Validation of the Indonesian version of the Recovery Experience Questionnaire

Abstract

This study aimed to validate the Indonesian version of the Recovery Experience Questionnaire (REQ-I) to assess how individuals unwind and recuperate from work during their off-job times, specifically in terms of psychological detachment, relaxation, mastery, and control. The translated and back-translated REQ, which has gone through semantic and face validation processes, was administered through an internet survey using 740 Indonesian workers from various backgrounds. Furthermore, confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was conducted to evaluate factorial validity. Construct validity was evaluated based on the correlation coefficients between recovery experience and potential consequences variables, while internal consistency and test-retest reliability were investigated to evaluate the reliability. The result of CFA showed that the hypothesized four-factor model was the most suitable for the data. Meanwhile, construct validity was supported by expected correlations of recovery experiences with possible consequences. Cronbach’s α coefficient for each of the four subscales was sufficient at 0.85–0.92. Test-retest reliability of each of the four subscales with three months intervals was confirmed with sufficient intraclass correlation coefficients at 0.60–0.66. This current study confirmed that REQ-I was an adequate measure of recovery experiences used in the Indonesian context.

Introduction

Information and communication technologies (ICTs), such as smartphones, have brought about a multitude of changes for workers, including the ability to work at any time and location, unconstrained by temporal or spatial limitations^1,2,3). This impedes the well-being of employees and the recuperation from stress when conducted without a clear understanding of the demarcation between professional and personal hours^{4, 5)}. In addition, since the World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 as a pandemic in 2020, many countries have implemented lockdowns and social restrictions. Almost all companies and organizations changed their work style abruptly and implemented working from home for workers^{6, 7)}. Meanwhile, working from home creates unclear boundaries between work and personal life⁸⁾. This unclear boundary between work and personal life has the potential to hinder the achievement of an individual’s recovery. Therefore, it is important to understand how workers spend their time during off-job hours⁹⁾.

Recovery

Recently, many studies have been conducted to determine the importance of recovering from stress due to work and the effects on the well-being of individuals^{10, 11)}. Recovery describes the psycho-physiological process of unwinding after experiencing a stressful situation¹²⁾. A person can be considered to experience recovery when the functional systems return to the initial state before experiencing the stressful situation¹³⁾.

In many previous studies, recovery focused more on activities outside of working time with a positive impact on restoring the affective state of workers to their original condition, such as enjoying holidays or weekends^14,15,16,17). According to Sonnentag and Fritz, the activities individuals engage in during their spare time do not promote stress recovery from work, but rather other factors associated with these activities that have a greater impact on the recovery process¹⁸⁾. To obtain a better explanation of this recovery process, Sonnentag and Fritz investigated the psychological experience of leisure activities by developing the Recovery Experience Questionnaire (REQ)¹⁸⁾. This measuring tool can explain the psychological experience of the recovery process.

Recovery experiences

The recovery experiences proposed by Sonnentag and Fritz have four main aspects related to the recovery process. These four aspects are psychological detachment, relaxation, mastery, and control¹⁸⁾.

Psychological detachment is a subjective phenomenon characterized by a deliberate disengagement or detachment from work-related matters, allowing individuals to redirect their attention toward activities beyond the realm of work, both physically and mentally^{18, 19)}. Moreover, the concept of mental distancing involves intentionally avoiding thoughts related to work and consciously disengaging from the psychological state of being in a work mode²⁰⁾. Mental separation from work can reduce an individual’s exposure to work-related stressors and alleviate the associated demands. As a result, their functional systems can return to their baseline state, which is similar to the state before being exposed to stressful working conditions.

Relaxation is often associated with activities that require little or no effort. This aspect of the recovery experience is characterized by a low activation state and is closely related to pleasant feelings resulting from low activation activities²¹⁾. These include sleeping, listening to music, watching TV, meditating, or doing fun activities requiring a slight physical activation, such as walking in a park and cycling in a relaxed environment. To obtain the benefit of relaxation, there should be no further demands on the individual¹⁸⁾. Studies showed that relaxation could reduce stress levels and increase positive emotions^{22, 23)}.

