience and training
Are certain about what others expect of you on the job

Are certain about what your job responsibilities are

Can predict what others will expect of you on your job in the fucure

Hy

able to use your skills and knowledge

Are given a chance to do the things you do best

&
§

conflicting orders from superiors
See the results of your work

Have feelings of pressure from having to please too many bosses

LLL ia titdd

Have superiors giving you things to do which conflict with other things you have to do
= Experience a sharp increase in work load

__ Notice a marked increase in amount of concentration required on your job

___ Have a marked increase in how fast you have to think

Have too little authority to carry out the responsibilities assigned to you

Know what opportunities for advancement or promotion exist for you

Have too heavy a work load

Are able to satisfy the conflicting demande of various people over you

Lh

Are fully qualified to handle your job

____ Don't know how your supervisor evaluetes your performance

_____ Have the information necessary to do your job

_____ Have too much influence over the lives of other people

_____ Are able to influence the decisions of your immediate supervisor which affect you
_____ Have so mich work that you can't do as good a job as you would like

_____ Have to do things on the job that are against your better judgment

Repeat the same activities over and over

= Have a chance to develop new talents

_____ Remain seated

_____ Have the opportunity to be creative

__ Do different things each day

_____ Work in the same location

Know how well you did at the end of the day

=
-8-


of family life. It.is important to note that the divorce rate was higher

in this study among officers who married prior to joining the force (26.5%)
than among those who married after joining (11.3%). Presumably, in the latter
case, courtship allowed for the development of role expectancies and inter-
personal compromises which facilitated family adjustment to police work.

For those officers who married prior to joining the force, the impact of
police work may have proved too immediate and overwhelming to permit a

gradual redefinition of family roles. These results suggest that special
attention be given to preparing the family members of police officers for
job-related problems and adjustments, especially those officers who are

already married at the time of entering the force.

The absence of suitable comparative data makes it difficult to gauge the
significance of certain other strain measures in Table 16 which also
displayed extreme mean levels in the somatic complaint, health disorder,
and auto accident categories. It would seem plausible for some of these
Measures to be more problematic for police in light of their job routine.
Indeed, extensive patrol car usage would explain the apparent elevated
rates of backache, musculoskeletal problems and auto accidents observed.
Similarly, stomachaches, headaches and constipation may be indicative of
irregular eating habits dictated by varying work hours, Hypertension is
so common and ideopathic that the ratings here may not be really deviant
or sufficient to imply job linkage. Despite any such contentions, the

officers perceive themselves as in good overall health (Figure 13).

The somatic complaint measures of strain showed numerous significant

associations with the job stressor/contextual factors shown in Table 17.

74


11.

13.

How wuch do you like or dislike handling the following situations or duties? Use the following
code:

1 = Dislike very mch 4 = Like slightly
2 = Dislike moderately 5 = Like moderately
3.= Dislike slightly 6 = Like very much

For example, if you "dislike moderately" a certain situation, place a "2" in the blank to the
left of it. If you “like very much’ uation, place a "6" in the blank.

— Domestic disturbance =—- Delivering death messages ma Offense incident reports
_____. Person with gun —___ Silent burglar alarms _____ Routine department paperwork
___ Auto accidents ____ Possible homicide ____ Another officer needs assistance
_ Prowler —__ Child beating = Unknown nature of call
____ Shooting = Robbery in progress —____ High speed auto chase
_____ Routine patrol ______ Taking rape reports _____ Mentally disturbed person
_—___ Car check _—____ Sudden death/D.0.A. _____ Staying alert ‘to the police
0 radio

Pedestrian check Burglary in progress
a

How tense or relaxed do you feel in handling the following situations or duties? Use the
following code:

1 = Very tense 4 = Slightly relaxed

2 = Moderately tense 5 = Moderately relaxed

3 = Slightly tense 6 = Very relaxed

Domestic disturbance Delivering death messages —____ Offense incident reports
nu ” a

Burglary in progress

_____ Person with gun _—___ Silent burglar alarms ______ Routine department paperwork
—___ Auto accidents —— Possible homicide —____ Another officer needs assistance
___ Prowler Child beating = go Unknown nature of call
—_ Shooting Robbery in progress ______ High speed auto chase
_____ Routine patrol _____ Taking rape reports _____ Mentally disturbed person

Car check Sudden death/D.0.A. __ Staying alert to the police
— —_— 7s radio

_____ Pedestrian check
Ey Cy

In the next set of questions, assume you had the job you would most like to have. Use the following
code:

Rarely

Occasionally

Sometimes

Fairly often

Very often

wrune
enone

How often would you like to:

Be able to predict what others will expect of you on your job
= P y

Experience a marked increase in how fast you have to think
Have a chance to develop new talents

Remain seated

Experience a sharp increase in work load

Have the opportunity to be creative
a

-4-


REFERENCES

Abram, H.S. (Ed.) Psychological aspects of stress. Springfield, Illinois:

Charles C. Thomas, 1970.

Althouse, R., Hurrell, J.J., Jr. An analysis of job stress in coal mining.
U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Publication No.

(NIOSH) 77-127. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1977.

Belsley, D.A., Kuh, E. and Welsch, R.E. Regression Diagnostics. New York:
John Wiley & Sons, 1980.

Bernard, R., Gardner, G.W., Diaco, N.V. and Kattus, A.A. Near maximal ECG stress
testing and coronary heart disease risk factor analysis in Los Angeles city
fire fighter. Journal of Occupational Medicine, 1975 17(11).

Brown, J.R. Factors contributing to the development of low pack pain in

industrial workers. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal.

1975, 36(1), 26-31.

Cannon, W.B. The wisdom of the body. New York: W.W. Norton, 1932.

Caplan, R.D., Cobbs, S., French, J.R.P., Jr., Van Harrison, R. and Pinneau, S.R.

Job Demands and Worker Health. U.S. Department of Health, Education and

Welfare, Publication No. (NIOSH) 75-160, U.S. Government Printing Office,

Washington, D.C., 1975.

Cobb, S. Class A variables from the card sort test (A study of People Changing
Jobs, Project Analyses Memo No. 12). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.

Institute for Social Research, July 24, 1970.

85


Self-Reported
Health

Obesity
| |
Most -1 6
Favorable a
Rating
m s2s—el |
= S—— 5.02
bs (I) 4.93 cy
!
1
1
1 4e]
313m |
Wham SS
1
3
5 2
Least
Favorable, 6 1
Rating | |

t

Figure 13. Mean [UPA, NIOSH and Combined Sample Ratings for
Health and Physical Illness (brackets depict combined
sample mean * | standard deviation)

53


Table 9

Reported Disorders, by Frequency Total Patroi Officer Sample
(N=2622) U.S. National Probability Sample (N=2157)

Illness

Patrol officers having ill-
ness in past six months

Workers having ill-
ness in past year*

|A cold/influenza

Trouble with teeth or gums
Migraine/severe headaches
Trouble with spine

Trouble with gastrointestinal tract
Hay fever

Hypertension/high blood pressure
Repeated skin trouble
Arthritis or rheumatism
Trouble with seeing

Trouble with hearing
Bronchitis

Ulcers

Whiplash injuries

Trouble with urinary tract
Paralysis, tremor or shaking
Asthma

Kidney trouble

Hernia or rupture

Heart disease/trouble
Diabetes

Gout

Thyroid trouble/goiter
Hypoglycemia/low blood sugar
Gall baldder trouble

Mental illness/nervous breakdown
Veneral disease

Liver trouble

Epilepsy

Cancer

Tuberculosis

A stroke

68.1%
14.3
13.7
13.5

PRR
SOSCSSSSOPHEEP EE EENNEUUUNDADBOOSOHN

NWOWKWBUIYNOCORPNEUYVNOAUEBRPAUNUDHONY

a
00
AWAARADDMODWNWADW

BP

Pee

NINMNNDNAAD SD FUNNNOWOD

ppp B RRPBO
BAaBAauUuAnEU

oooos
BNNNA

*Source: Quinn and Shepard, 1976:28-9
*#n.d. - no data were collected

49



responses to those items which demonstrated conceptual coherence and formed

clear factors.>

Table 1 lists all the measures analyzed in this study, the number of items which
constitute them, their internal consistency and the sources from which the

measures derive.

Sample Selection

The IUPA and NIOSH samples differed in their manner of selection and mode of
questionnaire distribution. The IUPA sample was drawn in two steps. First,
staff of the IUPA and Police Foundation selected 18 cities? whose local police
officer associations were affiliated with the international body and which
afforded broad regional representation. Once selected, the roster of IUPA
member officers in each city department was arranged alphabetically. Individual
names were then drawn in accordance with a selection rule designed to meet a
sample size large enough to afford a 95% confidence interval for any given
result, assuming even a 40% response rate and the expectation that 50% of the
officers sampled possess the characteristic being sampled for. (See Cochran
(1963) for details concerning this sampling procedure; the actual sampling plan
is presented in Appendix B). Table 2 presents the total number of IUPA members
in the 13 city police departments whose data were actually processed in this

study.’

3The resulting scales, distributions of resvonses to items composing the
scales and inter-item correlations are available from the authors upon request.

4 Questionnaire data received from patrol officer respondents in 13 of these 18
cities were actually processed in this study. Chiefs in five cities objected to
the IUPA surveying member police officers in their departments. Although it was
a subject of some dispute amongst the groups, it was finally decided to exclude
these cities from the survey. This decision was predicated upon the fact that
NIOSH was to undertake the overall analysis of both the IUPA and NIOSH data
samples, and the NIOSH study plan called for processing of questionnaire data
obtained with the mutual consent of both the police administration as well as
rank-and-file officers in any sampled police department.

11


Indicators of Stress Response and Strain

1. Disposition Toward Job: Mean ratings to scales reflecting job
dissatisfaction and work-related self-esteem for both the IUPA and NIOSH
respondents indicate no problems (Figure 10). The ratings with regard to self-
esteem show a distinct favorable trend. On the other hand, responses to
individual items comprising these two scales offer a different picture when
compared with data obtained from other occupational groups. For example. one
item in the job dissatisfaction scale asked respondents whether they would take
the same job if given the opportunity to make such a decision again. Among
patrol officers in both samples, 43.12% indicated it "very likely" that they
would take the same job and 15.7% indicated "very unlikely." In a previous
NIOSH sponsored survey of a representative sample of U.S. workers (Quinn and
Shepard, 1974), the composite responses to this question from nearly 1500
respondents indicated 69.7% deciding without hesitation to take the same job
with 5.8% indicating no desire to do so. Another item in the job
dissatisfaction scale posed the question of what one would say to a friend
considering working in a similar job. Only 24.9% of the patrol officers,
combining both samples of respondents, would voice support for this action while

17.5% would likely advise against it.

