OBJECTIVE\nMETHODS\nRESULTS\nCONCLUSION\nWork stress is a global issue with countries such as the UK requiring organisations to protect employees. Work stress can be beneficial (challenging) or... Show moreOBJECTIVE\nMETHODS\nRESULTS\nCONCLUSION\nWork stress is a global issue with countries such as the UK requiring organisations to protect employees. Work stress can be beneficial (challenging) or harmful (overwhelming), and characteristics such as resilience are thought to mitigate some of the negative effects. This paper describes the validation of two new scales. The WOSS-13 was designed to measure both benign and harmful experiences of work stress, while the ReWoS-24 captures information about individual and team resilience.\nFor both scales the assessment of individual items, domains captured by scale items, reliability and validity were completed using data from a survey of 1980 individuals from the University of York, England. A sub-sample of respondents (N = 609) provided additional data for retest purposes. Analyses were performed using these two samples.\nResponses to scale items were found to be normally distributed. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated the WOSS-13 was comprised of three subscales: positive work-related affect/stress, general positive affect and harmful stress. The ReWoS-24 is presented as four sub-scales: general well-being, well-being at work, satisfaction with job performance and team resilience. All subscales demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha ≥0.80). Both scales complement existing measures of stress and mental health.\nThe findings suggest that the WOSS-13 is a valid and reliable measure which enables the assessment of both benign and harmful forms of work stress. The ReWoS-24 is a valid and reliable measure of individual and team resilience. These scales could be used in workplaces to assess for and mitigate against, harmful work stress. Show less
Brandt, M. J.; Kuppens, T.; Spears, R.; Andrighetto, L.; Autin, F.; Babincak, P.; ... ; Zimmerman, J. L. 2020
The relationships between subjective status and perceived legitimacy are important for understanding the extent to which people with low status are complicit in their oppression. We use novel data... Show moreThe relationships between subjective status and perceived legitimacy are important for understanding the extent to which people with low status are complicit in their oppression. We use novel data from 66 samples and 30 countries (N = 12,788) and find that people with higher status see the social system as more legitimate than those with lower status, but there is variation across people and countries. The association between subjective status and perceived legitimacy was never negative at any levels of eight moderator variables, although the positive association was sometimes reduced. Although not always consistent with hypotheses, group identification, self‐esteem, and beliefs in social mobility were all associated with perceived legitimacy among people who have low subjective status. These findings enrich our understanding of the relationship between social status and legitimacy. Show less