In contrast to relaxation, mastery is leisure activities outside of working hours that require more effort. This experience provides an opportunity to learn new things from challenging situations and produce a feeling of success²⁴⁾. The activities include learning a new hobby and language, as well as doing extreme adrenaline-pumping sports. They are challenging to do but are still within the range of learning abilities and achievement. Even though they require effort and energy to gain mastery experience, these activities add competence, skills, and self-efficacy to the recovery process^{18, 25)}.

The final experience is control, which entails the ability to exercise dominion over the leisure time of individuals. This includes possessing the necessary expertise to determine how best to utilize one’s free time, and executing these activities²⁶⁾. In this particular experience, an individual can exercise their discretion to select activities from a range of pre-existing options to recover and can arrange the preferred schedule for performing these activities. This resource can significantly contribute to enhancing an individual’s recovery progress outside their working hours. The sense of control that this experience provides plays a crucial role in influencing self-efficacy and fostering a sense of time management¹⁸⁾.

Consequences of recovery experiences

Previous studies showed various potential consequences of recovery experiences related to well-being variables. This study focuses on mental well-being, psychological distress, and work engagement.

As recovery experiences can aid individuals in unwinding from work-related stress, they hold the potential to alleviate the negative impact of working conditions. This includes reducing fatigue, physical health complaints, and depressive symptoms, ultimately leading to increased life satisfaction^{18, 20, 26, 27)}. The experience of psychological detachment, relaxation, mastery, and control preserves the resources of individuals by providing a means of escape from work-related demands. Engaging in enjoyable leisure activities, achieving personal mastery, and exerting control can contribute to an enhanced sense of psychological well-being. The cumulative effect of these experiences leads to an overall increase in life satisfaction¹⁸⁾, and decreases stress levels. Therefore, we hypothesized that recovery experiences are positively and negatively related to mental well-being and psychological distress respectively.

Work engagement is another well-being variable that exhibits a positive correlation with recovery experiences^{26, 28)}. It is one of the well-being variables related to work which consists of several positive aspects, such as vigor, dedication, and absorption²⁹⁾. Regarding the correlation between the experience of psychological detachment and work engagement, there exists a disparity among the results. Several previous studies have shown that the experience of psychological detachment is positively correlated with work engagement^{28, 30)}. However, several studies also showed the opposite condition, where the experience of psychological detachment negatively correlates with work engagement^{9, 17, 31)}. To discover further insights, these studies performed a subsequent analysis to examine the correlation between the two variables. Furthermore, the relationship between the variables is not linear but rather curvilinear^{17, 31)}. At a certain level of psychological detachment experience, the level of work engagement of workers can reach its highest point. However, when the level of psychological detachment increases or decreases, the concept can be affected. Therefore, we hypothesized that three recovery experiences (relaxation, mastery, and control) have positive relationships with work engagement, and there is no specific hypothesis for the relationship between psychological detachment and work engagement.

Current study

REQ is mainly used in high-income countries and has been validated in several languages such as English and German¹⁸⁾, Spanish³²⁾, Finnish²⁶⁾, Japanese⁹⁾, and Swedish³³⁾. To our best knowledge, this measuring instrument has also been validated in Nepal³⁴⁾ and Brazil³⁵⁾, but it has not been validated and used in Indonesia as one of the upper middle-income countries³⁶⁾ with a different culture and religious background from the previous countries.

Indonesia, the 4th most populous country and the largest Muslim population in the world^{37, 38)} is currently in the peak period of the demographic bonus (from the year 2020 to 2035), with the productive-age population doubling the population of children and elderly³⁹⁾. This large productive-age population provides a significant source of labor. However, the average working hours per week of workers have increased year after year. In February 2023 the average working hours per week reached 42 h⁴⁰⁾, even though the government has regulated the maximum working hours per week as 40 h in the Indonesian Job Creation Law No. 11 of 2020. Besides, the rapid development of technology and the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020 has made the trend of working from home increase worldwide^{6, 7, 41)}, including in Indonesia⁴²⁾. This trend creates unclear boundaries between work and personal life⁸⁾, moreover there is a common perception among Indonesian workers that their home is primarily intended for relaxation and familial bonding, rather than a space for work productivity⁴²⁾.