With regard to items making up the scale of work-related self-esteem, patrol
officers again indicated less favorable responses than comparable data obtained
in the Quinn and Shepard (1974) survey. The items here dealt with the
respondent's view of the quality of effort expended in his/her job, perceived
success, and the importance of the work. The largest difference was with regard
to the latter item. Whereas 69.4% of the workers in the Quinn and Shepard
(1974) sample rated their job as being relatively important, only 38.4% of the

patrol officers felt similarly.

40


3. Behavioral Strains: Table 7 summarizes response data on several measures
depicting behavioral indications of stress. Few comparative data exist by which
to gauge the significance of the mean consumption levels for alcohol, coffee and
cigarettes. In a NIOSH study of 23 occupations (Caplan et al., 1975), 48.9% of
the respondent workers were reported as smokers. For the combined IUPA and

NIOSH samples of patrol officers, a slightly higher figure (50.3%) was obtained.

There were 2045 police officers in the combined IUPA and NIOSH samples who
indicated that they had been married and of these 462, or 22.6% were divorced at
least once. This figure is quite high compared to the 13.8% figure for white
urban males surveyed in the United States census in 1970. The validity of such
a@ comparison, however, is diminished by the fact that the age distribution of
police officers is considerably lower than that of the average white urban male.
If the age distribution of police officers is equated to that of the white urban
males in the 1970 census, the ever divorced/ever married ratio becomes a

striking 28.2%, more than two times that of the comparison group.

The relationship of this high divorce rate and the job of police officer is
clarified somewhat by noting that of the officers who married before entering
the police department, 26.5% have since become divorced. On the other hand,
only 11.3% of officers married after entry have divorced. This would indicate
that the sheer fact of becoming a police officer has a dramatic effect on the
chances of martial success. In elaborating further on this point, police
officers in this study were asked how many of the five officers they work with
most often have each of the several types of serious problems. The officers
indicated that approximately 37% of their fellow workers have serious marital
problems. Comparable questions produced results revealing about 36% of officers

had serious health problems, 23% serious alcohol problems, 21% serious problems

44


strain measures and in some cases were remarkably low. The latter was
especially true for the affective set of strains (anxiety, depression,
irritability, irritation, and placidity). The absence of notable troubles
here could be. a function of the selection procedures used in police
recruitment and also the training of officers which reinforces the idea of
maintaining composure even under the most extreme emotional situations. On
the other hand, the affective strain measures are among those showing the most
frequent co-variations with the different job stressor/contextual factors
shown in Table 17. This suggests a potential for affective problems, given
more extreme conditions of certain stressor or contextual factors. Table
17 indicates role conflict and personality factors to be primary predictors

of these kinds of problems.

Police officer ratings of work-related, self-esteem, while in a distinctly
positive direction, nevertheless were poor when compared to data obtained
from other occupational groups similarly surveyed. That officers view their
jobs with less pride may reflect on the role conflict issues already
addressed and the public's cynical, if not negative, view of any law

enforecement work.

The frequency of divorce among police officers since joining the force

was also excessive and gave evidence of significant strain. This finding
emphasizes the need to expand concerns about job related stress in this
occupation to include the officers' family as well. As previously discussed,
police work is demanding and involves a degree of commitment that is not
required in most other jobs. Long and irregular work hours ,hostile encounters

with the public, and role conflict can impact directly on the nature and quality

73


Police Stress and the Current Study

Some of the aforementioned job stressors go to the very heart of police work.
Indeed, shift work schedules, monotonous patrol routines with peak skill
utilization and effort used only in response to emergencies, responsibility for
people sometimes involving life endangering circumstances are regular aspects of
a patrol officer's job. Perceived stress and resultant strain owing to these
factors have been reported in small sample studies of police officer stress as
have a number of other factors (see Kroes & Hurrell, 1975). Among the latter
have been administrative/organizational problems such as rigid department
policies, inequities in pay, undue time demands for court appearance, poor
supervisory relations. Also acknowledged as sources of stress have been the
apparent negative public image of the police officer, the public's general

apathy toward crime and court leniency in dealing with offenders.

The intent of the current study is to provide a broad-based empirical
investigation of job elements perceived stressful by police officers and their
related strain consequences. For this purpose, a wide variety of job factors
believed to be stress producing in police work are sampled together with an
equally large number of adverse outcomes reflecting attitudinal, emotional,
behavioral and health difficulties. These are shown in Figure 1 which presents
a conceptual framework for the planned data collection and analyses. The
framework is akin to those offered by Caplan et al. (1975) and Cooper and
Marshall (1976) but modified to include a number of added stressors and strains

thought to be present in police work.

Listed in Figure 1 as Job Environment Stressors are those factors referenced

from the general job stress literature as well as those in the more limited


(ponunue,y)

JdueZy INeUMOS JOY sHuNUEY apduug pourquory PUL FISOIN ‘Vai “qglomsing
sso | w so fw 999. | N sro N 09 ON
[sez (pez 9} oeze 9] szzz 2 | veer azis
ust} vist} 4 Oy wisi} 1 Ea lost wisi 4 | dues
I I | | |
e- & e- €- e- UNO
fh weet 22
zt a a- a ; e-
» 291 pee
; si
oreo i
sit W)
1-001 wh - - fo L-
(3) sso} 650 {ul
. iro —-9¢'0 (W)
i.) cee Bt HY
Q 0 0 0 0 J2AQN
1 1 I 1 '
Ayng-i Ayng- spue; uonediysu eaqyes
asuay Aebota sua he Pd puyquely SHDENESHT u ph ey ud

48


and emotional states. Given the above results, it was felt that stress among
police officers involved needs for greater clarification of job roles and
expectations, and the development of strategies for better coping with conflicts
that relate to professional and familial responsibilities. Freer discussions
and interactions with police management and peers on matters of mutual concern
were viewed as beneficial in this regard as were more prosocial contacts with
the public. Preparing officers for dealing with their individual or familial problems
through counseling or other training was also.considered a positive step in
limiting potential stress and strain problems. Most of the more than 30 strain
measures were also non-remarkable in terms of overall mean ratings. Work
related self-esteem and divorce, especially for officers married prior to
joining the force, were among the few showing high level problematic response.
Complaints of musculoskeletal and gastrointestinal troubles and number of
driving accidents also appeared excessive, and had probable connection with the
officers’ constant vehicular use and their variable duty hours. Many more
strains were linked significantly with the different job factors, especially

those in the emotional and somatic complaint categories.

Relations with one's children and family concern for officer's safety received strong
positive ratings from the police officers surveyed. Rather than acting as a

support factor in buffering the effects of job stress, family concern for safety
showed correlations with strain measures suggesting a heightening of such

effects. It was explained that police officers may, in fact, feel added anxiety

and guilt about their jobs in terms of threatening family security. This

finding coupled with the high divorce rate among police officers suggested the

need to examine the nature and effectiveness of family coping styles in response

to police stress.


and irritation, the relationships were all positive whereas each of the five
significant relationships between placidity and somatic complaints was

negative.

Three factors, social desirability, Type A personality, and role conflict were
significant predictors of three measures of complaints. In the case of the

Type A personality and role conflict, the relationships were all positive. Social
desirability was, however, negatively linked to tension on and off duty but

positively linked to rapid heart beat.

Two factors, participation and job dissatisfaction were each significantly
linked to two complaints while an additional four, satisfaction with equipment,
boredom, poor fit with respect to variance in workload, and irritability were

associated with one measure of complaint.

c. Health and Disorders as Outcome Variables - As seen in Table 15, relatively
few factors were associated with the ten Health and Disorder measures. Anxiety
was positively related to six different disorders. Placidity was negatively
related to three different disorders and positively related to self reported
health. Union membership was positively associated with three different disorders

and six additional factors were related to one of the disorders.

£. Automobile Accidents as Outcome Variables - Out of all the predictor

variables, only three were associated with automobile accidents. These pre-
dictors were anxiety, Type A personality, and general social support from
supervisor. Anxiety was related to three of the six types of accidents assessed
while Type A personality and social support from supervisor were each related

to one of the six. Anxiety was positively associated with on-duty accidents at
fault, total number of accidents and total accidents at fault. Type A personality
was positively associated with total off duty accidents and social support was
negatively related to off duty accidents at fault.

65


sample, their roster size, the number of questionnaires distributed and
returned, the response rate and the number of patrol officer respondents. As in
the IUPA sample, only completed returns from patrol officers were evaluated in

this study.

Treatment of Sample Data

Although neither sample can be taken as scientifically representative of all
police officers in the United States, they do provide information from a large
number of officers in departments of different sizes and locations with diverse
problems and administrative styles. Because the sampling techniques were
different and the sizes of departments sampled quite disparate, it was deemed
"reasonable" to present data from the IUPA and NIOSH samples separately in the
sections of this report that discuss the levels of stressors and strains.
However, in order to provide maximum variance, the two samples were combined in
the analyses of the relationships between stressors and strains. Other
differences between the [UPA and NIOSH samples that could have produced some
differential response or bias are discussed later. Cross-comparing the
responses of the two groups of officers served to check to some extent on any

such indications.

RESULTS

Response Rate

As described in Tables 2 and 3, the rate of questionnaire returns from the NIOSH

sample was much greater (sample average = 64.9%) than that observed in

the IUPA group (sample average = 31.6%). This result could reflect differences

in the mode of questionnaire distribution among other factors. Unfortunately,

20


in workload, were associated with two of the nine behavioral strains. Officers
reporting more general social support from spouse/friend of the opposite sex
reported less alcohol and cigarette consumption while those reporting high
levels of job related social support from other than spouse/friend of opposite
sex reported more cigarette smoking and less divorce. The perception that the
courts were too lenient with accused offenders was associated with being
divorced. Good relations with citizens was associated with less alcohol and
cigarette consumption. Lastly, and inexplicably, poor fit with respect to

variance in workload was associated with less divorce and separation.

Eight additional factors were related to one of the nine Behavioral Strains.
These were, social desirability, family concern for safety, union membership,
job security, communication of department policy, interpersonal relations/
communications with fellow officers, poor fit with respect to role ambiguity and

irritability.

d. Somatic Complaints as Outcome Variables - As indicated in Table 14, anxiety

was a significant predictor of all thirteen somatic complaint indicators while
depression significantly prediced ten of the thirteen. All relationships were

positive for both predictors.

