LinkedIn

 آمار

تعداد نشریات20
تعداد شماره‌ها1,135
تعداد مقالات10,364
تعداد مشاهده مقاله44,106,281
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله10,021,473
Rajabi, Fazel, Mokarami, Hamidreza, Farhadi, Payam, Banaee, Sean, Jahangiri, Mehdi. (1401). Psychometric Properties of the Persian Version of Consideration of Future Safety Consequence (CFSC) Scale. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 11(1), 55-62. doi: 10.30476/jhsss.2021.92325.1336
Fazel Rajabi; Hamidreza Mokarami; Payam Farhadi; Sean Banaee; Mehdi Jahangiri. "Psychometric Properties of the Persian Version of Consideration of Future Safety Consequence (CFSC) Scale". سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 11, 1, 1401, 55-62. doi: 10.30476/jhsss.2021.92325.1336
Rajabi, Fazel, Mokarami, Hamidreza, Farhadi, Payam, Banaee, Sean, Jahangiri, Mehdi. (1401). 'Psychometric Properties of the Persian Version of Consideration of Future Safety Consequence (CFSC) Scale', سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 11(1), pp. 55-62. doi: 10.30476/jhsss.2021.92325.1336
Rajabi, Fazel, Mokarami, Hamidreza, Farhadi, Payam, Banaee, Sean, Jahangiri, Mehdi. Psychometric Properties of the Persian Version of Consideration of Future Safety Consequence (CFSC) Scale. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 1401; 11(1): 55-62. doi: 10.30476/jhsss.2021.92325.1336

Psychometric Properties of the Persian Version of Consideration of Future Safety Consequence (CFSC) Scale