From these conditions, Indonesian workers’ experiences of recovery seem to be crucial for their health. The concept of recovery experiences is potentially beneficial for the study and practice of Indonesian workers’ health, including their mental health. To conduct a study on recovery experience, an Indonesian version of the REQ (REQ-I) validation study becomes an initial step.

Participants and Methods

Translation

Prior to the translation process, we requested permission from the original authors of REQ via email to conduct this validation study. We received permission from the original authors on July 13, 2021.

The original English version of REQ¹⁸⁾ was translated into Indonesian by two translators, including the author. The back translation was carried out by an English-Indonesian bilingual professional translator with no knowledge of the REQ items to avoid bias. This back-translation version was then compared to the original version and harmonized with psychology experts and practitioners with Ph.D. in Psychology and was confirmed by the original author of REQ. Subsequently, for a face validation assessment, we distributed the questionnaire to 15 employees consisting of eight male full-time employees and seven female full-time employees (mean age=31.93, SD=3.03). We conducted small interviews to get their comments and feedback about the questionnaire. The main author conducted the interview through the Zoom meeting application for approximately 10 min for each participant. Comments and suggestions gathered from this interview mainly related to the instruction part on how to answer the questionnaire. Only one participant gave a comment on the “I kick back and relax” item since there is no word “kick back” in Indonesian and we used “unwind” as a substitute. Based on the results from the face validity assessment, a minor modification related to the wording of the instruction part on how to answer the questionnaire was carried out. In general, the comprehensibility of every item was proven. REQ-I is provided in the Appendix.

Participants

This validation study was a cross-sectional study as part of a longitudinal project on the association between hard work investments, work-life balance, and recovery experiences among dual-earner workers with preschool children. The inclusion criteria of participants in this study were productive age (from 18 yr old up to 58 yr old), dual-earner couples with preschool children, and full-time workers with a minimum of 40 working hours per week. The data were online-based and gathered through the internet amid the COVID-19 pandemic. An announcement, including the survey link, was made and spread through social media, mainly Instagram and WhatsApp.

This study was carried out from January 2022 to May 2022. In the first data collection (from January 15 to January 31, 2022), 1,027 responses were obtained from the survey and 740 were completed and used for the final analysis with a response rate of 72.3%. In the second data collection (from April 30 to May 17, 2022), there were 252 responses and 241 completed the survey with a response rate of 96%. To confirm test-retest reliability, data from 241 participants who responded to the first and second surveys were used.

Ethical approval was obtained from the Research Ethics Committee at Keio University, as they approved the procedures before starting the study (No. 389). The objective of this study was written at the beginning of the survey as part of the information for participants. Informed consent was obtained through the website at the time the data were collected. The consent of participants was verified through a review of their agreements, and those who did not provide consent would not have access to the survey. Participants had the option of not responding to any part of the questionnaire at any time and to discontinue the survey at any point without penalty.

All of the processes, from translation and back translation including expert review to the face validation assessment (pretesting process), refer to the guideline⁴³⁾. Then continued with data collection and ended with data analysis and data presentation. A general outline of the stages of this study can be seen in the following process diagram (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1.

Diagram process of the study.

Measures

The measures included recovery experiences, work engagement, mental well-being, and psychological distress.

Recovery experiences were assessed using the Indonesian version of REQ. There were sixteen questionnaire items divided into four subscales, namely psychological detachment, relaxation, mastery, and control. Each of these subscales consisted of four items and was scored with a Likert scale of five points from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The score used in this scale was a total subscale score of all four items.

Work engagement was assessed using the short form of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES)⁴⁴⁾, which was validated in the Indonesian version^{45, 46)}. The UWES consisted of three subscales, namely vigor, dedication, and absorption. The subscales have three items, namely “At my work, I feel bursting with energy”, “I am proud of my work”, and “I get carried away when I am working”. Every item was scored with a Likert scale of seven points from 0 (never) to 6 (always). The score was the total of all 9-item responses from three subscales. This study adopted a total score of each subscale, vigor, dedication, and absorption, to check the correlation between each subscale and all recovery experience variables.

Mental well-being was assessed using the translated WHO-5 questionnaire⁴⁷⁾ with five items asking respondents to rate their general psychological/mental well-being within the past two weeks, such as (I have felt calm and relaxed). The items were scored on a six points Likert scale from 0 (at no time) to 5 (all the time), and the score used was the total score of all five item responses from the scale.