Two factors, job security and family concern for officers safety were linked
to six of the thirteen complaints. The direction of these relationships indicate
that job security concerns and high levels of family concer for the safety

of the officer are associated with more frequent complaints.

Job schedule carry over problems and placidity were each associated with five
measures of complaints while union membership and irritation were each predictors

of four. In the case of job schedule carry over problems, union memberships

63


This was to account for the fact that changes in affective states can be
conditioned by job related responses as well as by the more antecedent sources
of interest. Affective States were similarly entered in Series III, as an added

predictor set for the Behavioral Strains.

3. After completing the multivariate analyses described above, univariate
multiple regression analyses were performed to identify those individual
variables (within significant predictor sets) which were significantly (p<.01)
related to the different measures comprising the sets of outcome variables. In
these analyses, the Contextual Variables and Demographic Characteristics were
treated as covariates, meaning that they were held constant in order to
eliminate their variance from subsequent calculations. This was done to permit
clearer examination of the variability that could be accounted for by the more
primary factors of concern to the study, i.e., job environment stressors, social

support variables etc.

Some cautions must be raised concerning the results of the regression analyses.
To begin with, the particular values obtained in any regression analysis are a
complex function of the actual underlying relationship and the manner in which
it is measured. The direction of a particular regression coefficient may be
very different if another sample were used, ‘4E different indicators were
calculated, if certain other predictors were included or excluded. No great
emphasis can be placed, therefore, on the exact values of the regression
coefficients obtained. Consistent with this orientation, only the direction of
significant regression coefficients will be presented. Secondly, to find that a
particular factor or set of factors is a statistically significant predictor of
another factor or set of factors is not be confused with determining one to be
the cause of the other. Indeed no assertion of causality can be drawn from

these analyses.

56


Table 1

Questionnaire Scales/Measures Used: Reliabilities and Sources
(continued

Number Estimates of
of Internal
Description Items Consistency Source

Satisfaction with Pay 2 +59 Original
Satisfaction with Promotion System 3 81 Original

Union Membership/Satisfaction 1 -- --
Satisfaction with Training 2 52 Original

Job Future Ambiguity 4 +73 From Caplan et al. (1975)

Communication of Department

Policies 2 78 Original
Satisfaction with Equipment 3 67 Original
B. Aspects of Work Routines
Shiftwork 1 = --
Hours Overtime 1 = --
Workload Dissatisfaction 3 +81 Revised Caplan et al. (1975)
Scale
Underutilization of Abilities 2 +62 Original
Court Apvearance Time 1 _- Original
Court Leniency 3 47 Original
Court Delays 3 54 Original
Boredom 3 +78 Caplan et al. (1975)
Role Conflict 3 .81 Partially derived from Caplan
et al. (1975) based on Kahn
et al. (1964), and Kahn &
Quinn (1970).
C. Interperonal Relations/
Communications
Relations with Supervisor 3 84 Original
Inter Officer Communication 4 64 Original
Sharing of Information Across
Shifts 2 68 Original
Police Citizen Relations 3 «78 Original
D. Job Carry-Over Problems
Harmful Effect of Job Hours
and Days on:
Friendship with Police Officers 2 87 Original
Holding Second Job or Attending
School 4 +88 Original
Ability to Perform Personal
Errands and Chores 4 ~92 Original
Social Life 10 93 Original
General Health 10 +92 Original

13


SOUNNOY YOM JO $i

e990 TW so 7h eo TW wo |W oso |W v9 TW
3] ovez a] eszz a] zvez a] beez a] tee 3] byez e215
BI ust | al ees | 1 af est | 4 a ost | 1 bl Sust | 1 bal ust {1 | 2dwes
Gune
if fF iH ft ‘ aanetey
1SOW
L i}
‘ ]
! ,
z = 1, eal Ww z
H GJ ahd ea
z z ' |
i” i) Cereal Ww a :
ry G 1 Sere ie
f \ if |
te---—- a PP-————-| 44
! Cr) evel {ere w fi H 4
) weimp ore Wt de ege a i” —U ’ 1 Pay tH
H Pe I ! i ore Ww
1" H oy U1) !
H L 6) at eat iw H
ul H $ s s LS
i}
s s 1
! na buney
sa BANISOd
may yaiu0g 9 9 9 9 \sOW
uonezinAsepur joy panne
wopes0g skejag Aguaiuey uonoeysnessig

nog unog peopyiom

30


examining these data is that the number of disorders for both survey samples is
quite similar. However, other considerations bearing on these comparisons
suggest a different interpretation. Specifically, workers in the Quality of
Employment Survey were instructed to note which disorders, if any, they had
incurred over the past year and not over a six-month period which was the case
for the police officers under study. The six month reference period for patrol
officers was used to facilitate better recall. Finding near equivalent results
for these two groups would suggest that police officers may have as many
problems in 6-months as the average worker reports in 12 months. An alternative
interpretation is that a recency effect may have resulted in an underestimate of
the number of disorders experienced by the respondents in the Quality of

Employment Survey due to the 12 month reference period.

Nevertheless, it should be noted that the age, sex, race and social class of
workers comprising the Quality of Employment survey were representative of the
national make-up of the U.S. labor force. In contrast, patrol officers are a
more select group, notably, younger, male and white. Moreover, the. officers
must pass a rigorous physical examination to obtain and often retain their jobs.
These considerations would dictate that the patrol officers would have fewer
health disorders than evident in the general work population. That they do not,

suggests some problems possibly inherent in their jobs.

Table 10 indicates for those officers reporting specific disorders, the relative
frequency of those judged to be either caused or worsened by their job
situation. The results show that musculoskeletal problems are most
predominantly perceived as job connected. Those commonly associated with
stress, i.e., hypertension, mental illness or nervous breakdown,

gastrointestinal troubles also loom significant in this type of evaluation.

50


Questionnaire Scales/Measures Used:

Table 1

Reliabilities and Sources

(continued)
Number Estimates of
of Internal
Description Items Consistency Source

HEALTH’ AND ILLNESSES

Physical and Mental Illness

Obesity
Self-Reported General Health

AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENTS

On Duty Automobile Accidents

At Fault On Duty Automobile
Accidents

Off Duty Automobile Accidents

At Fault Off Duty Automobile
Accidents

Total Automobile Accidents

Total At Fault Automobile
Accidents

(Thirty-two illnesses
treated separately and

combined)

1
1

Adapted from Quinn
and Shepard (1974)

Caplan et al. (1975)

= Original

— Original
_ Original

— Original
a Original

— Original

16


family characteristics. In all, more than 2,200 officers completed and
returned the questionnaire survey forms, representing an overall response

rate of 37%.

Few of the more than 25 job environment factors displayed overall mean
ratings suggestive of a significant stress level among the population
surveyed. Those features receiving the most negative ratings related
primarily to organizational and management practices, notably lack of
participation and expression in job decisions, frustration with lenient court
rulings, and too much repetitiousness in work rotines. Correlations between
the different job elements and strain measures, however, revealed other factors
to be more influential as stress producers in police work. In this regard,
job future uncertainty and role conflict showed the most frequent significant
associations with negative health and emotional strain measures. Given the
above results, it was felt that problems of stress among police officers
involve needs for greater clarification of their job roles, expectancies and
development of strategies for better dealing with issues that bear on those
professional and familial responsibilities. Freer discussions and inter-
actions with police management about problems of mtual concern were viewed
as beneficial in this regard as were more prosocial contacts with the

public. Preparing officers through special training or counseling for
handling individual or familial problems was also considered as a positive

step in limiting potential stress and strain problems.

Most of the more than 30 strain measures were non-remarkable in terms of their
overall mean ratings. Work related self-esteem and divorce actions, especially
among officers married before joining the force, were among the few showing

extreme prohlematic values. Complaints reflecting musculoskeletal and

83


EES

nt
nat

7--

I

pocc-

ior

Ayqisuodsay

re

'
!
!
!
ta) S501
!
!
1

a)

Ayxejdwog
gor

37

th iy
tai
—sz0 WW)



bias, (however inadvertent), may have influenced the identification

of target sites. In much the same way, it could be argued that

those departments which agreed to participate differed in some important
respects from those departments which refused, introducing additional bias into
the sampling procedure. There is no easy and satisfactory way to resolve such
issues, but an examination of the departments surveyed (Tables 2 and 3)
indicates that the individual sites varied along such dimensions as size,
geographic locale, density, and patrolment/citizen ratio. In this respect, the

cimbined NIOSH/IUPA sample has, at least, a fairly broad representation.

NIOSH distributed and collected questionnaires on-site (4.e., at each police
department headquarters). IUPA, however, mailed questionnaires to each
potential respondent's residence and collected completed questionnaires via a
self addressed return envelop. While no accurate assessment can be made of the
nature and degree of bias entering as a result of these different procedures, it
seems likely that some biasing occurred. Indeed the different procedures may
have been in part responsible for the response rate from the NIOSH sampled
cities being approximately twice that obtained by the IUPA (64.9% vs 31.62).

