Your privacy, your choice

We use essential cookies to make sure the site can function. We also use optional cookies for advertising, personalisation of content, usage analysis, and social media, as well as to allow video information to be shared for both marketing, analytics and editorial purposes.

By accepting optional cookies, you consent to the processing of your personal data - including transfers to third parties. Some third parties are outside of the European Economic Area, with varying standards of data protection.

See our privacy policy for more information on the use of your personal data.

for further information and to change your choices.

Skip to main content

The PSC-4; A Short PSC Tool

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Psychosocial Safety Climate
  • 4146 Accesses

  • 43 Citations

Abstract

The aim of this chapter is to introduce the PSC-4 short tool created as a parsimonious measure of PSC, with the same domain coverage as the PSC-12 (canvassing the four domains of PSC), that could be used in research and practice with only four items. This chapter describes the evolution of the PSC concept and assessment tools, beginning with the original short 4-item scale that canvased limited constructs, the development of the PSC-27 with increased domain coverage in terms of quantity and depth, refinement to the PSC-12, and then the development of the PSC-4 measure. In Study 1, starting with theory we consider the item in each of the four dimensions of PSC that best reflects the underlying theoretical construct. Then using cross-sectional and longitudinal data from the Australian Workplace Barometer telephone interview study we test the psychometrics of the four-item scale against competing scale constellations. We also assess the validity of the scale in a nomological network of theoretical concepts involving PSC. Next in Study 2, in an omnibus population study (n = 2732) using face to face interviews, we assessed the PSC-4 and then assessed reliability and validity of the tool, and how PSC related to mental health treatment. In Study 3, since PSC is proposed as a multilevel concept we sought to verify the multilevel factor structure of the PSC-4, this time using AWB multilevel data (31 organisations, 220 employees). PSC-4 psychometrics and predictive validity are as good as the PSC-12, implying support for the use of the parsimonious PSC-4 in research and practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+
from ¥17,985 /Month
  • Starting from 10 chapters or articles per month
  • Access and download chapters and articles from more than 300k books and 2,500 journals
  • Cancel anytime
View plans

