To date, there are no scales measuring work–home interaction which are adapted for the Eastern European population. Owing to the significantly different sociocultural contexts and geopolitical history between Western and Eastern populations, despite the massive contemporary East–West migration, a more culturally appropriate scale is needed to ensure valid and reliable measurement of the construct. This article presents the adaptation of the Survey Work–Home Interaction—NijmeGen (SWING) for the Romanian population. The results show that SWING can successfully measure work–home interaction for this population. Gender equivalence is also discussed.
AllenT. D.HerstD. E. L.BruckC. S.SuttonM. (2000). Consequences associated with work-to-family conflict: A review and agenda for future research. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 278–308. doi:10.1037//1076-8998.5.2.278
2.
AllmarkP. (2004). Should research samples reflect the diversity of the population?Journal of Medical Ethics, 30, 185–189. doi:10.1136/jme.2003.004374
3.
ArtazcozL.CortesI.Puig-BarrachinaV.BenavidesF. G.Escriba-AguirV.BorrellC. (2014). Combining employment and family in Europe: The role of family policies in health. The European Journal of Public Health, 24, 649–655. doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckt170
4.
BacharachS. B.BambergerP.ConleyS. (1991). Work–home conflict among nurses and engineers: Mediating the impact of role stress on burnout and satisfaction at work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 12, 39–53. doi:10.1002/job.4030120104
5.
BaumeisterR. F.BratslavskyE.FinkenauerC.VohsK. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5, 323–370. doi:10.1037//1089-2680.5.4.323
6.
BerwickD. M.MurphyJ. M.GoldmanP. A.WareJ. E.BarskyA. J.WeinsteinM. C. (1991). Performance of a five-item mental health screening test. Medical Care, 29, 169–176.
7.
BondM. A.KalajaA.MarkkanenP.CazecaD.DanielS.TsurikovaL.PunnettL. (2007). Work–family/work–life measures. In BaronS. (Ed.), Expanding our understanding of the psychosocial work environment: A compendium of measures of discrimination, harassment and work-family issues. Retrieved fromhttps://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2008-104/pdfs/2008-104g.pdf
8.
BriaM.SpânuF.BăbanA.DumitraşcuD. L. (2014). Maslach burnout inventory—General survey: Factorial validity and invariance among Romanian healthcare professionals. Burnout Research, 1, 103–111. doi:10.1016/j.burn.2014.09.001
9.
BriaM.SpânuF.BăbanA.TodeaC. (2014). Burnout and occupational factors among Romanian healthcare professionals working in obstetrics and gynecology clinics. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 127, 36–40. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.208
10.
CinamonR. G.RichY. (2002). Gender differences in the importance of work and family roles: Implications for work–family conflict. Sex Roles, 47, 531–541. doi:10.1023/A:1022021804846
11.
DemeroutiE.BakkerA. B.BultersA. J. (2004). The loss spiral of work pressure, work–home interference and exhaustion: Reciprocal relations in a three-wave study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 64, 131–149. doi:10.1016/S0001-8791(03)00030-7
12.
DemeroutiE.GeurtsS.KompierM. (2004). Positive and negative work–home interaction: Prevalence and correlates. Equal Opportunities International, 23, 6–35. doi:10.1108/02610150410787837
13.
EpskampS.CramerA. O.WaldorpL. J.SchmittmannV. D.BorsboomD. (2012). Qgraph: Network visualizations of relationships in psychometric data. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1–18.
14.
EpskampS.StuberS. (2017). Semplot: Path diagrams and visual analysis of various SEM packages’ output (version 1.1). Retrieved fromhttps://CRAN.R-project.org/package=semPlot
15.
FargherS.KestingS.LangeT.PachecoG. (2008). Cultural heritage and job satisfaction in Eastern and Western Europe. International Journal of Manpower, 29, 630–650. doi:10.1108/01437720810908938
16.
FriedmanS. D.GreenhausJ. H. (2000). Work and family—allies or enemies? What happens when business professionals confront life choices (1st ed.). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
17.
GadermannA. M.GuhnM.ZumboB. D. (2012). Estimating ordinal reliability for Likert-type and ordinal item response data: A conceptual, empirical, and practical guide. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 17(3). Retrived fromhttp://pareonline.net/getvn.asp?v=17&n=3
18.
GeurtsS. A. E.KompierM. A. J.RoxburghS.HoutmanI. L. D. (2003). Does work–home interference mediate the relationship between workload and well-being?Journal of Vocational Behavior, 63, 532–559. doi:10.1016/S0001-8791(02)00025-8
19.
GeurtsS. A. E.TarisT. W.KompierM. A. J.DikkersJ. S. E.HooffM. L. M. V.KinnunenU. M. (2005). Work–home interaction from a work psychological perspective: Development and validation of a new questionnaire, the SWING. Work & Stress, 19, 319–339. doi:10.1080/02678370500410208
20.