Psychological distress was assessed using the Kessler 6 questionnaire (K6)^{48, 49)}, which was validated in the Indonesian version^{50, 51)}. It had six items representing anxiety (In the past four weeks, how often did you feel nervous?) and depression (In the past four weeks, how often did you feel hopeless?). The K6 questionnaire was scored on five points Likert scale from 0 (never) to 4 (always).

Demographic characteristics were age, gender, working sector, education, number of preschool children, and having a babysitter. During the survey’s opening, all participants were requested to provide certain information which was included as variables in the analyses.

Analyses

Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) was used in the factorial validity analyses using the structural equation modeling (SEM) method by AMOS version 26. Furthermore, the one-factor and the four-factor models were compared. One-factor model was an assumption that all the items in REQ belong to one general factor of recovery experiences, and the four-factor was the hypothesized factor in recovery experiences. The fitness of the model to the data was examined using the parsimony goodness-of-fit index (PGFI), the Tucker–Lewis index (TLI), the comparative fit index (CFI), the normed fit index (NFI), the parsimony adjusted measures index (PNFI), the standardised root mean square residual (SRMR) and the χ² goodness-of-fit statistic. Generally model with PGFI ≥0.6, TLI, CFI, and NFI ≥0.9, PNFI ≥0.50, and SRMR ≤0.08 represent a close fit between the hypothesized model and the data^{52,53,54,55,56)}.

In the construct validity, correlation analyses were conducted between all recovery experience variables with work engagement and its subscales, mental well-being, and psychological distress using IBM SPSS version 26. Regression analyses were also conducted to check the curvilinear relationship using IBM SPSS version 26. This curvilinear analysis confirmed the relationship between psychological detachment and work engagement, as explained in the introduction part.

For internal consistency, the values of Cronbach’s α were computed, and the intraclass correlation coefficient was calculated to evaluate test-retest reliability by using a two-way random-effects model. These analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS version 26 and R 4.2.1 for Mac.

Results

Characteristics of the participants

As shown in Table 1, the total number of participants in this study was 740 participants. The mean age was 32.75 yr old with SD=4.49. There were 65.1% female, 44.4% private sector workers, 79% with a university degree or higher, 65.9% had one preschool child, and 76.8% had a babysitter.

Table 1. Means, standard deviations (SDs), and percentages of participants’ demographic variables (N=740).

Category		n	%	Mean	SD
Age		740		32.75	4.49
Gender
	Female	482	65.1
	Male	258	34.9
Working sector
	Private sector worker	328	44.3
	Civil servant	201	27.2
	Entrepreneur	211	28.5
Education
	Others/below High School	13	1.7
	High School	62	8.3
	Diploma	81	10.9
	Bachelor/Undergraduate	389	52.5
	Graduate	195	26.3
Number of preschool children
	1	488	65.9
	2	227	30.6
	3	22	3
	4	3	0.4
Having someone to help in babysitting
	Yes	569	76.8
	No	165	22.2

Factorial validity

In CFA, the one-factor and the hypothesized four-factor models were assessed. As shown in Table 2, the hypothesized four-factor model fitted the data better than the one-facto (∆χ² (6=2,636.88, p<0.001; PGFI=0.64; TLI=0.91; CFI=0.9; NFI=0.91; PNFI=0.74; SRMR=0.08). Therefore, the hypothesized four-factor was selected as the final model, as shown in Fig. 2. The inter-factor correlation for the factors hypothesized between psychological detachment and relaxation, psychological detachment and mastery, psychological detachment and control, relaxation and mastery, relaxation and control, as well as mastery and control were 0.59, 0.31, 0.32, 0.61, 0.56, and 0.55, respectively. There were four items on each factor with the factor loading on each item >0.7, categorized as excellent, and only two items >0.5 (Psychological Detachment 4 and Control 1) were categorized as acceptable^{53, 57)}.

Table 2. Results of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA): comparison of goodness-of-fit indices among one-factor and a four-factor model.

Model	PGFI	TLI	CFI	NFI	PNFI	SRMR	x2	df	p
One-factor model	0.44	0.55	0.61	0.6	0.52	0.13	3,385.08	104	<0.001
Four-factor model	0.64	0.91	0.92	0.91	0.74	0.08	748.2	98	<0.001

N=740. PGFI: Parsimony Goodness of Fit Index; TLI: Tucker–Lewis Index; CFI: Comparative Fit Index; NFI: Normed Fit Index; PNFI: Parsimony Normed Fit Index; SRMR: Root Mean Square Error of Approximation.

Fig. 2.

Path Diagram of Recovery Experience Questionnaire of a hypothesized four-factor model.

**p<0.01. PD: psychological detachment; Relax: relaxation.

Internal consistency and test-retest reliability

To check the reliability of REQ, the values for Cronbach’s α were computed for each subscale. Cronbach’s α for psychological detachment, relaxation, mastery, and control was 0.85, 0.92, 0.88, and 0.89, respectively.

The test-retest reliability using the square root of the error variance was analyzed⁵⁸⁾. Intraclass correlation coefficients with three months intervals of data collection were 0.63 (p<0.001), 0.66 (p<0.001), 0.65 (p<0.001), and 0.60 (p<0.001) for psychological detachment, relaxation, mastery, and control, while the standard error measurements were 1.37, 1.47, 1.51, and 1.54, respectively.

Relationship with the outcome variables

The construct validity test analyzed the correlations between recovery experience with well-being-related variables such as work engagement, mental well-being, and psychological distress. As shown in Table 3, as hypothesized, mental well-being was positively correlated to all the variables of recovery experiences, while psychological distress was negatively correlated. Work engagement was correlated positively with all of the recovery experience variables except for psychological detachment.

Table 3. Correlation between each subscale of the recovery experience questionnaire and work engagement, workaholism, work-family spillover, mental well-being, and psychological distress.

Measures		Mean	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16
Demographics
	1 Gendera			(n.a.)
	2 Age	32.75	4.49	0.20**	(n.a.)
	3 Occupationb			−0.05	0.01	(n.a.)
	4 Educationc			−0.09*	0.02	0.02	(n.a.)
	5 Number of children	1.67	0.73	−0.02	0.44**	0.08*	0.02	(n.a.)
	6 Having someone to help in babysittingd			0.02	0.09*	0.11**	0.01	0.05	(n.a.)
Recovery experience
	7 Psychological detachment	13.58	3.16	−0.08*	−0.06	0.04	−0.08*	−0.01	0.02	(0.85)
	8 Relaxation	15.42	2.94	0.05	−0.04	0.06	−0.09*	−0.07*	0.00	0.57**	(0.92)
	9 Mastery	13.9	3.18	0.12**	0.08*	0.08*	−0.09**	0.04	0.05	0.31**	0.58**	(0.88)
	10 Control	15.32	2.62	−0.03	−0.02	0.08*	−0.07*	−0.03	0.04	0.32**	0.54**	0.54**	(0.89)
Other variables
	11 Work engagement	43.89	8.40	0.06	0.08*	0.03	−0.12**	0.006	0.01	0.01	0.12**	0.21**	0.17**	(0.90)
	12 Vigor	14.8	2.93	0.08*	0.11**	0.04	−0.10**	0.08*	−0.01	0.08*	0.20**	0.24**	0.19**	0.87**	(0.86)
	13 Dedication	15.3	3.09	0.04	0.06	0.06	−0.11**	0.07	0.05	0.03	0.14**	0.20**	0.17**	0.89**	0.76**	(0.86)
	14 Absorption	13.8	3.61	0.05	0.07*	−0.02	−0.11**	0.02	−0.02	−0.08*	0.01	0.11**	0.10**	0.85**	0.57**	0.61**	(0.75)
	15 Mental well-being	18.36	5.27	0.15**	0.11**	0.03	−0.07	0.05	0.05	0.22**	0.42**	0.44**	0.36**	0.36**	0.42**	0.35**	0.20**	(0.91)
	16 Psychological distress	13.17	5.09	−0.15**	−0.17**	−0.01	0.02	−0.09*	0.03	−0.13**	−0.29**	−0.23**	−0.24**	−0.26**	−0.33**	−0.25**	−0.11**	−0.59**	(0.92)

**p<0.01, *p<0.05. Alpha coefficients are displayed in parentheses.

^a) Gender was coded as 1 (female) and 2 (male). ^b) Occupation was coded as 1 (private sector), 2 (civil servant), and 3 (entrepreneur). ^c) Education was coded as 1 (high school), 2 (college), 3 (undergraduate), and 4 (graduate). ^d) Having someone to help in babysitting was coded as 1 (yes) and 2 (no). SD: standard deviation; n.a.: not applicable.

