Adapting the HSE-MS Indicator Tool for Academia: A Psychometric Evaluation of the Academic Teacher Stress Indicator Tool in Italian
Main Article Content
Keywords
work-related stress, stress assessment, academic teaching staff
Abstract
Background: The assessment of work-related stress is mandatory in Italy, according to Legislative Decree 81/2008. The Academic Teacher Stress Indicator Tool (ATS-IT) was developed to address stress in academic teaching staff by adapting the Health and Safety Executive Management Standards Indicator Tool (HSE-MS IT). Methods: An online ATS-IT survey was administered to all teaching staff at the University of Trieste, yielding 334 valid responses. The survey also included a measure of psychosomatic complaints and demographic questions. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed to test the six-factor structure, and reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha.Results: CFA confirmed an excellent fit for the six-factor structure (CFI = .99; TLI = .99; RMSEA = .034). Reliability analysis mainly showed acceptable values (Cronbach’s α ranging from .66 to .91). Significant gender differences were found in the Demands and Control scales, with additional differences based on age and academic role across multiple scales. The ATIS-IT scales were significantly intercorrelated and negatively correlated with psychosomatic complaints. Conclusions: The ATS-IT demonstrates good potential as a valid and reliable instrument for assessing work-related stress among Italian academic teaching staff. Its use can facilitate better stress management and intervention strategies in educational institutions.
References
2. INAIL. La metodologia per la valutazione e gestione del rischio stress lavoro-correlato. Available online at: https://www.inail.it/portale/it/inail-comunica/pubblicazioni/catalogo-generale/catalogo-generale-dettaglio.2017.10.la-metodologia-per-la-valutazione-e-gestione-del-rischio-stress-lavoro-correlato.html. (Last Ac-cessed: July 28, 2024).
3. MacKay CJ, Cousins R, Kelly PJ, Lee S, McCaig RH. ‘Management Standards’ and work-related stress in the UK: policy background and science. Work Stress. 2004;18(2):91-112. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370410001727474
4. Cousins R, Mackay CJ, Clarke SD, et al. Management standards and work-related stress in the UK: Practical development. Work Stress. 2004;18(2):113-136. Doi: 10.1080/02678370410001734322
5. Magnavita N. Validation of the Italian version of the HSE Indicator Tool. Occup Med (Lond). 2012;62(4):288-294. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqs025
6. Wattie SC, Bridger RS. Work-related stress indicator surveys in UK Ministry of Defence. BMJ Mil Health. 2019;165(2):128-132. Doi: https://doi:10.1136/jramc-2018-000963
7. Bergh LIV, Hinna S, Leka S, Jain A. Developing a performance indicator for psychosocial risk in the oil and gas industry. Safety Sci. 2014;62:98-106. Doi: https://doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2013.07.029
8. Zeinolabedini M, Motlagh ME, Heidarnia A, Shakerinejad G, Zeidi IM. Revision and validation of the Health and Safety Executive Management Standards Indicator Tool among health care workers. Available online at: https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4230780/v1/2c3c4048-0c9d-46e8-9ee6-701774a995b3.pdf?c=1712824436. (Last accessed: July 28, 2024).
9. Sclip G, Marcatto F, Larese Filon F, Negro C, Ferrante D. La valutazione dello stress lavoro-correlato nell’università pubblica italiana: dall’obbligo di legge a un protocollo operativo. ISL. IGIENE & SICUREZZA DEL LAVORO. 2015;19(6):319-326.
10. Hall AT, Royle MT, Brymer RA, Perrewé PL, Ferris GR, Hochwarter WA. Relationships between felt accounta-bility as a stressor and strain reactions: The neutralizing role of autonomy across two studies. J Occup Health Psychol. 2006;11(1):87. Doi: https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/1076-8998.11.1.87
11. Marcatto F, Sclip G, Di Blas L, Ferrante D. La misura dello stress e la valutazione soggettiva: un’indagine sul personale docente dell’Università degli Studi di Trieste. Trieste, Italy: EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste; 2016.
12. Marcatto F, Di Blas L, Luis O, et al. The perceived occupational stress scale: A brief tool for measuring workers' perceptions of stress at work. Eur J Psychol Assess. 2022;38:293-306. Doi: https://doi:10.1027/1015-5759/a000677
13. Marcatto F, Colautti L, Filon FL, et al. Work-related stress risk factors and health outcomes in public sector em-ployees. Saf Sci. 2016;89:274-278. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2016.07.003
14. Marcatto F, Patriarca E, Bramuzzo D, Lucci E, Filon FL. Investigating the role of organizational stress in nurses' psychosomatic complaints: Evidence from a study in northeastern Italy. AIMS Public Health. 2024;11(2):420-431. Doi: https://doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2024021.
15. Nieuwenhuijsen K, Bruinvels D, Frings-Dresen M. Psychosocial work environment and stress-related disor-ders, a systematic review. Occup Med. 2010;60:277-286. Doi: https://doi:10.1093/occmed/kqq081
16. Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Modeling Multidiscip J. 1999; 6(1):1-55.
17. Marcatto F, Di Blas L, Ferrante D. Diagnostic utility of the Perceived Occupational Stress scale. Eur J Psychol Assess. 2023; Advance online publication. Doi: https://doi: 10.1027/1015 5759/a000789.
18. Kerr R, McHugh M, McCrory M. HSE Management Standards and stress-related work outcomes. Occup Med (Lond). 2009;59(8):574-579. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/kqp146
19. Marcatto F, Ferrante D. Beyond the assessment of work-related stress risk: the management standards ap-proach for organizational wellbeing. G Ital Med Lav Ergon. 2021;43(2):126-30.
20. Charzyńska E, Habibi Soola A, Mozaffari N, Mirzaei A. Patterns of work-related stress and their predictors among emergency department nurses and emergency medical services staff in a time of crisis: a latent profile analysis. BMC Nurs. 2023;22(1):98. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-023-01241-9
21. Marcatto F, Colautti L, Larese Filon F, Luis O, Ferrante D. The HSE Management Standards Indicator Tool: con-current and construct validity. Occup Med (Lond). 2014;64(5):365-71. Doi: https://doi:10.1093/occmed/kqu038.
Article Sidebar
Article Details
How to Cite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All Journal's articles are Open Access papers distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Reproductions with commercial intent will require written permission and payment of royalties.
This work is licensed under a CC BY-NC 4.0 Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