An equally critical issue concerns the potential impact of union participation
on demand characteristics and responder bias in those cities surveyed by the
TUPA. As noted above, the IUPA distributed and collected the questionnaires by
mail. Each packet distributed by both NIOSH and IUPA contained the survey
instrument and a brief cover letter from NIOSH describing the general purpose of
the study and requesting the police officer's participation. In addition,
however, those questionnaires distributed by the IUPA contained a letter from

the union president urging the cooperation of the members in completing and

78


SERIES I:

SERIES II:

SERIES III

SERIES IV:

SERIES V:

SERIES VI:

Figure 14

OUTLINE OF MULTIVARIATE REGRESSION ANALYSES

SETS OF OUTCOME VARIABLES

JOB RELATED ATTITUDES

AFFECTIVE STATES

BEHAVIORAL STRAINS

SOMATIC COMPLAINTS

HEALTH AND ILLNESS

AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENTS

55

SETS OF PREDICTOR VARIABLES

CONTEXTUAL VARIABLES AND
DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS

PERSONALITY TRAITS

SOCIAL SUPPORT AND FAMILY
ENVIRONMENT VARIABLES

ORGANIZATIONAL/CAREER SOURCES

ASPECTS OF WORK ROUTINES

INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS/COMMUNICATIONS

JOB CARRY-OVER PROBLEMS

PERSON-ENVIRONMENT FIT VARIABLES

ADD

y

JOB RELATED ATTITUDES

ADD

_t

AFFECTIVE STATES

SAME AS SERIES III

SAME AS SERIES III

SAME AS SERIES III

—



returning the forms. Regardless of the intent, this endorsement constituted an
additional "treatment" which differed betweem the IUPA and NIOSH samples and
which may have jeopardized the comparability of the data from these two sample
sources. Furthermore, even within the IUPA, it is possible that the officers’
decision to partictpate and the quality and nature of their responses may have
been influenced by their individual feelings about the union (local as well as
national) and by the officer's perceptions about union involvement in the
design, interpretation, and application of the research. Presumably, the
officers most likely to comply with the union request for participation were
those holding strong union attitudes (pro or con) which may have resulted in a
respondent sample that was extreme relative to the general population. The
absence of a follow-up mailing to nonrespondents, precluded by procedural and
administrative considerations, may have further limited the sample to the highly
motivated officers. Indeed, a comparison of the results from the IUPA and the
NIOSH sampled cities reveals some interesting differences. In general, the
officers included the IUPA sample tended to report higher overall levels of
stress and strain than the NIOSH officers. Whether this is due to a demand
characteristic engendered in the IUPA sample by the union cover letter or
whether it reflects actual stress and strain differences in the IUPA and NIOSH
sampled cities cannot be determined. It should be noted, however, that the IUPA
cities were considerably larger than those in the NIOSH sample (median city size
in the IUPA sample = 530,830 vs 72,863 in the NIOSH sample). Thus, in addition
to the elevated stress and strain associated with urban life in general (e.g.,
Glass and Singer, 1972) and urban police work in particular, the officers in the
IUPA sample, as compared to those in the NIOSH sample, were more susceptible to
the problems of organizational estrangement and ambiguity (e.g., Phelps, 1975;

McGrath, 1976) and characteristics of large, bureaucratic police departments.

79


ca

el

49.
50.

S51.

52.
53.

55.

56.

The last set of questions is included to provide further information about the backgrounds

of police officers.

What is your age? zr
What is your sex? (CHECK ONE) i.
_
What is your ethnic background? (CHECK ONE) 1.
—_ kh
_ 3.
—__ 4.
What is your weight? ~~

Do you consider yourself to be: (CHECK ONE)
____ 1. Very underweight

______ 2. Moderately underveight _
—__ 3. Slightly underweight
_____ 4. About the right weight

What is your height? —— Feet
a

cry

Years

Male

Female
White/Caucasian

Black/Negro

Chicano /Mexican-American

Other (SPECIFY)

Pounds

5. Slightly overweight
6. Moderately overweight

7. Very overweight

Inches

When you joined the department, what was your marital status: (CHECK ONE)

1. Never married
2. Married, never divorced or widowed
3. Remarried after divorce

4, Remarried after being widowed

a. Has your marital status changed since joining the department?

1. Marital status has not changed (have not been married, separated, divorced,

or widowed since joining the department)
2, Have been married for the first time
3. Have been married after a divorce
4. Have been married after being widowed
5. Have separated (but not divorced)
6. Have divorced
7, Have been widowed

b. If you have ever been divorced, are you now paying:

1. Alimony 2. Property Settlement
1. No 1. No
2. Yes 2. Yes

-18-

S. Separated

6. Divorced

7. Widowed

(CHECK ONE)

3, Child support


APPENDIX B

IUPA SAMPLING PLAN


Type-A Personality

Social Desirability (Hard-Driving, Coronary-Prone)
High Tendency High Tendency
6 6
—
5
in
PH UPA) 4.53 pot — 4!
| {WIOSK) 4g1—] | 52 Camel
al
UPA} 3.87 —]
ira $5973.74 (Combined) LS

werent dt LE

!
I
34 3
2 2
4 1
Low Tendency Low Tendency
Sampte |_! | 1972 u} [tee
gue yee LS yo 2

Figure 2. Mean IUPA, NIOSH and Combined Sample Ratings of
Personality Traits (brackets depict combined sample mean
+1 standard deviation)

24


LIST OF FIGURES

Page No.
1. Conceptual Framework of Study and Analysis .........cccceeeeee 7

2. Mean IUPA, NIOSH and Combined Sample Ratings
of Personality Traits ......ceccecce cece esac eccececccnctssceces 24

3a/b. Mean IUPA, NIOSH and Combined Sample Ratings
of Organizational/Career Sources of Stress............cceeeeees 26/27

4. Mean IUPA, NIOSH, and Combined Sample Ratings
of Aspects of Work RoutineS ......seceeeeeeeeececeesscscevceces 30

5. Mean IUPA, NIOSH and Combined Sample Ratings
of Interpersonal Relations/Communications
SUETESSOTS 2. eee e cece cece cece ccccccceescctecsssccecscsseccess 31

6. Mean IUPA, NIOSH and Combined Sample Ratings
of Job Carry-Over Problems...........c cece ccc ceeecccccscesceees 33

7a/b. Mean IUPA, NIOSH and Combined Sample Ratings
of Person-Environment Fit Stressors - Signed
Values oo. c cece cece cece eet e nese eceeeececeecesteccccecesececes 34/35

8a/b. Mean IUPA, NIOSH and Combined Sample Ratings
of Person-Environment Fit Stressors ~ Absolute
Values oo cece c cece ees ece cece cece ecceesceccssesscescecesesesee 37/38

9. Mean IUPA, NIOSH and Combined Sample Ratings
of Social Support and Family Environment
Vardables ... cece cece cece cece cece tence eteestessesesssceces 39

10. Mean LUPA, NIOSH and Combined Sample Ratings
for Job Related Attitudessss.sseseceeccceececcnscececcecvceaees 41

ll. Mean IUPA, NIOSH and Combined Sample Ratings
for Affective States 2... . cece cece eee c tec c ccc cence esecccenees 43

12a/b. Mean IUPA, NIOSH and Combined Sample Ratings
for Somatic Complaints ....... cece eceee eee cecceceeeeceesuceees 47/48

13. Mean IUPA, NIOSH and Combined Sample Ratings
for Health and Physical Illness .........cesececececsccccuceees 53

14, Outline of Multivariate Regression Analyses............,. seveee 55


F uvau ajdwes paurqwios widap siayxoe2q) sayqeue, WuaWUO TIANA
pue woddng jris0g jo s8unvy ajduieg pouiquio;) pure HSOIN ‘Vdill ULay “6 2mNSty

[9 | vezz os |" [s [cea os |" [2 Toeze |" [pe |" [2 | eeze |e [2 | eezz 9 |") aig
gust | 1 over | 1} eust | t asst | est | 4 ust [1 | elduies
i ] i | | |
fF H a i D + suney
eaneban
1SOW
my ry
! \
z z 1z rez z Hs
! { |
gl fszz i) ! ) erzgefo sez UN
() eel ee WN) J fssz tu b) & Pee i)
i CT ag Ba re 1
€ e --fe---—--— te-————— —+e-—---—— +e----
—+4---—-—--—-+ }—— LW Lose t in
H He ta wepLere tw
i” ima » v 1? v
' a! | 1
lbp IN) { H
tl isnt sce tl >
! () spti~or tt ! Bune;
I ViR2er tw te oanised
! $s H s ' s s s Hon
1 1 ' I t
‘SW3/qOJg [EUOSIO, ‘saouno! UH. JostAladn:
L HI a vadang d 1241p ttn -estlodg hoy nos) 3
yesauag uodadns gor uoddng yoddns gor
9
uaspiyug
yum

suonejey

39


Qc

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

LIST OF TABLES

Questionnaire Scales/Measures Used:

Reliabilities and Sources.......ee cece cee c ce ee cece cece ee eenaee

IUPA Sample Response by Department....-..eeeeessseereeeceeccece

NIOSH Sample Response by Department......eeeescseecesecscsceves

Summary Description of Sample Cities/Localities Served

Demographic Characteristic Means.......seeseeeseceereeeersccceae

Aspects of Work Routines........+.e-0e

Behavioral Strain Indicators......sseseeeeeecee cree eeceererees

Mean Number of Automobile Accidents Within Past Year............

Frequency of Reported Disorders.......eeees essere reer ee cer ences

Percent of Disorders Judged to be Caused or

Made Worse by the Job... sce ecer cess erences ececeet ene eeeensees

Summary of Relationships between Predictors
Significant at the .0l1 Level for Job Related

RESPONSES... cece eee esee ec cenccneee eset eneeee ress sessoeeres

Summary of Relationships between Predictors
Significant at the .01 Level for Affective

SCALES... reece err c cece nce es cre sersressssevecsersesscecesssene

Summary of Relationships between Predictors
Significant at the .01 Level for Behavioral

SCrains....cccccccccccccccs cere ccen cena seeee reese ecesenesessees

Summary of Relationships between Predictors
Significant at the .01 Level for Somatic

Complaints.....cceceeecceccecccrersccseceeeececssesassreveneees

Summary of Relationships between Predictors

Significant at the .01 Level and Health Disorders...

Job Stressors, Contextual Factors and Strains

Showing Most Extreme ReSponsSe....seseeeeeeeereees

Number of Significant Relationships at the

01 Level by Sttess Response Category..........-

ix

Page No.

12
18
19
22
23
29
42
46
49

51

58

60

62

64

66

68

69


zo [MN wa |W oo [N v9 9 [¥] ong
a] ose a] siz ao] e8lz Tew I] oz f
eT se caf} 2 var fr] Ll ev ta] gost [1°] “dues
| | | | sts)
9- 9 9- 9- - $ i Coen
180W
s- s- s- s- s-
r r
-
i | ry | =
\
1p th ortee mr Ly ine Vp
I { jweve i !
to) ove H \
a _o —
i i I 1 i) wee Be IN
1 & be €- H e- Le ' &-
=
ui | H
Uy |
z- z- a z- Le
(inywey
Se9)
- \- 1 7 -
yyeaH ay spueds: jor puosa: $1280) J9yN
jesus weloos jeuosiog Su109 *fulpion ® sedligpuat

33


42.

43.

45.

46.

47.

48.

Think now about your health in general.
a. During the past six months would you say your health has been: (CHECK ONE)

1) Very bad 4) Slightly good

2) Moderately bad 5) Moderately good RR
3) Slightly bad 6) Very good

b. How does your health now compare with your health when you became a police officer?

