The Job Stress Survey: assessing perceived severity and frequency of occurrence of generic sources of stress in the workplace.

In this article, the authors respond to comments in the October 1998 issue of the Journal of Occupational Health Psychology (Vol. 3, No. 4) in regard to measuring occupational stress with the Job Stress Survey (JSS). The authors are pleased that (a) the need to assess the perceived severity and frequency of occurrence of specific sources of occupational stress was acknowledged and (b) job pressure and lack of organizational support were recognized as key dimensions of stress in the workplace. In addressing concerns about the independence of JSS severity and frequency ratings and the utility of the JSS for assessing jobs with extensive person-machine interactions, the authors noted that correlations among JSS severity and frequency scores were relatively low, and that person-focused stressor items were relevant for employees with person-machine jobs because most workers are required to deal with supervisors and fellow employees. It was concluded that the JSS provides important information about sources of occupational stress that can adversely affect the health and productivity of men and women employed in a wide variety of work settings.

Occupational stress: measuring job pressure and organizational support in the workplace.

Person-environment fit and demand-control theoretical models developed to explain stress and strain in the workplace have guided the construction of most measures of occupational stress. The strengths and limitations of 8 job stress measures are briefly reviewed, and the Job Stress Survey (JSS), designed to assess the severity and frequency of occurrence of 30 specific sources of occupational stress, is described in some detail. Factor analyses of responses to the JSS items identified Job Pressure and Lack of Organizational Support as major dimensions of occupational stress for male and female employees in a wide variety of work settings. JSS Index, scale, subscale, and item scores assess general and specific aspects of the work environment that are most distressing for individual workers and that adversely affect groups of employees.

Augmentation-reduction and pain: reply to petrie.

The comments by Petrie (1978) on our earlier paper (Elton, et al., 1978) are discussed. Clarification of procedures demonstrates that Petrie's comments do not warrant any modification of our conclusion that the relationship between perceptual reactance and pain has not been clearly established.

Augmentation-reduction and pain experience.

The role of augmentation-reduction in pain tolerance and threshold was examined using Petrie's (1967) criteria for classification of subjects. 14 augmenters did not differ from 14 reducers on pain tolerance and threshold. Trait anxiety correlated with both pain tolerance and threshold, but state anxiety did not.

The number and kind of invariant personality (Q) factors: a partial replication of Eysenck and Eysenck.

A study by Eysenck & Eysenck (1969) investigated the invariance across sex of factors derived from the Eysenck, Cattell and Guilford personality inventories. They found only neuroticism and extraversion invariant. The present study was designed as a partial replication of their study, but employed simpler, common-sense methods that gave the more moderate sized factors a chance to demonstrate the extent of their invariance across sex. Four invariant factors were found: the first two, neuroticism and sociability, were large and demonstrated almost complete invariance across sex; the third and fourth factors were moderate-sized and showed less, but substantial invariance across sex. They were called 'sensitivity v. practicality' and 'group-centred morality v. self-centred independence'.