Work Stress Inventory

Abstract

The 40-item Work Stress Inventory (WSI) is a comprehensive psychological instrument designed to quantify and assess various dimensions of work stress, specifically focusing on two primary components: organizational stress and job risk. Developed by Barone et al. (1988), the WSI is a valuable tool used in organizational psychology to examine factors such as job satisfaction, organizational development, organizational climate, and occupational differences in stress exposure.

Keywords

Work Stress Inventory, organizational stress, job risk, role conflict, role ambiguity, employee satisfaction, psychological measurement, occupational psychology.

Authors

D. F. Barone, et al.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the WSI is to provide a standardized, empirically validated measure of work-related stressors. It serves researchers and practitioners in identifying specific sources of organizational stress and quantifying the associated risks inherent to various professions. The scale allows for detailed analysis of how environmental and relational factors contribute to overall employee strain.

Beyond simple stress measurement, the WSI is specifically useful for examining large-scale organizational issues, including evaluating the impact of interventions on organizational climate and identifying high-risk occupations where specialized stress management resources may be required. The inventory can be used to examine employee satisfaction, organizational development, organizational climate, and differences among occupations.

Construct

The WSI measures a two-factor construct of work stress. The first factor, Organizational Stress (OS), captures stressors related to the structure, management, and interpersonal dynamics within the workplace. These items focus on classical organizational stressors such as overload, role conflict, role ambiguity, nonparticipation, and interpersonal relationships with superiors and colleagues.

The second factor, Job Risk (JR), captures stressors related to specific threats or dangers inherent to the job environment. These include factors like emergency responding, prolonged attention to detail, adverse conditions in the work environment, safety, and job security. The final scale combines these two factors, yielding a comprehensive assessment of overall work-related strain and exposure.

Validity

Evidence for the validity of the WSI was established across two primary studies (Study 2 and Study 4). Study 2 provided initial support for both the construct validity and predictive validity of the inventory. In this phase, the WSI scores were empirically compared against other standardized questionnaires measuring related constructs, specifically job satisfaction, anxiety levels, and the frequency and intensity of daily stressors.

Study 4 reinforced these findings, offering further evidence for validity by comparing the two distinct WSI subscales (Organizational Stress and Job Risk) to questionnaires that assessed job satisfaction, anxiety, absenteeism/turnover rates, and general daily stressors. The reported correlation matrices in Study 2 and Study 4 further delineate the relationships between the WSI factors and external measures of strain and outcome.

Reliability

The WSI demonstrates high internal consistency across both primary scales. For the initial development phase (Study 1, 25 items), the internal consistency, measured by the alpha coefficient, was exceptionally high at 0.94. A subsequent evaluation using a cross-validation sample confirmed this strength, yielding an alpha coefficient of 0.92.

The Job Risk scale, developed in Study 3, also demonstrated excellent internal reliability, with an alpha coefficient of 0.91. Furthermore, Study 4 established strong temporal stability through test-retest reliabilities over a one-month period:

• For the Organizational Stress scale: Intensity (0.88), Frequency (0.83), and Composite (0.84).
• For the Job Risk scale: Intensity (0.90), Frequency (0.91), and Composite (0.90).

Factor Analysis

The development of the WSI involved sequential factor analysis across multiple studies to establish its underlying, multi-dimensional structure. In Study 1, a principal components factor analysis was conducted on the initial pool of items relating to organizational stressors, resulting in the identification of a single dominant factor: Organizational Stress. This process led to the retention of 25 items.

Study 3 followed a similar methodology for items related to threats and risks, where a separate principal components factor analysis identified a single factor: Job Risk, retaining 20 items. The final 40-item structure was achieved through a varimax rotation, which confirmed the clear separation of the two factors:

• Organizational Stress (OS): Contains 20 items (1, 3, 4, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 16, 20, 22, 23, 25, 26, 29, 30, 31, 34, 38, and 40).
• Job Risk (JR): Contains 20 items (2, 5, 6, 7, 10, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 21, 24, 27, 28, 32, 33, 35, 36, 37, and 39).

