Development and validation of a questionnaire for measuring team cohesion: the Erlangen Team Cohesion at Work Scale (ETC).

Marietta Lieb, Yesim Erim, Eva Morawa
Author Information
  1. Marietta Lieb: Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-N��rnberg (FAU), Schwabachanlage 6, 91054, Erlangen, Germany. Marietta.lieb@uk-erlangen.de. ORCID
  2. Yesim Erim: Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-N��rnberg (FAU), Schwabachanlage 6, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.
  3. Eva Morawa: Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-N��rnberg (FAU), Schwabachanlage 6, 91054, Erlangen, Germany.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Team cohesion is a crucial factor when it comes to job satisfaction and turnovers. However, in Germany, economic measures for team cohesion are scarce. The aim of this study was to develop and validate an economic self-report questionnaire for measuring team cohesion in a work setting in health care.
METHODS: The questionnaire was developed in a stepwise procedure. After item analysis, exploratory factor analysis was conducted to assess factor structure. Reliability was tested via internal consistency. To assess convergent and divergent validity, we applied the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire (COPSOQ), the Perceived Cohesion Scale (PCS), the ENRICHD Social Support Inventory (ESSI), the Effort-Reward Imbalance Scale (ERI) and the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-4), respectively.
RESULTS: The pilot version was tested in a sample of n���=���126 adult nurses. Item analysis resulted in a total of 13 items for the final version. Exploratory factor analysis indicated a two-factor structure. Internal consistency for the two subscales was good, with �����=���0.88 and �����=���0.84, respectively. Convergent validity with the subscales of COPSOQ and PCS was moderate to high (r���=.26- r���=.64). For divergent validity, correlations with the ESSI were low (r���=.01- r���=���-.09). We further found significant correlations with depression symptoms (r=-.22- r=-.37), as well as reward (ERI) (r���=.41 -r���=.47) and effort (ERI) (r=-.20 - r = -.24).
CONCLUSIONS: We developed and validated the Erlangen Team Cohesion at Work Scale (ETC), a self-report measure for team cohesion with very good psychometric properties. Due to its economic deployment, it is suitable for measuring team cohesion in work settings, especially in health care.

Keywords

References

  1. J Am Coll Health. 2009 Mar-Apr;57(5):521-6 [PMID: 19254893]
  2. Emerg Med Australas. 2021 Dec;33(6):1095-1099 [PMID: 34337873]
  3. Nurs Rep. 2021 Oct 19;11(4):787-810 [PMID: 34968269]
  4. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2019 Feb;73(2):117-122 [PMID: 30385516]
  5. J Appl Soc Psychol. 2021 Aug;51(8):793-808 [PMID: 34219802]
  6. J Interprof Care. 2020 Jan-Feb;34(1):140-142 [PMID: 31390225]
  7. J Clin Nurs. 2020 Aug;29(15-16):2762-2764 [PMID: 32344460]
  8. J Psychosom Res. 2021 Feb;141:110343 [PMID: 33360329]
  9. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017 Jun 2;17(1):381 [PMID: 28578673]
  10. Addict Behav. 2020 Nov;110:106510 [PMID: 32623236]
  11. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Feb 10;19(4): [PMID: 35206136]
  12. BMC Nurs. 2022 Jul 4;21(1):174 [PMID: 35787700]
  13. Am J Health Promot. 2003 Jul-Aug;17(6):382-9 [PMID: 12858618]
  14. BMC Public Health. 2021 Jan 22;21(1):195 [PMID: 33482786]
  15. BJPsych Open. 2022 Jun 01;8(4):e97 [PMID: 35642359]
  16. J Psychosom Res. 2005 Feb;58(2):163-71 [PMID: 15820844]
  17. Am J Epidemiol. 2008 May 15;167(10):1143-51 [PMID: 18413361]
  18. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000 Dec 15;25(24):3186-91 [PMID: 11124735]
  19. Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol. 2019 Feb;69(2):72-80 [PMID: 29614528]
  20. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2017 Jun;71(6):606-612 [PMID: 28235820]
  21. J Affect Disord. 2010 Apr;122(1-2):86-95 [PMID: 19616305]
  22. J Occup Med Toxicol. 2021 Nov 16;16(1):50 [PMID: 34784940]
  23. Community Ment Health J. 2022 Oct;58(7):1393-1402 [PMID: 35122580]
  24. Hum Factors. 2015 May;57(3):365-74 [PMID: 25875429]
  25. BMC Nurs. 2022 Apr 11;21(1):86 [PMID: 35410223]
  26. J Adv Nurs. 2006 Aug;55(4):497-509 [PMID: 16866845]
  27. Perspect Psychiatr Care. 2013 Jan;49(1):58-64 [PMID: 23293998]
  28. Ann Intern Med. 2007 Mar 6;146(5):317-25 [PMID: 17339617]
  29. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2024 Sep 26;: [PMID: 39380549]
  30. J Nurs Manag. 2011 Jul;19(5):601-10 [PMID: 21749534]
  31. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2009 Aug;82(8):1005-13 [PMID: 19018554]
  32. Psychiatr Serv. 2004 Dec;55(12):1371-8 [PMID: 15572564]

MeSH Term

Adult
Humans
Reproducibility of Results
Surveys and Questionnaires
Job Satisfaction
Workplace
Self Report
Psychometrics

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0cohesionteamTeamfactoranalysisScaler���=economicquestionnairemeasuringvalidityQuestionnaireCohesionERIr=-Workself-reportworkhealthcaredevelopedassessstructuretestedconsistencydivergentCOPSOQPCSESSIrespectivelyversionsubscalesgood�����=���0correlations-ErlangenETCBACKGROUND:crucialcomesjobsatisfactionturnoversHoweverGermanymeasuresscarceaimstudydevelopvalidatesettingMETHODS:stepwiseprocedureitemexploratoryconductedReliabilityviainternalconvergentappliedCopenhagenPsychosocialPerceivedENRICHDSocialSupportInventoryEffort-RewardImbalancePatientHealthPHQ-4RESULTS:pilotsamplen���=���126adultnursesItemresultedtotal13itemsfinalExploratoryindicatedtwo-factorInternaltwo8884Convergentmoderatehigh26-64low01-r���=���-09foundsignificantdepressionsymptoms22-37wellreward41-r���=47effort20r=24CONCLUSIONS:validatedmeasurepsychometricpropertiesDuedeploymentsuitablesettingsespeciallyDevelopmentvalidationcohesion:Validation

Similar Articles

Cited By