Cited by 534Workplace Health and Well-beingJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorEmployment and Welfare Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year; 52 of the 54 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The relationships between work characteristics and mental health: examining normal, reversed and reciprocal relationships in a 4-wave study

Open access

Abstract

This longitudinal study examined the causal relationships between job demands, job control and supervisor support on the one hand and mental health on the other. Whereas we assumed that work characteristics affect mental health, we also examined reversed causal relationships (mental health influences work characteristics). Further, the topic of the appropriate time lag for testing causal relationships was addressed. Our hypotheses were tested in a 4-wave study among a heterogeneous sample of 668 Dutch employees using structural equation modelling. The results provide evidence for reciprocal causal relationships between the work characteristics and mental health, although the effects of work characteristics on well-being were causally predominant. The best model fit was found for a 1-year time lag. Compared to earlier—predominantly cross-sectional—results, the present study presents a stronger case for the effects of work characteristics on the development of strain. The results also emphasize the need for a dynamic view of the relationship between work and health; the one-directional viewpoint in many work stress models does not seem to fully capture the relations between work characteristics and well-being.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/02678370412331270860

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 54 references

Research works printed but not linked: 13

  1. Byrne BM, 2002, Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS
  2. De Lange AH, Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health
  3. Fletcher BC, 2003, The Handbook of Work & Health Psychology, pp. 599–568
  4. Frese M, 1984, Role Transitions, pp. 00–00
  5. 10.1037/1076-8998.3.4.368 · DOI
  6. Jöreskog KG, 1993, Lisrel-8 (User's Manual)
  7. Karasek RA, 1985, Job Content Instrument: Questionnaire and User's Guide
  8. Kasl SV, 1978, Stress at Work, pp. 3–48
  9. 10.1037/1076-8998.1.3.246 · DOI
  10. Rothman KJ, 1998, Modern Epidemiology
  11. Semmer NK, 2003, The Handbook of Work & Health Psychology, pp. 83–120
  12. Taris TW, 1999, Genetic, Social and General Psychology Monographs, 125, 433
  13. 10.1023/A:1022988915062 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–400 of 533

Metadata

Authors
De Lange *, A. H., Taris, T. W., Kompier, M. A. J., Houtman, I. L. D., & Bongers, P. M.
Affiliations
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
  • Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (NL)
Venue
Work & Stress
Published
2004-04
Volume
18
Issue
2
Pages
149-166
ISSN
  • 0267-8373 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-5335
OpenAlex
W1999424113
Cited by
534
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 26 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 35 · 2015: 26 · 2014: 39 · 2013: 37 · 2012: 30
FWCI
40.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Work & Stress (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Digital Academic REpository of VU University Amsterdam (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam) (submittedVersion)
  • TNO Repository (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • VU Research Portal (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • VU Research Portal (submittedVersion)
  • Repository hosted by TU Delft Library (TU Delft) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Istituto Nazionale Previdenza Sociale
  • Ministerie van Sociale Zaken en Werkgelegenheid
  • Universiteit van Amsterdam
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Workplace Health and Well-being
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Employment and Welfare Studies
Keywords
job demands, job control, supervisor support, mental health, reciprocal causation, job characteristics, occupational stress, well-being

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review