Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Siegrist, Johannes
Dragano, Nico
Nyberg, Solja T.
Lunau, Thorsten
Alfredsson, Lars
Erbel, Raimund
Fahlén, Göran
Goldberg, Marcel
Jöckel, Karl-Heinz
Knutsson, Anders
Leineweber, Constanze
Magnusson Hanson, Linda L.
Nordin, Maria
Rugulies, Reiner
Schupp, Jürgen
Singh-Manoux, Archana
Theorell, Töres
Wagner, Gert G.
Westerlund, Hugo
Zins, Marie
Heikkilä, Katriina
Fransson, Eleonor I.
Kivimäki, Mika
Year of Publication: 
[Journal:] International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health [ISSN:] 0340-0131 [Publisher:] Springer [Place:] Berlin, Heidelberg [Year:] 2014 [Volume:] 87 [Edition:] 3 [Pages:] 249-256
Background: Effort-reward imbalance (ERI) is an established conceptualisation of work stress. Although a validated effort-reward questionnaire is available for public use, many epidemiological studies adopt shortened scales and proxy measures. To examine the agreement between different abbreviated measures and the original instrument, we compared different versions of the effort-reward scales available in 15 European cohort studies participating in the IPD-Work (Individual-participant-data meta-analysis in working populations) consortium. Methods: Five of the 15 studies provide information on the original (‘complete’) scales measuring ‘effort’ and ‘reward’, whereas the 10 remaining studies used ‘partial’ scales. To compare different versions of the ERI scales, we analyse individual-level data from 31,790 participants from the five studies with complete scales. Results: Pearson’s correlation between partial and complete scales was very high in case of ‘effort’ (where 2 out of 3 items were used) and very high or high in case of ‘reward’, if at least 4 items (out of 7) were included. Reward scales composed of 3 items revealed good to satisfactory agreement, and in one case, a reward scale consisting of 2 items only demonstrated a modest, but still acceptable degree of agreement. Sensitivity and specificity of a composite measure, the ratio of effort and reward, comparing partial versus complete scales ranged between 59–93 and 85–99 %, respectively. Complete and partial scales were strongly associated with poor self-rated health. Conclusion: Our results support the notion that short proxy measures or partial versions of the original scales can be used to assess effort-reward imbalance.
Effort-reward imbalance
Work stress
Abbreviated measures
European cohort studies
Published Version’s DOI: 
Additional Information: 
The final publication is available at
Document Type: 
Document Version: 
Accepted Manuscript (Postprint)

Files in This Item:

Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.