Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Psychosocial and ergonomic survey of office and field jobs in a utility company
Department of Electromechanical Engineering, Universidade da Beira Interior, Portugal; Centre for Mechanical and Aerospace Science and Technology, Universidade da Beira Interior, Portugal.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-9759-9133
Escola Superior de Tecnologia e Gestão, Instituto Politécnico da Guarda, Portugal.
Department of Electromechanical Engineering, Universidade da Beira Interior, Portugal; Centre for Mechanical and Aerospace Science and Technology, Universidade da Beira Interior, Portugal.
Centre for Mechanical and Aerospace Science and Technology, Universidade da Beira Interior, Portugal; Escola Superior de Tecnologia e Gestão, Instituto Politécnico da Guarda, Portugal.
2018 (English)In: International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, ISSN 1080-3548, E-ISSN 2376-9130, Vol. 24, no 3, p. 475-486Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Sustainable development
Sustainable Development
Abstract [en]

Introduction. The effect of different kinds of work on the psychosocial assessment of workers under the same management and organizational environment is investigated.

Methods. A voluntary assessment in a utility company was carried out using the short version of the Copenhagen psychosocial questionnaire (CoPsoQ) on two occasions, 1.5 years apart. Initially, 25 office workers (11 men and 14 women) participated, while 14 of those workers (8 women and 6 men) participated in the second assessment together with 32 field workers. The sewage, water treatment and maintenance workers, totaling 32 men, also participated in a field ergonomics assessment using the Washington State Department of Labor and Industries field work ergonomic checklist.

Results. The longitudinal outlook was fairly stable, with sustained severe scores in many CoPsoQ subscales and intensification of severity of workers’ control over work and esteem for men. A significantly higher esteem score resulted for field rather than office workers. Workers subjected to foul odors showed similar severity of psychosocial factors.

Discussion. For most psychosocial dimensions, the organizational design and management system in place, as well as the overall cultural environment in which it operates, create a much stronger and more decisive impact than job-specific factors.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis, 2018. Vol. 24, no 3, p. 475-486
Keywords [en]
administrative work, blue-collar workers, macroergonomics, musculoskeletal complaints
National Category
Production Engineering, Human Work Science and Ergonomics
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-58649DOI: 10.1080/10803548.2017.1331620ISI: 000436437500016PubMedID: 28589755Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85026891170OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hj-58649DiVA, id: diva2:1703967
Available from: 2022-10-17 Created: 2022-10-17 Last updated: 2022-10-17Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Coelho, Denis A.

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Coelho, Denis A.
In the same journal
International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics
Production Engineering, Human Work Science and Ergonomics

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 28 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf