The Occupational Depression Inventory confounds depressive symptoms with their assumed work-related causes

Abstract

Background:

Scholars have recently raised concerns regarding the validity of widely-used burnout measures, including the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI). At the same time, the Occupational Depression Inventory (ODI) has been proposed as an alternative measure of job-related distress.

Objective:

The aim of this commentary is to point out that the items of the ODI confound depressive symptoms that may be experienced by workers, such as lack of energy, feelings of worthlessness, and sleep problems, with their assumed work-related causes, particularly high levels of job stressors.

Methods:

This commentary uses conceptual and methodological arguments to describe the problematic consequences of confounded measurement in the ODI.

Results:

This commentary suggests that, when researchers use the ODI in empirical studies, confounded measurement can lead to artificially inflated associations between measures of job stressors (e.g., work demands, role conflict, job insecurity) and occupational depression. Moreover, it can be unclear whether associations between occupational depression and potential outcomes (e.g., low job satisfaction, turnover intentions) are caused by depressive symptoms, job stressors, or both.

Conclusions:

It is recommended that researchers assess job stressors and workers’ depressive symptoms separately, ideally using multiple sources and time lags to avoid inflated associations between constructs.