Occupational StressJCQThe hypothesi

Occupational StressJCQThe hypothesized three-dimensional model for the JCQ (job demands, control and social support) fit the data better (Δχ2 = 531.51, df = 3, p < 0.001, CFI = 0.93, TLI = 0.92, SRMR = 0.1, RMSEA = 0.09) than the uni-dimensional model (CFI = 0.79, TLI = 0.76, SRMR = 0.15, RMSEA = 0.16). In terms of reliability, the demand and the social support sub-scales showed acceptable reliability (Cronbach's αs > 0.7, McDonald's ωts > 0.7), but the control subscale displayed questionable reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.61, but McDonald's ωt = 0.72). Upon further inspection, we identified an item (“Il tuo lavoro richiede di fare la stessa cosa più e più volte?”/ “your job requires you to do the same thing over and over again”) that poorly reflected the construct (standardized pattern coefficient = 0.17). After removing that item, the reliability of the control sub-scale improved (Cronbach's α = 0.65, McDonald's ωt = 0.75), and, to a less extent, the fit of the three-dimensional model improved as well (CFI = 0.94, TLI = 0.94, SRMR = 0.1, RMSEA = 0.09).ERI. The hypothesized three-dimensional model for the ERI (Effort, Reward, Overcommitment) fit the data better (Δχ2 = 467.41, df = 3, p < 0.001, CFI = 0.95, TLI = 0.94, SRMR = 0.08, RMSEA = 0.08) than the uni-dimensional model (CFI = 0.82, TLI = 0.80, SRMR = 0.12, RMSEA = 0.16). In terms of reliability, the reward subscale showed an acceptable reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.76, McDonald's ωt = 0.83), whereas the effort and the overcommitment subscales displayed an almost acceptable reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.67 and 0.69, respectively, McDonald's ωts = 0.68 and 0.74, respectively).