The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Job strain and psychological distress in white collar workers
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVES: In line with Karasek's job strain model, the objective of the study was to determine whether workers submitted to high job strain, a combination of high psychological demand and low decision latitude, develop more psychological distress than workers not submitted to high job strain. A second objective was to determine whether social support at work modifies the association between job strain and psychological distress. METHODS: The design was cross-sectional and included white-collar workers in the Québec city area. A self-administered 26-item questionnaire (the Job Content Questionnaire) measured psychological demand, decision latitude, and social support at work. Psychological distress was measured by the Psychiatric Symptom Index, a 14-item self-administered instrument. RESULTS: Among the 2889 participants, the prevalence of psychological distress was 27.8%. High job strain was present in 20.5% of the subjects. The crude odds ratio (OR) of high job strain with psychological distress was 3.52 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 2.54-4.88]. The OR adjusted for age, gender, employment status, occupation, social support at work, nonwork social support, cynicism, hostility, domestic load, and stressful life events during the last 12 months was still significant (OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.66-3.62). CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the association between job strain and psychological distress. Social support at work, although significantly associated with psychological distress, did not modify the association between job strain and psychological distress.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Hosmer, D. W., Lemeshow, S., & Sturdivant, R. X. (2013) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/9781118548387 · Cited by 13,861
Social Relationships and Health
House, J. S., Landis, K. R., & Umberson, D. (1988) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.3399889 · Cited by 7,073
The Cook-Medley hostility scale: item content and ability to predict survival.
Barefoot, J. C., Dodge, K. A., Peterson, B. L., Dahlstrom, W. G., & Williams, R. B. (1989) · Psychosomatic Medicine · doi:10.1097/00006842-198901000-00005 · Cited by 825 · cited 1×
“Cynicism and hostile affect were measured by subsets of the Cook-Medley Hostility Scale (16).”
Method
Cited by
Karasek, R. A., Brisson, C., Kawakami, N., Houtman, I. L. D., Bongers, P. M., & Amick, B. C. (1998) · Journal of Occupational Health Psychology · doi:10.1037//1076-8998.3.4.322 · Cited by 3,189
Self-citationLink, B. G., & Phelan, J. C. (2013) · Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research · doi:10.1007/978-94-007-4276-5_25 · Cited by 269
Self-employment and work-related stress: The mediating role of job control and job demand
Hessels, J., Rietveld, C. A., & van der Zwan, P. (2017) · Journal of Business Venturing · doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2016.10.007 · Cited by 267
Metadata
- Authors
- Bourbonnais, R., Brisson, C., Moisan, J., & Vézina, M.
- Venue
- Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health
- Published
- 1996-04
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 139-145
- ISSN
- 0355-3140 (ISSN-L)
- 1795-990X
- OpenAlex
- W2101573034
- Cited by
- 184
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 8.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Job strain and psychological distress in white collar workers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5271/sjweh.122
- The paper
- Bourbonnais, R., Brisson, C., Moisan, J., & Vézina, M. (1996). Job strain and psychological distress in white collar workers. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.122
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.