Journal of Health Sciences & Surveillance System
دوره 11، شماره 1، فروردین 2023، صفحه 55-62    اصل مقاله (653 K)
نوع مقاله: Original Article
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30476/jhsss.2021.92325.1336
نویسندگان
Fazel Rajabi1؛ Hamidreza Mokarami2؛ Payam Farhadi3؛ Sean Banaee4؛ Mehdi Jahangiri* 5
1Student Research Committee, School of Health, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
2Department of Ergonomics, School of Health, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences Shiraz, Iran
3Department of Management, Zand Higher Education Institute, Shiraz, Iran
4College of Health Sciences, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia, USA
5Department of Occupational Health and Safety Engineering, School of Health, Shiraz University of Medical Science, Shiraz, Iran
چکیده
Background: Personality traits, due to having a relative stability, are important factors for predicting employees’ safety behavior. Consideration of Future Safety Consequence (CFSC) is a personality trait that was recently introduced to predict the safety behaviors. The purpose of this study was to translate and assess the psychometric properties of the Persian version of the CFSC scale.
Methods: In the first stage of this cross-sectional study, the instrument was prepared by the forward-backward forward translation technique and evaluated by 487 employees of a gas refinery. The validity of the scale was evaluated through face, concurrent, validity, and construct validity. The safety performance questionnaire was used to examine the concurrent validity. The reliability of the questionnaire was evaluated using internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient) and test-retest.
Results: Content validity index was 0.885. The results of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the CFSC scale had a single factor. Also, Pearson correlation showed a positive correlation between the safety performance and the Persian version of CFSC (R=0.401). Test-retest reliability and internal consistency were calculated as 0.86 and 0.82, respectively.
Conclusion: It is concluded that the psychometric properties of the Persian version of CFSC scale are desirable and can be used in future studies
کلیدواژه‌ها
Reliability and validity؛ Psychometrics؛ Consideration of future safety consequence؛ Questionnaire
مراجع
  1. Mahmoudi S, Fam I, Afsartala B, Alimohammadzadeh S. Evaluation of relationship between the rate of unsafe behaviors and personality trait case study: Construction project in a car manufacturing company. Journal of Health and Safety at Work. 2014; 3(4): 51-58.
  2. Dembe AE. The social consequences of occupational injuries and illnesses. American journal of industrial medicine. 2001; 40(4): 403-417. doi: 1002/ajim.1113. PubMed PMID: 11598991.
  3. International labour organization. Global trends on occupational accidents and diseases. . 2015; available at: www.ilo.org/legacy/english/osh (accessed: 10 Sep 2018).
  4. Ministry of cooperatives labour and social welfare of iran. Statistics of occupational accidents. 2016.
  5. Probst TM, Graso M, Estrada AX, Greer S. Consideration of future safety consequences: A new predictor of employee safety. Accident Analysis & Prevention. 2013; 55: 124-134. doi: 1016/j.aap.2013.02.023. PubMed PMID: 23524204.
  6. Vredenburgh AG. Organizational safety: Which management practices are most effective in reducing employee injury rates? Journal of safety Research. 2002; 33(2): 259-276. doi: 1016/S0022-4375(02)00016-6. PubMed PMID: 12216450.
  7. Rajabi F, Mokarami H, Cousins R, Jahangiri M. Structural equation modeling of safety performance based on personality traits, job and organizational-related factors. International journal of occupational safety and ergonomics. 2022; 28(1): 644-658. doi: 1080/10803548.2020.1814566. PubMed PMID: 32842916.
  8. Rajabi F, Mokarami H, Jahangiri M. Investigation of safety performance of the workers and the effective demographic charactristics in a gas refinery. Journal of Occupational Hygiene Engineering. 2019; 6(1): 52-62. doi: 52547/johe.6.1.52.
  9. Beus JM, Dhanani LY, McCord MA. A meta-analysis of personality and workplace safety: Addressing unanswered questions. Journal of applied psychology. 2015; 100(2): 481. doi: 1037/a0037916. PubMed PMID: 25243998.
  10. Kaplan S, Tetrick LE. Workplace safety and accidents: An industrial and organizational psychology perspective. 2011. doi: 1037/12169-014.
  11. Adams J, Nettle D. Time perspective, personality and smoking, body mass, and physical activity: An empirical study. British journal of health psychology. 2009; 14(1): 83-105. doi: 1348/135910708X299664. PubMed PMID: 18435866.
  12. Joireman J, Kees J, Sprott D. Concern with immediate consequences magnifies the impact of compulsive buying tendencies on college students' credit card debt. Journal of Consumer Affairs. 2010; 44(1): 155-178. doi: 1111/j.1745-6606.2010.01161.x.
  13. Joireman J, Sprott DE, Spangenberg ER. Fiscal responsibility and the consideration of future consequences. Personality and individual differences. 2005; 39(6): 1159-1168. doi: 1016/j.paid.2005.05.002.
  14. Murphy L, Dockray S. The consideration of future consequences and health behaviour: A meta-analysis. Health psychology review. 2018: 1-25. doi: 1080/17437199.2018.1489298. PubMed PMID: 29902949.
  15. Strathman A, Gleicher F, Boninger DS, Edwards CS. The consideration of future consequences: Weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior. Journal of personality and social psychology. 1994; 66(4): 742. doi: 1037/0022-3514.66.4.742.
  16. Mashi MS. Moderating effect of consideration of future safety consequences on the relationship between safety management practices and safety performance among health care workers: A conceptual analysis. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences. 2014; 4(6): 402. doi: 6007/IJARBSS/v4-i6/970
  17. Mashi MS, Al Subramaniam C, Johari JB. The effect of management commitment, safety rules and procedure and safety promotion policies on nurses safety performance: The moderating role of consideration of future safety consequences. International Business Management. 2017; 100(2): 478-489.
  18. Mashia MS, Subramaniama C, Joharia J. The effect of safety training and workers involvement on healthcare workers safety behavior: The moderating role of consideration of future safety consequences. International Journal of Business. 2016; 1(2). doi: 3923/ibm.2017.478.489.
  19. Maasoumi R, Mokarami H, Nazifi M, Stallones L, Taban A, Yazdani Aval M, Samimi K. Psychometric properties of the persian translation of the sexual quality of life–male questionnaire. American journal of men's health. 2017; 11(3): 564-572. doi: 1177/1557988316629641. PubMed PMID: 26856758; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5675236.
  20. Polit DF, Beck CT, Owen SV. Is the cvi an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Research in nursing & health. 2007; 30(4): 459-467. doi: 1002/nur.20199. PubMed PMID: 17654487.
  21. Sagherian K, Steege LM, Geiger-Brown J, Harrington D. The nursing performance instrument: Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses in registered nurses. journal of nursing research. 2018; 26(2): 130-137. doi: 1097/jnr.0000000000000215. PubMed PMID: 28708798.
  22. Costello AB, Osborne JW. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical assessment, research & evaluation. 2005; 10(7): 1-9. doi: 1.1.110.9154.
  23. Hooper D, Coughlan J, Mullen M. Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods. 2008; 6(1): 53-60. doi: 21427/D7CF7R.
  24. Yousefi Y, Jahangiri M, Choobineh A, Tabatabaei H, Keshavarzi S, Shams A, Mohammadi Y. Validity assessment of the persian version of the nordic safety climate questionnaire (nosacq-50): A case study in a steel company. Safety and health at work. 2016; 7(4): 326-330. doi: 1016/j.shaw.2016.03.003. PubMed PMID: 27924236; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5127913.
  25. Neal A, Griffin MA. A study of the lagged relationships among safety climate, safety motivation, safety behavior, and accidents at the individual and group levels. Journal of applied psychology. 2006; 91(4): 946. doi: 1037/0021-9010.91.4.946. PubMed PMID: 16834517.
  26. Kalteh HO, Mortazavi SB, Mohammadi E, Salesi M. Psychometric properties of the persian version of neal and griffin's safety performance scale. International journal of occupational safety and ergonomics. 2018: 1-7. doi: 1080/10803548.2018.1504853. PubMed PMID: 30113274.
  27. Hevey D, Pertl M, Thomas K, Maher L, Craig A, Chuinneagain SN. Consideration of future consequences scale: Confirmatory factor analysis. Personality and Individual Differences. 2010; 48(5): 654-657. doi: 1016/j.paid.2010.01.006.
  28. Crockett RA, Weinman J, Hankins M, Marteau T. Time orientation and health-related behaviour: Measurement in general population samples. Psychology and Health. 2009; 24(3): 333-350. doi: 1080/08870440701813030. PubMed PMID: 20204997; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2657323.
  29. Adams J. Consideration of immediate and future consequences, smoking status, and body mass index. Health Psychology. 2012; 31(2): 260. doi: 1037/a0025790. PubMed PMID: 22103393.
  30. McKay MT, Perry JL, Cole JC, Magee J. Adolescents consider the future differently depending on the domain in question: Results of an exploratory study in the united kingdom. Personality and Individual Differences. 2017; 104: 448-452. doi: 1016/j.paid.2016.09.002.
  31. Joireman J, Balliet D, Sprott D, Spangenberg E, Schultz J. Consideration of future consequences, ego-depletion, and self-control: Support for distinguishing between cfc-immediate and cfc-future sub-scales. Personality and Individual Differences. 2008; 45(1): 15-21. doi: 1016/j.paid.2008.02.011.
  32. Joireman J, Shaffer MJ, Balliet D, Strathman A. Promotion orientation explains why future-oriented people exercise and eat healthy: Evidence from the two-factor consideration of future consequences-14 scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2012; 38(10): 1272-1287. doi: 1177/0146167212449362. PubMed PMID: 22833533.
 

آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 297
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 291


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب