The adaptation and validation of the Techno-Work Engagement Scale (TechnoWES-9) in the case of Romanian employees
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24837/pru.v20i2.513Keywords:
techno-work, work engagement, employability, well-being, validationAbstract
The study looks into the validation and analysis of the psychometric properties of the Techno-Work Engagement Scale (TechnoWES-9) in the case of a sample of Romanian employees (N=280). The scale is based on the concept of work engagement and evaluates the well-being generated by the use of technology at the workplace. The tool includes three factors: techno-vigor, techno-dedication, and techno-absorption, each with three items. The factorial structure was verified through confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and the reliability of the scale was examined from the perspective of its internal consistency. The concurrent validity was performed by associating scales that assess subjective well-being. The CFA supports the tri-factorial structure of the scale. The internal consistency of the total score is excellent. TechnoWES-9 is positively associated with subjective well-being, life satisfaction, and positive affect. None of the dimensions of the scale correlates with negative affect. The study suggests that the Romanian version of TechnoWES-9 is an adequate measure for the assessment of well-being of Romanian employees working in digital technology.
Downloads
References
Balgiu, B.A. (2019a). Satisfaction with Life Scale: New Psychometric Evidence in a Romanian Emerging Adults Sample. International Journal of Humanities & Social Studies, 7, 184-190. https://doi.org/10.24940/theijhss/2019/v7/i8/HS1908-089
Balgiu, B.A. (2019b). Validation of the Scale of Positive and Negative Experience (SPANE) on a Romanian student sample. Revista de Psihologie, 65, 209–218.
Balgiu, B.A., Sfeatcu, R., Ilinca R, & Bucur, V. (2021). Investigating construct validity of the Satisfaction with Life Scale in a sample of Romanian dental students. Romanian Journal of Oral Rehabilitation, 13, 7-12.
Bavaresco, R., Arruda, H., Rocha, E., Barbos, J., & Li, G-P. (2021). Internet of Things and occupational well-being in industry 4.0: A systematic mapping study and taxonomy. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 161, 107670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2021.107670
Beaton, D.E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M.B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25, 3186-3191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
Byrne, B.M. (2010). Structural equation modelling with AMOS: basic concepts, applications, and programming. 2nd ed. New York, Routledge, p. 81.
Cazan, A.M. (2014). The Romanian version of the satisfaction with life scale. Romanian Journal of Experimental Applied Psychology, 5, 42-47. https://www.proquest.com/docview/1693628141
Cazan, A.M. (2020). The digitization of working life: Challenges and opportunities. Psihologia Resurselor Umane, 18, 3–6, http://dx.doi.org/10.24837/pru.v18i1.457
Chang, S.Y., & Hsu, HC. (2022). Validation of the double mediation model of workplace well-being on the subjective well-being of technological employees. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 838723. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.838723
Chin, W.W. (2010). How to write up and report PLS analyses. In E.V. Vinzi, W. Chin, J. Henseler, & H. Wang (Eds.), Handbook of partial least squares (pp. 655-690). Berlin: Springer.
Diener, E.D. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American Psychologist, 55, 34-43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.34
Diener, E., Emmons, R.A., Larsen, R.J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D-W., Oishi, S., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2010). New well-being measures: short scales to assess flourishing and positive and negative feelings. Social Indicator Research, 97, 143-156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-009-9493-y
Dienlin, T., & Johannes, N. (2020). The impact of digital technology use on adolescent well-being. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 22, 135-142. https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.2/tdienlin
DiPietro R. B., Moreo A., & Cain L. (2020). Well-being, affective commitment and job satisfaction: influences on turnover intentions in casual dining employees. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 29, 139–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/19368623.2019.1605956
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D.F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104
Haepp, T. (2022). New technologies and employee well-being: the role of training provision. Applied Economics Letters, 29, 1211-1216. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2021.1922579
Hair, J.F., Black, W.C, Babin, B.J., & Anderson, R.E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis. 7th ed. Essex, Pearson education limited, p.571.
Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N.P., & Ray S. (2021). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Using R, Cham: Springer.
Hakami, E., Hernández-Leo, D., & Amarasinghe, I. (2021). Understanding the Well-Being Impact of a Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Tool: The Case of PyramidApp. In T. De Laet, R. Klemke, C. Alario-Hoyos, I. Hilliger, A. Ortega-Arranz (Eds.) Technology-Enhanced Learning for a Free, Safe, and Sustainable World. EC-TEL (pp. 373-378). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 12884. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86436-1_38
Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6, 53-60.
