Perceived stress in human-machine interaction in modern manufacturing environments-Results of a qualitative interview study.

Rapid advances in digitization technologies are changing modern working conditions especially in industrial settings. Consequently, employees are confronted with new forms of human-machine interaction. Whether changes in working conditions in general, and the increasing relevance of human-machine interaction in particular, affect psychosocial working conditions, and employee's health is currently matter of debate, but empirical data are lacking. Therefore, we conducted semistructured interviews with 36 employees working in five different companies. The interviews were aimed at identifying potential stressors associated with the introduction and use of modern technologies in the manufacturing industry. The results show that stressors linked to human-machine interaction are technical problems, poor usability, low situation awareness, and increased requirements on employees' qualification. For example, technical problems such as breakdowns or slowdowns were described as a main stressor when employees were not qualified to handle these problems on their own, thus decelerating work flows and causing additional time pressure. Overall, the results show that problems in human-machine interaction, which have been observed in laboratory and nonindustrial settings, also apply to industrial work places with highly automated working conditions and are a potential source of stress. These factors should be considered in psychosocial risk assessment of work-related stressors.

[Is the school entrance examination a door opener for health sciences research? : Analyzing study participation of hard-to-reach groups]. / Die Schuleingangsuntersuchung als Türöffner für die gesundheitswissenschaftliche Forschung? : Eine Analyse zur Studienteilnahme "schwer erreichbarer" Bevölkerungsgruppen.

BACKGROUND: Additional scientific surveys within the compulsory school entrance examination (SEE) have become increasingly popular, partly because the SEE potentially reaches all socioeconomic groups. However, it has not been sufficiently explored whether selective participation in voluntary supplementary surveys actually results in no selection bias along socioeconomic characteristics. Therefore, the aim of this study is to analyze the participation of potentially hard-to-reach families in a parent survey at the SEE. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The parent survey on the utilization of community prevention has been linked to the SEE in a community in North Rhine-Westphalia. We compared families with low and higher education (CASMIN classification), families with and without migration background (at least one parent was not born in Germany), as well as single-parent and two-parent families. Using logistic regression we analyzed whether survey participation (n = 3410) and non-participation (n = 346) was different along all three indicators. RESULTS: Families with low education were slightly more often among the group of participants compared to non-participants (11.2 vs. 8.8%; odds ratio (OR) 1.29; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85-1.95) and single-parent families slightly less often (14.1 vs. 17.7%; OR 0.75; 95% CI 0.55-1.02). Families with migration background participated significantly more often (52.9 vs. 46.1%; OR 1.27; 95% CI 1.01-1.60). CONCLUSIONS: Hard-to-reach families could be recruited for a voluntary parent survey in the SEE to a satisfying degree. This illustrates the potential of the SEE for population-based basic and evaluation research.

[How Representative are Participants of a Parent Survey in the Context of School Entrance Examination]. / Wer macht mit? Zur Repräsentativität einer Elternbefragung im Rahmen der Schuleingangsuntersuchung.

AIM: In an evaluation study of preventive programmes, the recruitment success of families in difficult socio-economic circumstances was examined during the school entrance examination (SEE). METHOD: Using a 3-stage recruitment procedure, parents were motivated to participate in the survey. The response rate was calculated for the entire cohort and separately for the single recruitment stages. Non-participants and participants were compared on 4 indicators of difficult socio-economic circumstances. RESULTS: 52% of the parents participated in the study. The response rate reached 21% for the recruitment stage 'questionnaire with invitation to the SEE', 28% for stage 'personal delivery at the health department' and 4% for stage 'stamped addressed envelope'. Families with low education were more often non-participants (multivariate Odds Ratio (OR) 2.2; 95%-confidence interval (CI) 1.3-3.6). Marginal differences in study participation were present for unemployed families (OR 1.4; CI 0.6-3.2), single parents (OR 1.0; CI 0.6-1.8) and families with immigration background (OR 1.2; CI 0.7-1.5). CONCLUSION: The response rate was adequate. Personal delivery achieved the highest response rate compared to the other stages. A parent survey at the SEE is a promising approach to access families in difficult socio-economic circumstances. Nevertheless, families with low education are still underrepresented.