IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jocnur/v20y2011i3-4p494-503.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A psychometric evaluation of the Taiwan version of the Individual Workload Perception Scale

Author

Listed:
  • Shu‐Yuan Lin
  • Chung‐Hui Lin
  • Mei Chang Yeh
  • Shu‐Ying Lin
  • Yueh‐Jiau Hwang

Abstract

Aim. The aim was to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Taiwan version of the Revised Individual Workload Perception Scale on staff nurses in southern Taiwan. Background. Most psychometric measures of the nursing work environment were developed in North America and reflect nursing practice in Western health care environments. As these instruments are used most often in translation, it is important to inquire whether they appropriately capture the characteristics of nursing work in environments outside of the original contexts. Design. A descriptive, cross‐sectional study was conducted between 1 June–30 September 2009, with a convenience sample of 344 nurses providing direct patient care at a regional teaching hospital in southern Taiwan. The Taiwan version of the Revised Individual Workload Perception Scale was created by translating the original English language Individual Workload Perception Scale–Revised, which is used to measure the staff nurses’ perceptions of their work environment. The Taiwan version of the Revised Individual Workload Perception Scale is a 24‐item five‐point Likert scale measuring manager support, peer support, unit support, workload and intent to stay. Content validity, construct validity and reliability of the Taiwan version of the Revised Individual Workload Perception Scale were evaluated. Results. The content validity index of the Taiwan version of the Revised Individual Workload Perception Scale was 0·93. Cronbach’s alpha for the total Taiwan version of the Revised Individual Workload Perception Scale was 0·88, with a range of 0·61–0·85 for the subscales. Factorial validity was supported using a five‐factor model solution that accounted for 55·47% of the total variance for nursing work environment. Manager support had the highest explained variance (28·38%). Conclusions. Acceptable reliability and content validity were found; the Taiwan version of the Revised Individual Workload Perception Scale is recommended for measuring nurses’ perceptions of their work environment. Relevance to clinical practice. Psychometric properties of a scale such as the Individual Workload Perception Scale translate cross‐culturally, with minor adjustments. The Taiwan version of the Revised Individual Workload Perception Scale can be used to provide data and analyses in comparisons with nursing work environment features internationally.

Suggested Citation

  • Shu‐Yuan Lin & Chung‐Hui Lin & Mei Chang Yeh & Shu‐Ying Lin & Yueh‐Jiau Hwang, 2011. "A psychometric evaluation of the Taiwan version of the Individual Workload Perception Scale," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(3‐4), pages 494-503, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:20:y:2011:i:3-4:p:494-503
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03495.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03495.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03495.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jocnur:v:20:y:2011:i:3-4:p:494-503. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2702 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.