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report inventory; Psychometric scale

Format: 40 items, scored on two separate 5-point Likert scales (Intensity and Frequency).

Language Available: English (Original Publication)

Population Group: Working professionals across diverse occupations.

Age Group: Adults (Implied by working status).

Population Details: Validation studies utilized samples from various demanding professions. The sample for Study 1 consisted of 300 workers (administrators/managers, nurses, police, teachers, social workers, counselors, and air traffic controllers). Subsequent samples included 100 workers (Study 2), 231 workers (Study 3), and 182 workers (Study 4).

Test Methodology: Respondents rate each stressor based on two dimensions. Intensity (amount of stress) is scored as: 0 = None; 1 = A little; 2 = Moderate amount; 3 = Much; and 4 = Very much. Frequency is scored as: 0 = Never; 1 = Rarely (annually); 2 = Sometimes (at least monthly); 3 = Often (at least weekly); and 4 = Daily.

Keywords

WSI, organizational climate, job security, stress measurement, organizational development, predictive validity, organizational stress, job risk.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source material.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided in source material.

Correspondence Address: Not provided in source material.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Work Stress Inventory was first published in 1988 in the journal Educational and Psychological Measurement. Permission and fee information for use of the scale must be obtained directly from the copyright holder, typically the journal publisher or the primary author, D. F. Barone.

Reference’s

Barone, D. F., et al. (1988). The Work Stress Inventory: Organizational stress and job risk. Educational and Psychological Measurement 48:141–54.

Lee, R. T., and B. E. Ashforth. (1993). A longitudinal study of burnout among supervisors and managers: Comparisons between the Leiter and Maslach (1988) and Golembiewski, et al. (1986) models. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 54:369–398.

Page, R. A. (1988). Changing stressful work environments: Supervisory interventions with minority service workers. PhD dissertation, Nova University.

Sarason, I. G., et al. (1983). Assessing social support: The Social Support Questionnaire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 44:127–39.

Simons, Y., and Barone, D. F. (1994). The relationship of work stressors and emotional support to strain in police officers. International Journal of Stress Management 1:223–34.

Items of the Work Stress Inventory

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1. Not knowing what superiors expect of you.
2. Having to respond on an “emergency basis.”
3. Disagreeing with superiors.
4. Not knowing how much authority you have.
5. Being injured as a result of the mistakes of others.
6. Having to deal with injury or death as part of your job.
7. Having to make decisions that will dramatically affect other peoples’ lives.

8. Finding that rewards are not based on performance (e.g., promotions, raises).
9. Having to deal with several pressing problems at once.
10. Working in a “high crime area.”
11. Not knowing what supervisors think of you.
12. Not having the opportunity to participate in decision making.
13. Having conflicting job responsibilities.
14. Working without adequate safety standards.
15. Having inadequate personnel or equipment to respond in an emergency situation.
16. Feeling there is no clear chain of command.
17. Having periods of inactivity separated by periods of emergency response.
18. Having to physically restrain others.
19. Potential for being injured on the job.
20. Being held responsible for too many different activities.
21. Knowing that your error may harm another person.
22. Failing to receive recognition of achievement by superiors.
23. Having to do things on the job that are against your better judgment.
24. Never knowing when a potentially dangerous event might occur.
25. Feeling that your work ability is under rated.
26. Not being permitted to make decisions on your own.
27. Working for long periods of time without rest.
28. Performing duties that are potentially dangerous to others.
29. Receiving criticism from superiors.
30. Receiving conflicting requests.
31. Finding a lack of assistance or support from superiors.
32. Working in excess of eight hours per day.
33. Working with dangerous materials.
34. Having ideas considerably different from those of your superior.
35. Doing another person’s job in addition to yours.
36. Having to maintain prolonged vigilance to protect the safety of others.
37. Potential for being the victim of a crime while on the job.
38. Being held responsible for mistakes made by coworkers.
39. Working while fatigued or tired.
40. Working under inconsistent policies and guidelines.