(CHECK ONE)
1) Very mich worse 5) Slightly better
2) Moderately worse 6) Moderately better
wT
3) Slightly worse 7) Very much better
4) The same
*
TTFt3T7
During the past month how often have you used each of the following? Use this code: Lb
0 = Never 2 = Twice
1 = Once 3 = Three or more times
Antacids Aspirin or headache Cough or cold medicine
0 uu medicine a
Laxatives Sleeping pills
_ Medication to give you
Tranquilizers pep Other medicines
Fo)

On an average day, how many of each of the Following do you usually drink:

a. Bottles of beer __ ___ bottles ¢. Shots of liquor _ Shots

ie

b. Glasses of wine | __—s Glasses ~—Sd. Cups of coffee
a

Cups

On an average day, how many of each of the following do you smoke:

a. Cigarettes Cigarettes
& _ Cig
b. Cigars —____ Cigars
EY
c. Pipesful of tobacco _____ Pipesful
FO

Of the five people on the department you work with most often, how many have serious problems
with the following: (IN THE SPACE NEXT TO EACH PROBLEM, PLEASE WRITE IN A NUMBER FROM 0 TO 5S
TO INDICATE HOW MANY OF THOSE PEOPLE HAVE A SERIOUS PROBLEM)

Alcohol Children Finances Neighbors
30 ae Fy res

Marriage Health Drugs
cy Fr cr)

How many officers on this department have you known who have attempted or successfully
committed suicide?
Officers

z
How many officers on this department have you known who have had one or more heart attacks?
Officers

a. If you have known officers who have had heart attacks, how many of these officers had
attacks during regular duty hours?

_ Officers

a
o Mpa


Table 1

Questionnaire Scales/Measures Used: Reliabilities and Sources

Number Estimates of
of Internal
Description Items Consistency Source
SITUATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS
City Size 1 -- --
Reported Crimes/Officer 1 -- =
DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS
Age 1 -- --
Education L -- -_-
Height 1 _ --
Weight 1 — =o
Sex 1 — --
Marital Status 1 = --
Number of Dependents 1 _ ——
Years in Department E -- =
PERSONALITY CHARACTERISTICS
Social Desirability 6 +65 Crowne & Marlow (1964)
Type A Personality 3 74 Sales (1969)
SOCIAL SUPPORT & FAMILY CHARACTERISTICS
General Social Support from
Supervisor 2 -65
Job-Related Social Support from Refinement of scales used by
Other than Spouse 3 .72 Caplan et al. (1975), based
General Social Support from Spouse/ the research of Pinneau (1972
Closest Friend of Opposite Sex 2 .73 Taylor & Bowers (1972), Liker
Personal Problems Social Support (1961) and Gore (1974)
from Other than Spouse 3 70
Good Relations with Own Children 2 40 Original
Family Concern for Safety 2 48 Original
JOB ENVIRONMENT STRESSORS
A. Organizational/Career Sources
Satisfaction with Management 2 -68 Original
Rigidity of Department Policies 2 +78 Original

12


CONCEPTUA, FRAEMIC ‘nov AND ANALYSIS

DIVORCED OR SEPARATED SINCE JOINING THE DEPARTHENT.

. D
[EVER DIVORCED OR SEPARATED, EXCLUDING THOSE NEVER

THOSE NEVER MARRIED AND THOSE SEPARATED AT TIME OF
‘ABRIED

SOINING

‘ASPIRIN, COUGH/COLD MEDICINES AMO ANTIACIDS
SLEEPING PILLS, TRANQUILIZERS, PEP PILLS,
LAXATIVES AND OTHER HEDICINES.

DIVORCED SINCE JOINING THE DEPARTMENT, EXCLUDING

TOTAL SOMATIC COMPLAINTS

QH-DUTY SOMATIC COMPLAINTS.

GFF-DUTY SOMATIC COMPLAINTS.

BEMAVIORAL STRAINS

‘ALCOMOL CONSUMPTION,
COFFEE CONSUEPTION
CIGARETTE SHOKING

‘SOMATIC COMPLAINTS

PEDICATION USED:

BEING FIDGETY, TENSE OR HAVING TROUBLE SLEEPING

BEING FIDGETY, TENSE OR NERVOUS ON-DUTY
L_ WHILE OFF-puTy.

a
(AT FAULT OFF-DUTY AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENTS
TOTAL AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENTS:

ELF REPORTED HEALTH

‘ACCIDENTS

i?

STRESS RESPONSE VARIAKLES

IRRITATION

‘MERELATED ATTITIES 4] «= {AFFECTIVE STATES

(STRESSORS AND CONTEXTUAL FACTORS
‘ATTEND SCHOOL OR HOLD SECOND JOB
xX
(CROWME-HARLOME SOCIAL DESIRABILITY
SALES TYPE A PERSONAL ITY

REPORTED CRIMES/OFFICER

MARITAL STATUS

EDUCATION

CITY SIZE

f

i

i

af
af 2 Z
EEE be x ak
mid dg
Fes 7 8 EE tas
Gee bie pie ae
ecbd a greed podugs ck
cay 2 WAHL HHIEEE:



Patrol officers from unionized departments included in the survey tended to give
higher levels of stress and strain than their-non-union cohorts. A number of
methodological and other reasons were offered for such differences including the
fact that unionized departments were from much larger cities, presumably

subjecting the patrol officers to more bureaucratic pressures and problems.

The report acknowledges several methodological shortcomings in the data collection,

e.g., one time solicitation, self-report measures, union vs. non-union influences,

tempering the above, described findings and interpretations.

vi


JOB G JOB_B

in this job, you have changes in work load. In this job, you go along evenly from hour
Every once in a while you have to work to to hour and from day to day. The pace of
your absvlute maximum. When that happens, the work stays about the same. You rarely,
you have to concentrate very hard, work very if ever, have to suddenly change the pace
fast ana as carefully as you can. of your work and work even faster and harder.

Use the following code to describe your present job and the job you would most like to have:

1 = Very mich like JOB G 4 = Slightly ltke JOB H
2 = Somewhat like JOB G 5 = Somewhat like JOB H
3 = Slight*y like JOB G 6 = Very much like JOB H

Your present job is

The job you would most like to have would be

JOB I JOB J
In this job, your work is defined and In this job, you have some idea of the
described in almost every detail. Nothing purpose of the job, but no exact instructions
is left to chance. There is a procedure are given on how to do the work. There is
for every type of task. often no set procedure.

Use the following code to describe your present job and the job you would most like to have:

1 = Very auch like JOB I 4 = Slightly like JOB J
2 = Somewhat like JOB T 5 = Somewhat like JOB J
3 = Slightly like JOB I 6 = Very much like JOB J

Your present job is

7
The job you would most like to have would be

JOB K JOB L
In this job, things change almost every In this job, you work on the same tasks
day. Each task is rarely the same as the every day. You use the same procedures
previous one. You are likely to use dif- or equipment all of time. Each task

ferent procedures from task to task. is like the one you just finished.

Use the following code to describe your present job and the job you would most like to have:

1 = Very much like JOB K 4 = Slightly like JOB L
2 = Somewhat like JOB K 5 = Somewhat like JOB L
3 = Slightly like JOB K 6 = Very much like JOB L

Your present job is
rr)
“The job you would most like to have would be



spunoy een dyy
eogeoypuy [109 Kade uy -dyysuoyaeqes onpaeSou quesyzpusys e oavo}puy ousye enuye pun dyysuoyaejes oazaysod qued;

ys ov 38u3
susys enja —:B10N

aa

+

if

t + ¥

s + cy cy rs ry Taine
Saivis GAlLoaaav

WaaLs-2195 Galviza WEOK

MOILOVaSILYSS1q Or
Sa0NLILIV daiviae Gor

QVOTHHOR BALLVALINVND

T SeANSNOILILaaTE

SeMNLO 80d ALITIGISNOdSTE
‘ALINaTaNOD Gor

= S 5 GVOTHEOR W1_BORVIEVA

TE1d INBHROULANA-NOSUAd =:

TeRaIGOed WAND AREVO Tindawos gor ~

S = Guazi1i9 RLIA

4
T S SUORLABAANS-S¥aD1Ad0 MOTIAA WLI

Jl

ALITGV_ 40 NOLLVZI7110

ROLLDVAS11V3910_GVOTXEOR

ETI

TSEN1ENO’ WHOM 40 G197a8V *

inanainda

Word INGaVaR 20 NOTLVOINNDIOD

= ‘ai1a0933_gor

‘MINT VEL

ROISSTAGEA BOA ALINALNOGdO
WaiSAS_‘TvHOLLORONd

‘Ava
SIDI ws DUBUAVERT 2 TEGO
ry + + ra + INBEV
aT SAVORED NO a

SUOSSTUIS INTHNOETAND COr

ia rs Eigays G89dTA0 WOU WEBCT ATIVE

“Goud “IvNosuaa

t = + i ‘Fas W1TG0dd0 40
Guaiua/3s0048 NYHL WuRIO “dans ‘908 “Ive GOr

‘WOSIARHANS WOES LkOdaNs IVIO0S IVEINED

BOLLSIUSLOVEVHD Alina GV IeOdans “1VID08

Ririvmoseaa V ganl oxive

T = RITTIGVELS2d TVID0S BHOTEVH-aNROUD

SOTLSTURLOVEVHO ALTIVROSUaa

‘asivavaas wood MI souoa |" saioviny | ~ ~ SeoLoiamea
SROLLVISU Ld JOZ0SOAIG | -MIOF ZOWIS | NINIOL suszi11nbuva. soneq MIFONS | DIVINT | MAVINI
‘ou tvion| azowoata | = azaa | wotivavans | wszav | STIIa sMIazxIs | «@109/HON0D] sizgavOID} 294z09 | 10ROTTV
gaz ¥o gouoata | sa0aIa | wrarasy ‘saHODINO

= SHIVELS "IVEOLAYIAS

SHIVELS IVEOLAVHRT WO THAN] 10° BHL LY INVOLAINDIS SUOLDIGMAS NTVALIT SATASHOTLVINE 40 ABVHHNS
1 ateva

62


Also shown are the numbers of questionnaires directed to selected members of
these departments in fulfilling the sample size requirements, the number of
questionnaires returned and the response rate. All questionnaires were
distributed by mailing to the police officer's home address. This was
accomplished during January 1976, when a total of 7,306 questionnaires were
mailed, accompanied by cover letters from union leaders requesting cooperation.
The questionnaire returns in some instances included tesponses from police
officers in supervisory or administrative positions. Because this study sought
to focus specifically on job stress among patrol officer personnel, only the
tTesponses of such personnel were analyzed here. The numbers of completed
questionnaires received from patrol officers for the different cities in the

IUPA sample are listed in the last column of Table 2.