Horowitz, J. (2016). Dimensions of job quality, mechanisms, and subjective well‐being in the United States. Sociological Forum, 31(2), 419–440. https://doi.org/10.1111/socf.12251
Hu, L.T., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Imran, M., Ramayah, T., & Kurnia, S. (2017). To use or not to use: modelling end user grumbling as user resistance in pre-implementation stage of enterprise resource planning system. Information Systems, 69, 164–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.is.2017.05.005
Johnson, A., Dey, S., Nguyen, H., Groth, N., Joyce, S., Tan, L., Glozier, N., & Harvey, S.B. (2020). A review and agenda for examining how technology-driven changes at work will impact workplace mental health and employee well-being. Australian Journal of Management, 45, 402-424, https://doi.org/10.1177/0312896220922292
Kameyama, J., Hashizume, Y., Takamura, Y., Nomura, S., Gomi T., & Yanagi H. (2022). Work engagement, well-being, and intent to continue working based on educational support among foreign care workers in Japan, Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine, 27, 4 https://doi.org/10.1265/ehpm.21-00248
Kim H. (2013). Statistical notes for clinical researchers: assessing normal distribution (2) using skewness and kurtosis. Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics, 38(1), 52–54. https://doi.org/10.5395/rde.2013.38.1.52
Kun, A., & Gadanecz P. (2019). Workplace happiness, well-being and their relationship with psychological capital: a study of Hungarian teachers. Current Psychology, 41(1), 185–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00550-0
La Torre, G., Esposito, A., Sciarra, I., & Chiappetta, M. (2019). Definition, symptoms and risk of techno-stress: a systematic review. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 92, 13–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-018-1352-1
Mache, S., Vitzthum, K., Klapp, B.F., & Danzer, G. (2014). Surgeons' work engagement: Influencing factors and relations to job and life satisfaction, The Surgeon, 12(4), 181-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surge.2013.11.015
Mäkiniemi, J.P., Ahola, S., & Joensuu, J. (2019). How are technology-related workplace resources associated with techno-work engagement among a group of Finnish teachers? Seminar.net., Media, Technol & Lifelong learning, 15, 1-21.
Mäkiniemi, J.P., Ahola, S., & Joensuu, J. (2020). A Novel Construct To Measure Employees’ Technology Related Experiences of Well-Being: Empirical Validation of the Techno-Work Engagement Scale (TechnoWES). Scandinavian Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5, 1–14. http://doi.org/10.16993/sjwop.79
Mäkiniemi, J.P. (2022). Digitalisation and work well-being: a qualitative study of techno-work engagement experiences related to the use of educational technology. International Journal of Educational Management, 36, 152-163. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-07-2021-0276
Marcu, R. (2013). New psychometrical data on the efficiency of Satisfaction with Life Scale in Romania. Journal of Psychological and Educational Research, 21, 77-90.
McNeish, D., An, J., & Hancock, G. R. (2018). The thorny relation between measurement quality and fit index cutoffs in latent variable models. Journal of Personality Assessment, 100(1), 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2017.1281286
Radic, A., Arjona-Fuentes, J.M., Ariza-Montes, A., Han, H., & Law, R. (2020). Job demands–job resources (JD-R) model, work engagement, and well-being of cruise ship employees, International Journal of Hospitality Management, 88, 102518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102518
Rahi, S. (2022). Investigating the role of employee psychological well-being and psychological empowerment with relation to work engagement and sustainable employability, International Journal of Ethics and Systems, 38(2), 266-285. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOES-12-2020-0200
Rutkowski, L., & Svetina D. (2017). Measurement invariance in international surveys: categorical indicators and fit measure performance. Applied Measurement in Education, 30(1), 39–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2016.1243540
Salanova, S.M. (2003). Trabajando con tecnologías y afrontando el tecnoestrés: el rol de las creencias de eficacia [Working with technologies and coping with technostress: the role of efficacy beliefs]. Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 19, 225-246.
Seligman M. (2018). PERMA and the building blocks of well-being. Journal of Positive. Psycholology, 13(4), 333–335. doi: 10.1080/17439760.2018.1437466
Schaufeli, W.B., Salanova, M., Gonzáles-Romá, V., & Bakker, A.B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3, 71-92. DOI: 10.1023/A:1015630930326
Schaufeli,W.B., Bakker, A.B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 701–716. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282471
Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., & Müller, 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. http://www.mpr-online.de/
Soper, D. (2022). A-Priori Sample Size Calculator for Structural Equation Models. Retrieved from: https://www.danielsoper.com/statcalc/calculator.aspx?id=89
Stich, J.F, Tarafdar, M., Copper, C.L., & Stacey, P. (2017). Workplace stress from actual and desired computer-mediated communication use: a multi-method study. New Technology, Work and Employment, 32, 84–100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/JOEPP09-2015-0031
Stoet, G., & Geary, D. C. (2018). The gender-equality paradox in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education. Psychological Science, 29(4), 581–593. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617741719
Visvizi, A., & Daniela, L. (2019). Technology-enhanced learning and the pursuit of sustainability. Sustainability, 11, 1–7. DOI: 10.3390/su11154022
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Psihologia Resurselor Umane
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal,it also allows for use of the work for non-commercial purposes and if others remix, transform or build upon the works found in this journal they must distribute the contributions under the same licence as the original.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See: The Effect of Open Access).