GutekB. A.SearleS.KlepaL. (1991). Rational versus gender role explanations for work–family conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 560–568.
21.
HarmanH. H. (1976). Modern Factor Analysis (3rd Rev. ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
22.
JacksonL.Rothmann (2005). Work-related well-being of educators in a district of the North-West Province. Perspectives in Education, 23, 107–122.
23.
LangballeE. M.InnstrandS. T.AaslandO. G.FalkumE. (2011). The predictive value of individual factors, work-related factors, and work–home interaction on burnout in female and male physicians: A longitudinal study. Stress and Health, 27, 73–87. doi:10.1002/smi.1321
24.
LourelM.GanaK.WawrzyniakS. (2005). L’interface « vie privée–vie autravail »: adaptation et validation française de l’échelle SWING (survey work–home interaction-Nijmegen). Psychologie Du Travail et Des Organisations, 11, 227–239. doi:10.1016/j.pto.2005.10.003
LundbergU.FrankenhaeuserM. (1999). Stress and workload of men and women in high-ranking positions. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 142–151.
27.
MaraisC.MostertK.GeurtsS.TarisT. (2009). The psychometric properties of a translated version of the survey work–home interaction—Nijmegen (SWING) instrument. South African Journal of Psychology, 39, 202–219. doi:10.1177/008124630903900206
28.
MaslachC.JacksonS. E. (1981). The measurement of experienced burnout. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 2, 99–113. doi:10.1002/job.4030020205
29.
MeijmanT. F.MulderG. (1998). Psychological aspects of workload. In DrenthP. J. D. (Ed.), Handbook of work and organizational psychology: Work psychology (pp. 5–33). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
30.
MereczD.AndyszA. (2014). Burnout and demographic characteristics of workers experiencing different types of work–home interaction. International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health, 27, 933–949. doi:10.2478/s13382-014-0320-6
31.
Moreno JiménezB.Sanz VergelA. I.Rodríguez MuñozA.GeurtsS. (2009). Psychometric properties of the Spanish version of the Survey Work–Home Interaction Nijmegen (SWING). Psicothema, 21, 331–337.
PieterseM.MostertK. (2005). Measuring work–home interaction: A validation of the Survey Work–Home Interaction Nijmegen (SWING) instrument. Management Dynamics: Journal of the Southern African Institute for Management Scientists, 14, 2–15.
34.
PodsakoffP. M.MacKenzieS. B.LeeJ.-Y.PodsakoffN. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
35.
R Core Team. (2016). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved fromhttps://www.R-project.org/
36.
RevelleW. (2017). Psych: Procedures for personality and psychological research (Version 1.7.5). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University. Retrieved fromhttps://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych
37.
Romeo DelgadoM.BergerR.Yepes i BaldóM.RamosB. (2014). Adaptation and validation of the Spanish version of the “Survey Work–Home Interaction-NijmeGen” (SWING) to Spanish speaking countries. Retrieved fromhttp://diposit.ub.edu/dspace/handle/2445/59770
38.
RosseelY. (2012). lavaan: An r package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1–36.
39.
SassD. A. (2011). Testing measurement invariance and comparing latent factor means within a confirmatory factor analysis framework. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 29, 347–363. doi:10.1177/0734282911406661
40.
SchulzM. S.CowanP. A.Pape CowanC.BrennanR. T. (2004). Coming home upset: Gender, marital satisfaction, and the daily spillover of workday experience into couple interactions. Journal of Family Psychology, 18, 250.
ShockleyK. M.ShenW.DeNunzioM. M.ArvanM. L.KnudsenE. A. (2017). Disentangling the relationship between gender and work–family conflict: An integration of theoretical perspectives using meta-analytic methods. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 102, 1601–1635. doi:10.1037/apl0000246
van der HulstM.GeurtsS. (2001). Associations between overtime and psychological health in high and low reward jobs. Work & Stress, 15, 227–240. doi:10.1080/026783701110.1080/02678370110066580
46.
WaldingerR. (2013). Immigrant transnationalism. Current Sociology, 61, 756–777. doi:10.1177/0011392113498692
47.
WareJ. E. (1999). SF-36 health survey. In MaruishM. E. (Ed.), The use of psychological testing for treatment planning and outcomes assessment: Volume 1: General considerations (2nd ed., pp. 1227–1246). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
48.
ZinbargR. E.RevelleW.YovelI.LiW. (2005). Cronbach’s α, Revelle’s β, and Mcdonald’s ωH: their relations with each other and two alternative conceptualizations of reliability. Psychometrika, 70, 123–133. doi:10.1007/s11336-003-0974-7
49.
ZumboB. D.GadermannA. M.ZeisserC. (2007). Ordinal versions of coefficients α and θ for Likert rating scales. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 6, 21–29. doi:10.22237/jmasm/1177992180