The NIOSH sample was much smaller than the one of the IUPA and was selected in
less systematic fashion. More specifically, the police departments

included in the NIOSH sample were chosen because of (a) the presence of NIOSH
consultants or other contacts in the locality who would assist in gaining the
participation of the police administrators and/or police officers in the survey
and actually handle the questionnaire distribution, or (b) receipt of direct
requests from the police department administrator of a given city to have their
force included in the survey. There were 15 such police departments in the
NIOSH sample, owing to the aforementioned factors, representing a mix of medium
size city and smaller municipalities, largely located in the southern and
western areas of the U.S. Table 3 lists these cities. Depending upon the
cooperation of the department administrators, questionnaires were distributed
on-site to as many. officers as possible during the January-February period in

1976. Table 3 also summarizes for the different departments in the NIOSH

17


Since the work of Walter Cannon (Cannon, 1932) in the 1930's, homeostatic models
have played a large role in both physiology and psychology. From a homeostatic

point of view, a stress is some stimulus condition that causes disequilibrium in
the system and thereby produces a dynamic kind of strain. The strain, in turn,

triggers changes in the system aimed at restoring the original state of

equilibrium.

A homeostatic conceptualization is embodied in the work of Hans Selye, a
Physiologist and acknowledged "father" of stress research. More than twenty-
five years ago, Selye defined stress as a nonspecific response of the body to
any demands made upon it (Selye, 1956). According to Selye, when an individual
is confronted by "any demand" (called a "stressor"), there occurs stages of
biological change reflecting different levels of the body's defense mechanisms
for coping with the insult. Recurrent, prolonged experiences with intense types
of stressors, by requiring sustained activation of these defense mechanisms, can
lead to a variety of ailments referred to by Selye as "diseases of adaptation."
In other words, diseases caused by the body's own attempts to adapt to stress
rather than to the stressor agents directly. Although Selye's research in large
measure has been concerned with the physiological effects of physical and
humoral stimuli, his mention of "nervous stimuli" as "stressor" agents has had
an enormously stimulating effect on research in the physiological and social
sciences. Indeed, the bulk of research currently being conducted in the stress
field is concerned with "psychological stress", i.e., with the impact of
psychosocial factors on the individual (Mason, 1975). Within this growing body
of literature, a host of physical and mental disorders have been identified as
being triggered by or associated with psychological stressors. Among the more

commonly researched physical problems are heart disease (see House, 1974),


Table 4

Summary Description, of Sample Cities/Localities Served

Population Size of Cities # of Mean Crime Geographic Regions
Localities Served Departments Rate/Officer** Represented
IUPA
<200,000 3 36.53 NW, C, NE

200, 000-399, 999 1 49.73 sw

400 ,000-599,999 4 28.90 NE, NC, NW
600, 000-799,999 ar 33.82 NC, SC, WC
800 ,000-999,999 o - -
>999,999 1 28.81 NC

TOTAL 13 33.81 NE,NC,NW,C,WC,SC
NIOSH

<50,000 4 37.99 c, we
50,000-99,999 4 46.47 wc, sc

100, 000-199 ,999 4 47.89 WC, SE

200, 000-299,999 S - -

300 ,000-399,999 1 29.53 sc

400, 000-499, 999 1 60.97 wc

TOTAL 14 44.28 WC, C, SC, SE

*San Francisco Airport Police were included in the San Francisco city category
in this summary.

Code for Geographic Region: NE = North East
E = East
SE = South East
NC = North Central
C = Central
SC = South Central
NW = North West

WC = West Central
SW = South West

** Defined as number of reported crimes for the 1976 year divided by the total
number of police personnel found in a given city or locale.

22


Zung, W.W.K. A self rating depression scale. Archives of General Psychiatry.

1965, 13, 63-70.

91


gastrointestinal troubles and numbers of auto accidents also appeared excessive.
Many more strain measures appeared linked significantly with the different job
factors, with those in the affective and somatic complaints categories covarying
with the greatest number of perceived work stressors. Relationships between job
stressors and strains appeared moderated by personality as well as social
support factors. The latter included family concern for safety and support
from the spouse. Such findings coupled with the high divorce rate evident in
this sample of patrol officers suggest the need to expand concerns about job

related stress among police officers to include the officer's family.

Patrol officers from unionized departments included in the survey tended to give
higher levels of stress and strain than their non-union cohorts. Possible
methodological reasons for this difference were noted, including the fact that
the unionized departments were from much larger cities, presumably subjecting

the patrol officers to more bureaucratic pressures and problems.

84


hypertension (see Rose & Levine, 1979), ulcers (see Rose & Levine, 1979)
diabetes (see Hinkle & Wolf, 1952), backaches or the lower back syndrome (see
Brown, 1975), and problems of the immune system (see McQuade & Aikman, 1974).
Major mental ailments associated with psychological stress include neurosis and
psychosis, personality regressions, sexual dysfunction, so-called traumatic
neurosis also known as combat neurosis, and transient situational organic

disease of varying severity (see Abram, 1970 & Levi, 1972).

Even with the above apparent associations, causal linkages between psychological
stressors and disease processes remain to be clearly delineated. One factor
that clouds the issue is that responses to any psychological stimulus may vary
widely from one person to another. This consistent observation has lead to
"individual fit" formulations of stress that has gained wide acceptance in the
psychological stress field (Kasl, 1978; McGrath, 1976; Caplan, Cobb, French,
Harrison and Pinneau, 1975). In these formulations, the potential for stress
exists when one perceives their response capabilities as inadequate to meet the
demands of a given situation. Discrepancies between response capabilities and
demands are thought to cause disequilibrium or strain referring to any deviation
from normal functioning. Strain may be displayed in a variety of ways. It may
be expressed through anxiety and depression-like changes in emotional state
(affective strains), through elevations of blocd pressure and muscle tension
(physiologic strains), through increased smoking, alcohol consumption and other
maladaptive actions (behavioral strains). Prolonged recurrent responses of this
type are thought to eventually lead to the clinical disorders alluded to above

(or health strains).


Rose, R.M., Jenkins, C.D. and Jurat, M.W. Air traffic controller health change
study: A retrospective investigation of physical, psychological and work

related changes. University of Texas, Galveston, 1978.

Sales, S.M. Differences among individuals in affective, behavioral, biochemical,
and physiological responses to variations in work load (Poctoral dissertation,

University of Michigan, 1969). Dissertation Abstracts International. 1969,

30, 2407-B (University of Microfilms No. 69-18098).
Selye, H. Stress. Montreal: Acta, Inc., 1980.
Selye, H. The stress of life. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956.

Shev, E.C. and Hewes, J.J. Good cops and bad cops. San Francisco:

San Francisco Book Company, 1977.

Somodeville, S.A. The psychologist's role in the police department. The
Police Chief. 1978, 45(4), 21-23.

Speilberger, C.D., Gorsuch, R.L., Lushene, R.E. Manual for the state trait

anxiety inventory. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1970.

Tasto, D.L. and Colligan, M.J. Health consequences of shift work. DHEW (NIOSH)
Publication No. 78-154, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1978.

Taylor, J.C. and Bowers, D.G. Survey of organizations. Ann Arbor: Institute

for Social Research, 1972.

Unkovic, C.M. and Brown, W.R. The drunken cop. The Police Chief. 1978, 45(4),

18-20.

Whitehouse, J.E. A preliminary inquiry into the occupational disadvantages of
law enforcement officers. Police. 1965, 9(5), 30-35.

90


DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
HEALTH SERVICES AND MENTAL HEALTH ADMINISTRATION

NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL
SAFETY AND HEALTH
U.S, POST OFFICE AND COURT HOUSE
CINCINNATI. OHIO 45202

Dear Respondent:

The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health is
interested in American workers. We are concerned with the types
of work they do, and the problems they face, their feelings about
their work and the effects of work on their health and well-being.
The aim of this study is to obtain an idea of how to improve the
working conditions of the police officer so as to provide him with
a healthier and more satisfying work environment.

Answers to all questions on the attached questionnaire are voluntary
and anonymous. To insure confidentiality we are not asking for your
name nor will your individual questionnaire be shown to anyone in
your department, so please answer honestly. Feel free to add comments
in the margins or at the end of the questionnaire.

We are grateful for your assistance.
Sincerely yours,

1 a

William Kroes, Ph.D.
Chief, Stress Research Section


38.

39,

40.

How often have you experienced each of the following during the past month while on-duty?
Use this code:

O = Never 2 = Twice
1 = Once 3 = Three or more times
7 Fainting or blacking out Hands trembling enough to bother you
ra a
Spells of dizziness Hands sweating so that you felt damp and clammy
Headaches _____ Stomachaches
ry
A loss of appetite Feeling you were going to have a nervous breakdown
Ey
Being fidgety or tense Being bothered by your heart beating faster than
usual
Being nervous or shaky inside
Shortness of breath when you were not working
Nausea hard or exercising
__ Backaches Constipation
4 7

In addition, have you experienced any of the following while off-duty during the past month?
Use this code:

0 = Never 2 = Twice
1 = Once 3 = Three or more times
____ Nightmares —= Trouble falling or staying asleep
——— Fainting or blacking out _ Feeling you were going to have a nervous breakdown
___ Headaches ____ Being nervous or shaky inside
_—___. Being fidgety or tense — Hands trembling enough to bother you
—_. A lose of appetite —— Hands sweating so that you felt damp and clammy
‘ Nausea __ et bothered by your heart beating faster than
usua.