Buy Now

Chapter
JPY 3498
Price includes VAT (Japan)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arbuckle, J. L. (2016). Amos 24.0 User’s Guide. Chicago, IL: IBM SPSS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, T., Dollard, M. F., & Richards, P. A. M. (2015). A national standard for psychosocial safety Climate (PSC): PSC 41 as the benchmark for low risk of job strain and depressive symptoms. Journal of occupational health psychology, 20, 15–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bliese, P. D. (2000). With-in group agreement, non-dependence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analyses. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory research and methods in organizations: Foundations extensions and new directions (pp. 349–381). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bond, F. W., & Bunce, D. (2000). Mediators of change in emotion-focused and problem-focused worksite stress management interventions. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 156–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, S. J., & Cheyne, A. J. T. (2000). Assessing safety culture in offshore environments. Safety Science, 34, 111–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, T., Randall, R., & Griffiths, A. (2002). Interventions to control stress at work in hospital staff. Sudbury, UK: HSE Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dal Grande, E., Chittleborough, C. R., Campostrini, S., Dollard, M., & Taylor, A. W. (2016). Pre-survey text messages (SMS) improve participation rate in an Australian mobile telephone survey: An experimental study. PLoS ONE, 11. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0150231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dollard, M. F. (2007). Psychosocial safety culture and climate; Definition of a new construct. Adelaide, SA: Work & Stress Research Group, University of South Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dollard, M. F. (2012). Psychosocial safety climate: A lead indicator of workplace psychological health and engagement and a precursor to intervention success. In C. Biron, M. Karanika-Murray, & C. Cooper (Eds.), Improving organizational interventions for stress and well-being interventions: Addressing process and context (pp. 77–101). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dollard, M. F., & Bailey, T. S. (Eds.). (2014). Australian workplace barometer: Psychosocial safety climate and working conditions in Australia. Samford Valley, QLD: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dollard, M. F., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). Psychosocial safety climate as a precursor to conducive work environments, psychological health problems, and employee engagement. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83, 579–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dollard, M. F., Le Blanc, P., & Cotton, S. (2007; 2008). Participatory action research as work stress intervention, In K. Näswall, J. Hellgren, & M. Sverke (Eds.), Balancing work and well-being: The individual in the changing working life (pp. 351–353). London, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. (2002). Systems and programmes: How to tackle psychosocial issues and reduce work-related stress. Luxembourg, Luxembourg City: Office for the Publications of the European Communities.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gershon, R. R., Karkashian, C. D., Grosch, J. W., Murphy, L. R., Escamilla-Cejudo, A., Flanagan, P. A., et al. (2000). Hospital safety climate and its relationship with safe work practices and workplace exposure incidents. American Journal of Infection Control, 28, 211–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giga, S. I., Noblet, A. J., Faragher, B., & Cooper, C. L. (2003). The UK perspective: A review of research on organisational stress management interventions. Australian Psychologist, 38, 158–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, M. A., & Neal, A. (2000). Perceptions of safety at work: A framework for linking safety climate to safety performance, knowledge, and motivation. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 347–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, G. B., Dollard, M. F., & Coward, J. (2010). Psychosocial safety climate: Development of the PSC-12. International Journal of Stress Management, 4, 353–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison Research (2015). Spring 2014 Health Omnibus Survey. Harrison Research: Adelaide, SA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinkin, T. (1995). A review of scale development practices in the study of organizations. Journal of Management, 21, 967–988.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmbeck, G. N. (1997). Toward terminological, conceptual, and statistical clarity in the study of mediators and moderators: Examples from the child-clinical and pediatric psychology literatures. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 599–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoyle, R. H. (1995). Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications. London, UK: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang, Y. H., Lee, J., Chen, Z., Perry, M., Cheung, J. H., & Wang, M. (2017). An item-response theory approach to safety climate measurement: The Liberty Mutual Safety Climate Short Scales. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 103, 96–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Wolf, G. (1984). Estimating within-group interrater reliability with and without response bias. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 85–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, J., Gurr, E., Tinline, G., Giga, S. I., Faragher, B., & Cooper, C. L. (2003). Beacons of excellence in stress prevention. Manchester, UK: Robertson Cooper & UMIST.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog, K.G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Chicago: Scientific Software International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karasek, R. A., & Theorell, T. (1990). Healthy work: Stress, productivity and the reconstruction of working like. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kompier, M. A. J., & Cooper, C. (Eds.). (1999). Preventing stress, improving productivity: European case studies in the workplace. London, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kompier, M. A. J., & Kristensen, T. S. (2001). Organizational work stress interventions in a theoretical, methodological and practical context. In J. Dunham (Ed.), Stress in the workplace: Past, present and future (pp. 164–190). London, UK: Whurr.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landsbergis, P. A., & Vivona-Vaughan, E. (1995). Evaluation of an occupational intervention in a public agency. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 16, 29–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nytrø, K., Saksvik, P. Ø., Mikkelsen, A., Bohle, P., & Quinlan, M. (2000). An appraisal of key factors in the implementation of occupational stress interventions. Work & Stress, 14, 213–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pasmore, W., & Friedlander, F. (1982). An action—Research program for increasing employee participation in problem solving. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27, 343–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pronovost, P. J., Weast, B., Holzmueller, C. G., Rosenstein, B. J., Kidwell, R. P., Haller, K. B., et al. (2003). Evaluation of the culture of safety: Survey of clinicians and managers in an academic medical center. BMJ Quality & Safety, 12, 405–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosecrance, J. C., & Cook, T. M. (2000). The use of participatory action research and ergonomics in the prevention of work-related musculoskeletal disorders in the newspaper industry. Applied Occupational and Environmental Health, 15, 255–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schermelleh-Engel, K., & Moosbrugger, H. & Mueller, H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness of fit measures. Methods of psychological research online, 8, 23–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, C., Dollard, M., Clark, A., Dormann, C., & Bakker, A. B. (2019). Psychosocial Safety Climate as a Factor in Organisational Resilience: Implications for Worker Psychological Health, Resilience, and Engagement. In M. Dollard et al. (Eds.), Psychosocial safety climate. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20319-1_8.

  • Zohar, D. (1980). Safety climate in industrial organizations: Theoretical and applied implications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 96–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maureen F. Dollard .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Dollard, M.F. (2019). The PSC-4; A Short PSC Tool. In: Dollard, M., Dormann, C., Awang Idris, M. (eds) Psychosocial Safety Climate. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20319-1_16

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics