Ravalier PhD Theis.pdf - Anglia Ruskin Research Online

133
2a.1) Psychometric Properties of the MSIT
Researchers have described the MSIT as having excellent perceived face validity (e.g. Kompier, 2004;
Edwards et al., 2008) indicating that on the surface it would seem that the tool does indeed measure psychosocial
stress in the workplace. However, as Kompier noted in his 2004 review of the literature which was released along
with the MSIT, one of the main disadvantages of the tool is a lack of psychometric property information. Indeed
since the release of the MSIT and its two accompanying papers (Cousins et al., 2004; Mackay et al., 2004) there
have been very few journal releases indicating psychometric properties.
Edwards et al. (2008) is one such study which has validated the use of the MSIT, having conducted the
research involving 30,903 employees from within 39 UK organisations. Similarly, Cousins et al. (2004) describes
the process taken in order to develop the MSIT while also reporting statistical analysis results. Again the tool as a
whole and the items within the tool which represent the six (seven when support is split into Peer and Managerial
Support) factors were adjudged to have good face validity. For each of the factors represented by the MS
approach, a similar Cronbach’s Alpha value was found in both the Cousins et al. (2004) journal article and the
Edwards et al. (2008) study. See Table 5 for these figures:
Table 5: Item numbers and Cronbach’s Alpha values for each factor from two different studies of the MSIT.
Factor Item Number Cousins et
al.
Edwards et al.
(2008) α value
(2004) α
value
Demands 3, 6, 9, 12, 16, 18, .89 .87
(8 items)
20, 22
Control 2, 10, 15, 19, 25, 30 .78 .82