Spells of dizziness

Shortness of breath when you were not working
_____ Stomachaches hard or exercising

Backaches Constipation
36 cry

How much of the time do you have the following feelings while you are at work? Use this code:

0 = Never 3 = A good part of the time
1=A little of the time 4 = Most of the time
2 = Some of the time 5 = All of the time
I feel:
Nervous Good Blue
6 70 ny
Sad Depressed Aggravated
Jittery Angry Cheerful
Calm Fidgety Irritated or annoyed
wT 7 * to
Unhappy TUSTITT
co)

-15-


spunoy een diysuoyjeja1 quests quBy6 ou 2643

saqe}puy 1199 Aadwo uy “dyyouoyqeya4 oazqe8ou ques}; 1UsTs e sazeo1pUy UB}e eaTzeBoU © puw dyysuor3B]a1 aAza}e0d JUeI};1UBIE © eaqeo1puy usys snd y :320N

GVOTNIOM FAILVI1INVAD

‘SSANSHOILILaday

NOLIVdlOTLuvd

ALINOIaRV 3108

SUBHLO WOA ALI‘IIGISNOdSTU

‘ALIxaTaHOO Or

GVOTIUOM NI BONVIEVA

3114 LNSWNOUIANZ-NOSHad

TSHI1GOUd BAAO AVUVD TINGAHOS aor

SNazILIO HLTA

$ua01440 MOTISA HLIA

TSNOLLVOINAHHOO/SNOTIV1GN “IVNOSUAdUaINI “9

LO11ANOD 27108

kodzod

SAV1aG_ LUNOD

KONZINAT LUN09

GAIL ZONVUVaddv 1UN0D

ALITIGV 40 NOLLVZI11L0

NOILOVASILVSS10 AVOTHUOM

BRILYSAO

WIOALATHS

TSANTINOW WHOM 40 SLOBdSV *

BEEEEE

‘inanainba

Kol10d INaWLUVdAd 40 NOTLVDINARROD

Airanoas gor

SMINIVEL

daLHSdaanak NOINA

NOISSHUdXa YOA ALINNALYOddO

HALSAS TVNOLLOWOUd

AVd

SH1D110d INANLUVdad 40 ALIGISIY

ANAHAIVNVR

TSHOUNOS WaaUVO/IVNOILVZINVSHO “V
SUOSSAYIS INBRNOWIANA Gor

Rigavs $8991440 WOd NUZONOD ATINVA
GSN0aS NON WOWd “ddNS “90S “GOUd “IVNOSUad

XS ALISOddO 40
GNgI¥4/ASNOAS NVHL YBHLO “ddNs “00S “1au GOL

@L1SOddO 40 GNA1BA/BENOdS-"ddNS *90S_1,NaD
WOSTAMAaNS HOWA LYOddNS TVIO0S "IVWANaD

SOLLSIMALOVUVHO ATINVA GNV LUOdaNs ‘IVID0S

su017e12u JO 22qGuNN 1820]

Waaisa A198 Galviza WOK NOILOVASILYSSIG GO|
Sadhiliiy daivigd dor

ALTIVNOSWad V adAL S3'1VS
RLLTIGVYISEd TVIDOS BHOTEVH-ANHOYD

BOLLSTWALOVUVHD ALITVNOSUAd

SuOLoIamed
‘sanooI—

SHGALILLV G3LVIaY OF HOA THAT] 10° FHL LV ANVOIZINOIS GYOLOTGMd NAAALAG SdIHSNOLLVIY 40 AYVHHNS

U1 aleve

58


“punoy svn drysuozzetoa queoez}UBzs ou yey2 seav9TpUE {199 Aades uy

“atusuor ates oapaeBou quest srusys = seaws,pur sts earaoBou © pue dpysoorseter ongapood auEsTsTUR;e w sozesspuy Usfe sntd y 230K

AICI

EI =

¥ a 7 + + Ea

==
aR

+ + + + + + + + +

+/H lay
+/+ bt
+

z

+
+

FSELTIGY 420 MOLAVZITLIN

Rial gree

OATHS

DOITOd ANNES 40 NOLLVIINTHHOO

ME

‘Wd
B312170d WENLER JO ALICIONY

URES

1
;

‘SIMNOS YEVI/THOLLYZINVRIO *V
JIGHNOWING Gor

ABYVS SWSBI14I0 BOS WENO ATI

SSS NVHL YEHIO

WOH uOdaNS “WID0S SHETTY “WHDSYEY
LISO4d0 20 BONY 153571, na

'
Ei
:

SOLISTYGLVUMD ATIMVS OMY AMOddTTS WII0S
~—ALITWHOStEd V 3dAL SWS.

‘ALITIGVUIS30 WII0S_JMORNW-MOED

id

SOLSTELWUMD ALITNOSUSd

+

ate

iit
bal

HLVHOS

puma

se| SYS) 2] Bh Sl al expe

SINIVIGKOD OILVHOS

SINIVIGWOD DILVHOS WOd TAZ] 10° AHL LV LNVOIAINOIS SHOLOIGAYd NAAMLaG SA1HSNOLLVIaY 40 AUVs
9U W1UVL

64


perceived in a large sample of police personnel, and (2) the relationships
between these stress factors and strains reflecting attitudinal/emotional

difficulties, behavioral/accident problems, and health outcomes.
METHODS

The present project represents a merger between what were initially two
independent efforts. One of these efforts came about-as a result of what was
then the International Conference of Police Association's (acea)? interest in
studying police officer stress in a sample of their constituent members, and the
willingness of the Police Foundation? to fund and pian an active role in the
conduct of such a study. The other involved the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), which was planning an investigation of
job stress factors in policing in a number of cities based upon an exploratory
study of the problem among police officers in one municipality. Contacts and
discussions among key staff in these different organizations indicated the
commonality of their research goals, and it was decided to collaborate in the
investigation. This was to include joint efforts in instrument development,
analysis of acquired data, and the preparation of a final report. Although the
usual problems were expected to arise (and did) when different groups, each with
their own priorities, attempt to work jointly, it was believed that the end-
product of this project could be strengthened by this collaboration. Aside from
the opportunity to gather data from two separate samples for reliability and
other purposes, there were the benefits of capitalizing on the NIOSH expertise
in dealing with occupational health problems, the understanding and cooperation
of the police officers not only as worker subjects but as research partners in

this study, and the Police Foundation's experience in researching police issues.

TICPA has since been terminated with many member groups forming the International
Union of Police Associations (IUPA) which is affiliated with the AFL-CIO.
Hereinafter, the IUPA will be used rather than the older ICPA designation.
2the Police Foundation is a privately funded, independent, non-profit organization
established by the Ford Foundation in 1970 and dedicated to supporting innovation

and improvement in police work.


APPENDIX A
STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE

92


Table 1

Questionnaire Scales/Measures Used: Reliabilities and Sources

(continued)
Number Estimates of
of Internal
Description Items Consistency Source
E. Person-Environment Fit
Variance in Work Load:
(Environment~Preferred) 3 +69
Environment~Preferred 3 Caplan et al. (1975)
Job Complexity:
(Environment-Preferred) 4 +62
Environment~-Preferred 4
Responsibility for Others:
(Environment-Preferred) 2 64 Subset of items in
Environment-Preferred 2 Caplan et al. (1975)
Role Ambiguity:
(Environment-Preferred) 3 «74 Caplan et al. (1975)
Environment-Preferred 3
Participation:
(Environment~Preferred) 3 +72 Derived from Caplan et.
Environment-Preferred 3 al. (1975), Likert (1961
and Caplan (1971)
Quantitative Work Load:
(Environment-Preferred) 3 +68 Derived from Caplan et
Environment-Preferred 3 al. (1975), based upon
Caplan (1971)
Repetitiousness:
(Environment~Preferred) 2 +47 Althouse & Hurrell (1978
Environment-Preferred 2
JOB RELATED ATTITUDES
Job Dissatisfaction 2 -70 Based upon Caplan et al.
(1975) derived from Quin
and Shepard (1974)
Work Related Self-Esteem 4 64 Quinn & Shepard (1974)
AFFECTIVE STATES
Anxiety 3 +83 Derived from Caplan et a
Depression 4 +88 (1975), Cobb (1970)
Irritability 2 25) Zung (1965), Gurin et
Irritation 3 83 al. (1960), and
Placidity 3 77

Spielberger et al. (1970
Caplan et al. (1975)

14


Tray

99 |W iso |W iso |W zo [NW 69 [8
9 | 9zzz 9 | 1ezz 2 | zeze 9 | 9zzz 2 | 2ezz 2216
ust | t wast | 1 sist | 1 al lst] aust | 1 | edures
9d
| | | I | 1sdu01H
o- s- s- s- s-
s- re v- -
i
a
' tol wet-|=see
' ee)
ine |e &- e- e-
Lycise 0
th wey ; 1
RFR OSE IW)
i rm
+e z- ! a z a
Pr]
ty seitef est I iT
H zr UW I H
A} ret
. ie Co) ot Loe
z- ¥ Lt H pat Go) oI |S
H 1 620 Ww
! !
Wi ul
{9A07
- C) 0 0 0 1semoy
Amqewy Aypiseld uONe I] uojssasdeq Aaixuy

43


House, J.S. Occupational stress and coronary heart disease: A review and
theoretical integration. Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 1974, 15,

12-27.

Kahn, R.L., Wolf, D.M., Snock, J.E. and Rosenthal, R.A. Organizational stress:

Studies in role conflict and ambiguity. New York: John Wiley, 1964.

Kahn, R.L. and Quinn, R. Role stress: A framework for analysis. In A. McLean

(Ed.) Occupational mental health. New York: Rand McNally, 1970.

Kasal, S. Epidemiological contributions to the study work. In C.L. Cooper

and R. Payne (Eds.) Stress at Work. New York: John Wiley, 1978.

Kroes, W.H. and Hurrell, J.J., Jr. (£ds.) Job stress and the police officer:

Identifying stress reduction-techniques. U.S. Department of Health, Education

and Welfare, Washington, D.C. DHEW Publication No. (NIOSH) 76-187, 1975.

Lazarus, R.S. Psychological stress and the coping process. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1976.

Lester, D. Suicide in police officer. The Police Chief. 1978, 45(4), 17.

Levi, L. Stress and distress in response to. psychologtcal stimuli. New York:

Pergamon Press, 1972.
Likert, R. New patterns of management. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961.

McGrath, J.E. Stress and behavior organizations. In D. Dunnet (£d.)

Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. Chicago: Rand McNally,
1976.

88


soo |W 199 |W soo [NW og |W 699 |W] arg
Wee eee ‘0sze 9 | eezz 9 | byez du
st | BEAar le ah [2 est | 1 la] zest [1 | 1mes
rt ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ Suey
enneban
H 1 SOW
|
em Oe Pr
to) scoz-pz 96 fl 1z Te z 1z
Tite 1 prez f Fr 1
{ !
i) wee) ! H 1 |+-esz tvani)
! ! i i th wet
Le 1 ¢ © ow 1¢€ te. ' 1é
1 3 th zeletize ty O) wep-yrHe tt !
i 7 ---—-—-{ ee Wd ore w—-———l_}~ oe (usoin)
!
» ’ i? L? by
!
!
LL
s s s s s
Suney
Bansod
9 9 9 9 9 1SOW
ways;
uolssasdx3 wonowog Red squawabeuey
JOY yum uu

Ayunysoddg wONIEIsHeS uonseysnes

26


Instrument Development

Independently, NIOSH and IUPA each envisioned a questionnaire survey approach to
gathering information on stress factors in police work and their associated
behavioral, social and health consequences. In a plan for collaboration, it was

agreed that the questionnaire would:

~build upon those used in recent surveys of job stress.
and strain as exemplified in the Caplan et al. (1975),

and Quinn and Shepard (1974).