A regression analysis was conducted to check the curvilinear relationship between psychological detachment and work engagement³¹⁾. The results showed that there were no relationships between the variables (p>0.05). Furthermore, a correlation analysis was performed between recovery experience and every work engagement subscale to obtain the relationship. According to Table 3, there was a positive, zero, and negative correlation with vigor, dedication, and absorption.

Discussion

This study validated the recovery experience questionnaire in the Indonesian version. It conducted several analyses, ranging from CFA to test the factorial validity, internal consistency with test-retest reliability, as well as correlation with several related variables.

From CFA, the hypothesized four-factor model was more suitable to the data better than the one-factor. This means that there were four constructs in recovery experiences, according to the original study¹⁸⁾. Meanwhile, the internal consistency scores for the four subscales met very good criteria, which were more than 0.80⁵⁹⁾.

This study also found that each sub-scale of recovery experiences correlated positively. The correlation between psychological detachment and relaxation (r=0.57) was higher than with mastery (r=0.31) and control (r=0.32). This finding was consistent with previous studies, where psychological detachment had a higher correlation with relaxation than mastery and control^{9, 18)}.

The recovery experience subscales had a positive correlation with mental well-being. This finding was in line with several previous studies^{10, 18, 26)}. The higher the recovery experience, the higher the mental well-being of workers. It suggests that among participants, 1) being psychologically detached or switching off from work was positively related to well-being, 2) experiencing low activation activities or relaxation during leisure time was positively related to well-being; 3) being involved in challenging and fun activities outside of work had a positive relation to mental health, and 4) control on their leisure time was also positively related to the level of happiness.

The findings showed that all recovery experience subscales had a negative relationship with psychological distress. This was also consistent with previous studies, where the same result was obtained^{9, 18)}. Furthermore, participants might experience decreased psychological distress as their level of recovery increases. Individuals who were detached from work, experienced low activation during their leisure time, encountered challenges or achieved personal goals in non-work-related activities, and have control over their spare time, will be able to unwind from stress due to work. Consequently, their psychological well-being was expected to improve, potentially leading to a reduction in depressive symptoms¹⁸⁾.

Meanwhile, regarding the correlation between recovery experiences and work engagement, not all subscales correlated. In this study, there was no correlation between psychological detachment and work engagement. This is contradicted with previous findings which had indicated a positive correlation between the variables^{9, 18, 28, 30, 31)}. Mastery experience had the highest positive correlation with work engagement (r=0.21), followed by control (r=0.17) and relaxation (r=0.12). It was indicated that among participants, detaching from work during their off-job time was unrelated with how engaged they are with work. However, when participants experienced new and challenging extra activities outside of working hours, having higher level of control during leisure time and having more ability to relax when not working were improving their engagement with work.

The correlation between psychological detachment and work engagement had been widely studied with varying results. Some showed positive^{28, 30)}, negative^{9, 17)}, and curvilinear correlations³¹⁾. In contrast to the previous studies, this result indicated no relationship between the variables. Concerning the curvilinear analysis conducted, no correlation was also found. The implication was that the level of psychological detachment among participants had no association with work engagement. Therefore, the study analyzed the correlation between psychological detachment and work engagement subscales to gain a better understanding of the relationship between the variables. It was found that there was a positive correlation with vigor (r=0.08), no correlation with dedication, and a negative correlation with absorption (r=−0.08). The positive correlation between psychological detachment and vigor was consistent with previous studies, where psychologically detached individuals had more vigorous conditions the following day^{27, 60)}. The obtained outcome indicated that individuals who mentally detached themselves from work during non-working hours were likely to experience elevated levels of vigor and energy. However, this practice resulted in diminished levels of work absorption. This incongruous correlation led to a neutral association between psychological detachment and work engagement, devoid of any discernible positive or negative effects.

