Skip to main content
. 2014 Feb 4;52(3):175–189. doi: 10.2486/indhealth.2013-0185

Table 5. Exploratory factor analysis of 34 BJSQ and New BJSQ psychosocial work environment scales †.

Scales Factor 1
(Workgroup- and organizational
-level job resources)
Factor 2
(Job demands)
Factor 3
(Task-level job resources)
Job demands
1. Quantitative job overload 0.067 0.712 –0.080
2. Qualitative job overload –0.064 0.686 –0.274
3. Physical demands 0.089 0.318 –0.032
4. Interpersonal conflict 0.494 0.501 0.452
5. Poor physical environment 0.363 0.250 0.291
6. Emotional demands 0.255 0.673 0.247
7. Role conflict 0.414 0.654 0.330
8. Work-self balance (negative) 0.222 0.589 0.208

Job resources: task-level
9. Job control 0.383 0.296 0.371
10. Suitable jobs 0.348 0.184 0.634
11. Skill utilization 0.232 –0.078 0.451
12. Meaningfulness of work 0.483 –0.102 0.808
13. Role clarity 0.407 0.156 0.422
14. Career opportunity 0.579 –0.093 0.674
15. Novelty –0.172 0.431 –0.121
16. Predictability 0.292 0.111 0.288

Job resources: workgroup-level
17. Supervisor support 0.608 0.183 0.492
18. Coworker support 0.410 0.156 0.432
20. Monetary/status reward 0.588 0.252 0.379
21. Esteem reward 0.654 0.244 0.506
22. Job security 0.482 0.199 0.343
23. Leadership 0.754 0.005 0.426
24. Interactional justice 0.747 0.210 0.424
25. Workplace where people compliment each other 0.727 0.166 0.420
26. Workplace where mistakes are acceptable 0.692 0.056 0.490
27. Collective efficacy 0.546 0.117 0.455

Job resources: organizational-level
28. Trust with management 0.712 0.221 0.382
29. Preparedness for change 0.763 0.154 0.367
30. Procedural justice 0.714 0.140 0.304
31. Respect for individuals 0.760 0.141 0.476
32. Fair personnel evaluation 0.765 0.116 0.320
33. Diversity 0.603 0.174 0.372
34. Career development 0.792 0.027 0.435
35. Work-self balance (positive) 0.528 0.141 0.521

† Data from 1,442 respondents who completed 34 scales from a national representative survey of employees of Japan in 2010/2011. “19. Support from family and friends” scale was excluded from the analysis because of non-work environment. Principal factor method was used to extract factors with scree test criterion, and a rotated factor structure with Oblimin method is shown. Factor loadings over 0.50 are underlined.