-incorporate wherever possible, existant standardized scales
or develop new ones offering a more meaningful measure of

job stress or resultant strain.

-take account of job stress and strain factors specific

to policing as defined by the available literature.
-undergo pre-testing.

A first questionnaire encompassing this subject matter was administered to 100
police officers in Kansas City, Missouri as part of a formal pre-test of the
instrument. In this effort, comments concerning questionnaire length, item
readability and format were solicited and low yield items were identified and
eliminated via factor analysis. The final version of the questionnaire was
subsequently prepared for distribution to the NIOSH and IUPA survey samples as

described below. A copy of the questionnaire appears in Appendix A.

In an attempt to create indicators of maximum reliability, several multiple-item
scales were constructed, based upon factor analyses of the responses of the

combined sample. Based upon these results, scales were created combining the

10


category, Job Schedule Carry Over Problems. Here too, the data on these factors

were combined into a single predictor variable for the regression analyses.

2. The regression analyses involved first multivariate then univariate
treatments of the data. The multivariate approach was used to test for evidence
of correpondence between sets of predictor variables and sets of outcome
measures. The different sets or blocks of variables so evaluated are shown in
Figure 14, which also outlines the total scheme of the regression analyses.
Given evidence of significant correspondence between the sets of predictor and
outcome variables treated in this way, a univariate series of analyses were then
performed to sort out those variables within each predictor group which bore a
significant relation to the different measures composing the set of outcome
variables. For example, as outlined in Series I of Figure 14, a test (F-test)
was performed to determine if there was a significant relationship between the
predictor set Contextual Variables and Demographic Characteristics and the
outcome set‘of Job Related Responses. If a significant relationship was found,
all of the individual variables comprising the Contextual Variables and
Demographic Characteristics set were designated for inclusion in a univariate
multiple regression. Next, as shown in Figure 14, a test was performed to
determine if the predictor set Personality Traits bore a significant
relationship to the Job Related Responses outcome set. If so, the two
personality trait measures (Type A behavior and social desirability) comprising
the Personality Traits predictor set were designated for inclusion in the
univariate regression. This process was repeated for each of the remaining six
predictor sets shown in Series I. In Series II, treating Affective States as
the set of outcome measures, the Job Related Responses were entered into the

analyses as an added set of predictor variables along with the others indicated.

54


29. (continued)

1 = Strongly disagree 4 = Slightly agree
2 = Moderately disagree 5 = Moderately agree
3 = Slightly disagree 6 © Strongly agree

—_— My children and I don't get along very well

a The work on my job is dull

—— The department's job promotion policies are basically good

—___ I am happy about my current work load

—_ Other ‘people give my children a hard time because I am a police officer
—__ Some of the best qualified people can't get promoted under the current system
—— Many of the department's regulations are unrealistic

Families of police officers
families

@ expected by the community to behave better than other

Overall, my job has a negative effect on my home life
This department is a good one to work for

I don't receive enough praise for the work I do

My family is no more concerned about my safety than they would be if I were not a police
© officer

—— My department is too much like a military organization
—— Nobody seems to notice when I do my job well

—___ Most citizens have a great deal of respect for the police
——— My job requires me to do too mich paperwork

_ I feel I am getting ahead in the department

My progress toward promotion is satisfactory
Citizens usually report the crimes they observe
My department does a poor job in maintaining commmications equipment

Many citizens believe that investigations of police misconduct are usually biased in
favor of police

—> The public is generally eager to cooperate with the police
__ Police vehicles are kept in good mechanical condition
——— My department does a good job in providing the equipment I need
—___ The relationship between citizens and police in this city is a good one
——— Many citizens believe that police officers are people who like power and tend to abuse it
7 I sometimes try to get even, rather than forgive and forget
—____ I thrive on challenging situations
In comparison to most people I mow, I'm very involved in my work

There have been occasions when I felt like smashing things

In general, I approach my work more seriously than most people I know
9

5 iio


31.

32.

33.

34,

In the past year, have you had any vehicular accidents while off-duty? 1. No

2. Yes s
Tf Yes, a. How many accidents have you had off-duty? —____ Accidents
a
b. In how many accidents were you found to be legally at fault? Accidents
re
The following questions concern your appearances in court as a police officer.
a. On the average, how many regular duty hours per week do you spend in court?
____ Hours per week
“
b. On the average, how many hours per week do you spend in court during which you are not
normally on duty?
———— Hours per week
o —_—
What kind of effect do your work hours have on each of the following aspects of yeur life?
Use this code:
1 = Very negative 4 = Slightly positive
2 = Moderately negative 5 = Moderately positive
3 = Slightly negative 6 = Very positive
Recreation Eating habits Friendships with other police
2° Ed @ officers
Family life Ability to stay alert
Friendships with persons who
—___ Sleep —__._ Social life are not police officers
Holidays General energy level Ability to deal with household
chores
Digestion Ability to go to school
—_— Ability to perform personal
——__. Sex life —__.. Ability to hold a second errands
a job
What kind of effect do the days of the week that you normally work have on each of the
following aspects of your life? Use this code:
1 = Very negative 4 = Slightly positive
2 = Moderately negative 5 = Moderately positive
3 = Slightly negative 6 = Very positive ..
rrtrsty
Sleep Ability to stay alert Friendships with other
ry % 8 police officers
Sex life General energy level
Friendships with persons
Digestion Recreation who are not police officers
Holidays Ability to go to school Ability to deal with
household chores
Social life Eating habits
Ability to perform personal
Family life Ability to hold a second WW errands

7 job

35. Which of the following best describes the situation in your department?

1. There is no union or association (SKIP TO QUESTION 37}
2. There is a union or association for lower ranking officers only (SKIP TO QUESTION 35c)
3. There is one union or association for officers of all ranks (SKIP TO QUESTION 35c) a

4. There is one union or association for lower ranking officers and another for senior
level officers (SKIP TO QUESTION 35a)

Sika


PREFACTORY NOTE

ABSTRACT

LIST OF TABLES

LIST OF FIGURES

INTRODUCTION

Conceptualizing Stress

Job Stress

Police Stress and the Current Study

METHODS

Instrument Development

Sample Selection

Treatment of Sample Data

RESULTS

Response Rate

Levels of Stressors and Contextual Factors

1.

2.

3.

Situational/Demographic/Personality Factors

Job Environment Stressors

Organizational/Career Elements

Work Routines

Inter-personal Relations/Communications
Personal Factors

Person-Environment Fit

Social Support/Family Environment

Indicators of Stress Response and Strain

vil

Page No.

ait

iv

10
ul
20
20
20
21
21
25
25
28
28
32
32
36
40


Cobb, S. Role responsibility: The differentiation of a concept. In A. McLean

(Ed.) Occupational Stress, Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas, 1976.

Cobb, S. and Kasl, S.V. Termination, the consequences of job stress. U.S.

Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health Service, Centers for
Disease Control, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. DHEW

(NIOSH) Publication No. 77-224, June 1977.

Cobb, S. Social support as a moderator of life stress. Psychosomatic Medicine.
1976, 38, 300-314.

Cochran, W.G. Sampling techniques (2nd ed.) New York: Wiley, 1963.

Cooper, C.L. and Marshall, J. Occupational sources. of stress: A review of the

literature relating to coronary heart disease and mental health. Journal of

Occupational Psychology. 1976, 49, 11-28.

Cooper, C.L. and Payne, R. (Eds.) Stress at work. New York: John Wiley, 1978.
Crowne, D.P. and Marlow, P. The approval motive. New York: John Wiley, 1964.

Danto, B.L. Police Suicide. Paper presented at the American Association of

Suicidology. Los Angeles, 1976.

Dash J. and Reiser, M. Suicide among police in urban law enforcement agencies.

Journal of Police Science and Administration. 1978, 6(1), 18-21.

Dichlacoff, L. The drinking cop. The Police Chief. 1976, 43(1), 32-39.

Dunn, J.A. Counseling alcoholic employees in a municipal police department.
Quarterly Journal of Studies on Alcohol. 1973, 34, 423-434.

86


{]) StOSSe

jg suOHe
x) pur HSOIN ‘Wdll

x)

WoW “gon

ais

[3 [exe

[3 | ozze

[9 | vez

[3 [zzz

sost | |

sist | 1 | aidwes

—----- by+-~- o

v—=00y tw
jeep

i}
sutus Ssoudy
uonediunwwog

cote

-

() 162%

7 7t

o

ove WW)
— o9e Int

<

|
sjeiu0g
2891))0-221U]

porto
;

a

at

£
P= OE

r

a 44—
!

oe et

—

Suney
aanebon
sow

ove tn

ay Ww

Suney
gjqesones
\sow

31


IUPA Sampling Plan

qd) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Department ICPA Members Sample Mailing Sampling
Desired Required Interval
Albuquerque 430 203 430 ALL
Bellevue 65 56 65 ALL
Buffalo 1500 306 765 THO
Cleveland 1301 296 740 Two
Detroit 4009 350 875 FOUR
Joplin, Mo. 78 65 78 ALL
Memphis 725 251 628 ALL
Minneapolis 870 266 665 ALL
San Francisco 1705 313 783 TWO
Seattle 1042 281 703 TWO
Se. Louis 2232 328 820 THREE
Toledo 502 223 501 ALL
Trenton 350 183 350 ALL
Total 14808 3121 7403 —



OMB No. 68S-75013
Expires April 1976

JOB ENVIRONMENT AND HEALTH

QUESTIONNAIRE

FOR

POLICE OFFICERS

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
Public Health Service
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

Center for Disease Control


Aynbiquy
9j0y

[alee

S1aYI0 40)

suodsay

Slayouaq) sone, poutig —

a

s
8

i

baa
ae
z=

—ae
pe —— ae nee elo tek

Ayxojdwog
gor

paurquioy pue HSOIN ‘Vai

22g
east | t ajduies,

biz

_ palsag vey
ssa] Yon

Le
Me
rl

odte-020- I

1 oti ozo

pausag ueyy
aJ0W YOnW

34