The findings of the current study provide sufficient information, particularly addressing the fact that this instrument can be utilized as an initial assessment to evaluate the recovery experiences among Indonesian workers. Indonesia’s economy is currently growing, with the productive age population doubling the non-productive age, and at the same time, the average number of working hours per week is increasing over time. Therefore, more attention is needed for workers to maintain their health, and knowledge about recovery experience will be useful in this regard. The authors believe that the knowledge on recovery experiences can help policymakers, health and safety professionals, and employers to understand how employees experience recovery from their daily working activities, as well as identify its positive consequences on their health and well-being. Finally, it is hoped that the knowledge of these aspects of recovery experience can be applied to work policies for the establishment of prosperous working conditions.

Limitations and suggestions

This study had several limitations, firstly, the data were the result of self-report measurements, which were prone to common method bias. Therefore, the actual correlation between the variables was not stronger than the recorded findings. Secondly, the data were collected from online-based surveys, hence, participants involved were less evenly distributed due to different access to the internet, including educational and socioeconomic backgrounds. The data indicated a higher proportion of university graduates as participants compared to non-university graduates. However, using online surveys with a comprehensive reach enabled the analysis to attain a larger and more representative sample size. Thirdly, this study was based on a cross-sectional design, where longitudinal and qualitative analyses were suggested to determine the causal order. Fourthly, participants were limited to dual-earner couples with preschool children. It was expected that future studies would provide insight into the applicability of REQ-I to other participants, including individuals without partners and children.

Conclusion

This study highlights the psychometric features, factor structure, and validity of the Indonesian version of the REQ. It is known that experiencing recovery from work has many positive consequences and is essential for maintaining health among workers. It has been concluded that the Indonesian version of the REQ developed in this study was a suitable and useful measurement tool for evaluating recovery experiences. This measurement tool can be beneficial for the study and practice of Indonesian workers’ health, eventually improving their well-being.

Conflict of Interest

All authors declare no relevant conflicts of interest in relation to the subject of the manuscript.

Appendix. The Indonesian version of Recovery Experience Questionnaire (REQ) (REQ-I)

Skala Recovery Experiences versi Indonesia

Kuesioner berikut ini menanyakan tentang bagaimana Anda menghabiskan waktu Anda setelah bekerja seharian. Bacalah setiap pernyataan dengan seksama dan tentukan seberapa sering Anda merasakan hal tersebut pada diri Anda. Mohon tunjukkan pada setiap pernyataan, keadaan yang paling menggambarkan perasaan Anda. Sebagai contoh, jika Anda sangat tidak setuju dengan suatu pernyataan, lingkari angka “1” (satu) setelah pernyataan tersebut. Jika Anda sangat setuju dengan suatu pernyataan, lingkari angka “5” (lima).

1: Sangat tidak setuju 2: Tidak setuju 3: Antara setuju dan tidak setuju 4: Setuju 5: Sangat setuju
1. Saya merasa bisa menentukan apa yang hendak saya lakukan	1	2	3	4	5
2. Saya mempelajari hal-hal baru	1	2	3	4	5
3. Saya melupakan semua hal terkait pekerjaan	1	2	3	4	5
4. Saya menentukan jadwal saya sendiri	1	2	3	4	5
5. Saya tidak memikirkan pekerjaan sama sekali	1	2	3	4	5
6. Saya bersantai dan rileks	1	2	3	4	5
7. Saya mencari tantangan-tantangan yang mampu menambah pengetahuan saya	1	2	3	4	5
8. Saya melakukan hal-hal yang menantang	1	2	3	4	5
9. Saya menentukan sendiri bagaimana saya akan menghabiskan waktu saya	1	2	3	4	5
10. Saya menjauhkan diri dari pekerjaan	1	2	3	4	5
11. Saya melakukan hal-hal yang membuat saya rileks	1	2	3	4	5
12. Saya menggunakan waktu untuk bersantai	1	2	3	4	5
13. Saya menyelesaikan berbagai hal dengan cara saya sendiri	1	2	3	4	5
14. Saya meluangkan waktu untuk melakukan aktivitas waktu senggang	1	2	3	4	5
15. Saya melakukan kegiatan yang memperluas cakrawala saya	1	2	3	4	5
16. Saya menyempatkan beristirahat dari tuntutan pekerjaan	1	2	3	4	5