References
- Bakker, A. B., & Albrecht, S. (2018). Work engagement: Current trends. Career Development International, 23, 4–11. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-11-2017-0207
- Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Sanz-Vergel, A. I. (2014). Burnout and work engagement: The JD–R approach. Annual Review of Organisational psychology and Organisational Behaviour, 1, 389-411. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ana-Sanz-Vergel-2/publication/263851330_Burnout_and_Work_Engagement_The_JD-R_Approach/links/0046353c18cb881c27000000/Burnout-and-Work-Engagement-The-JD-R-Approach.pdf doi: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091235
- Bakker, A. B., Schaufeli, W. B., Leiter, M. P., & Taris, T. W. (2008). Work engagement: An emerging concept in occupational health psychology. Work and Stress, 22(3), 187–200. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370802393649
- Banihani, M., Lewis, P., & Syed, J. (2013). Is work engagement gendered? Gender in Management, 28, 400–423. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-01-2013-0005
- Bartlett, M. S. (1954). A note on the multiplying factors for various χ 2 approximations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B. Methodological, 16, 296–298. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1954.tb00174.x
- Caputo, A. (2017). Social desirability bias in self-reported well-being measures: Evidence from an online survey. Universitas Psychologica, 16(2), 245–255. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.upsy16-2.sdsw
- Cerny, B. A., & Kaiser, H. F. (1977). A study of a measure of sampling adequacy for factor-analytic correlation matrices. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 12(1), 43–47. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr1201_3 PMID:26804143
- Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 14(3), 464–504. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701301834
- Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040957 PMID:13245896
- Cucina, J., & Byle, K. (2017). The bifactor model fits better than the higher-order model in more than 90% of comparisons for mental abilities test batteries. Journal of Intelligence, 5(3), 27. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence5030027 PMID:31162418
- de Bruin, G. P., & Henn, C. M. (2013). Dimensionality of the 9-item Utrecht work engagement scale (UWES-9). Psychological Reports, 112(3), 788–799. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2466/01.03.PR0.112.3.788-799 PMID:24245073
- De Bruin, G. P., Hill, C., Henn, C. M., & Muller, K. P. (2013). Dimensionality of the UWES-17: An item response modelling analysis. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 39(2), 1–8. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v39i2.1148
- Dueber, D. M. (2017). Bifactor Indices Calculator: A Microsoft Excel-based tool to calculate various indices relevant to bifactor CFA models. Retrieved from https://uknowledge.uky.edu/edp_tools/1/
- Fong, T. C., & Ho, R. T. (2015). Dimensionality of the 9-item Utrecht Work Engagement Scale revisited: A Bayesian structural equation modeling approach. Journal of Occupational Health, 57, 353–358. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1539/joh.15-0057-OA PMID:25958976
- Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Sage Publications.
- Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of resources. A new attempt at conceptualizing stress. The American Psychologist, 44(3), 513–524. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.3.513 PMID:2648906
- Hobfoll, S. E. (2001). The influence of culture, community, and the nested-self in the stress process: Advancing conservation of resources theory. Applied Psychology, 50(3), 337–421. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/1464-0597.00062
- Hobfoll, S. E. (2011). Conservation of resource caravans and engaged settings. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, 84(1), 116–122. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8325.2010.02016.x
- Hobfoll, S. E., Halbesleben, J., Neveu, J. P., & Westman, M. (2018). Conservation of resources in the organisational context: The reality of resources and their consequences. Annual Review of Organisational Psychology and Organisational Behavior, 5, 103–128. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104640
- Hoffman, L., & Stawski, R. S. (2009). Persons as contexts: Evaluating between-person and within-person effects in longitudinal analysis. Research in Human Development, 6(2-3), 97–120. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/15427600902911189
- Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
- Isbel, B., Stefanidis, K., & Summers, M. J. (2020). Assessing mindfulness: Experimental support for the discriminant validity of breath counting as a measure of mindfulness but not self-report questionnaires. Psychological Assessment, 32(12): 1184. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000957
- Keum, B. T., Miller, M. J., & Inkelas, K. K. (2018). Testing the factor structure and measurement invariance of the PHQ-9 across racially diverse US college students. Psychological assessment, 30(8): 1096. doi: https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000550
- Kulikowski, K. (2017). Do we all agree on how to measure work engagement? Factorial validity of Utrecht Work Engagement Scale as a standard measurement tool - A literature review. International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health, 30, 161–175. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.13075/ijomeh.1896.00947 PMID:28366949
- Lathabhavan, R., Balasubramanian, S. A., & Natarajan, T. (2017). A psychometric analysis of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale in Indian banking sector. Industrial and Commercial Training, 49, 296–302. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/ICT-04-2017-0031
- Lee, S. T. (2018). Testing for Measurement Invariance: Does your measure mean the same thing for different participants? Retrieved from https://www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/testing-for-measurement-invariance
- Littman-Ovadia, H., & Balducci, C. (2013). Psychometric properties of the Hebrew version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9). European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 29(1), 58-63. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2013-03360-009 doi: https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000121
- Lovakov, A. V., Agadullina, E. R., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2017). Psychometric properties of the Russian version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9). Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 10(1), 145–162. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2017.0111
- Madhuku, L. (2001). Gender equality in employment: The legal framework in the case of Zimbabwe. International Labour Organization, Southern Africa Multidisciplinary Advisory Team.
- Mills, M. J., Culbertson, S. S., & Fullagar, C. J. (2012). Conceptualizing and measuring engagement: An analysis of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Journal of Happiness Studies, 13(3), 519–545. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-011-9277-3
- Musek, J. (2017). The general factor of personality: Ten years after. Psihologijske Teme, 26(1), 61–87. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.31820/pt.26.1.4
- Musenze, I. A., & Mayende, T. S. (2020). A psychometric evaluation of the 17 itemed Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-17) in Uganda. African Journal of Psychological Assessment, 2: a9. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4102/ajopa.v2i0.8
- Muthén, B., Kaplan, D., & Hollis, M. (1987). On structural equation modeling with data that are not missing completely at random. Psychometrika, 52(3), 431–462. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294365
- Nerstad, C. G., Richardsen, A. M., & Martinussen, M. (2010). Factorial validity of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) across occupational groups in Norway. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 51(4), 326–333. PMID:20015117
- Petrović, I. B., Vukelić, M., & Čizmić, S. (2017). Work Engagement in Serbia: Psychometric Properties of the Serbian Version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES). Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1799. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01799 PMID:29085319
- Putnick, D. L., & Bornstein, M. H. (2016). Measurement invariance conventions and reporting: The state of the art and future directions for psychological research. Developmental Review, 41, 71–90. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.004 PMID:27942093
- Radic, A., Arjona-Fuentes, J. M., Ariza-Montes, A., Han, H., & Law, R. (2020). Job demands–job resources (JD-R) model, work engagement, and well-being of cruise ship employees. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 88, 102518. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102518
- Reise, S. P., Moore, T. M., & Haviland, M. G. (2010). Bifactor models and rotations: Exploring the extent to which multidimensional data yield univocal scale scores. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92(6), 544–559. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2010.496477 PMID:20954056
- Rodriguez, A., Reise, S. P., & Haviland, M. G. (2016). Evaluating bifactor models: Calculating and interpreting statistical indices. Psychological Methods, 21(2), 137–150. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000045 PMID:26523435
- Rogers, T. A., Bardeen, J. R., Fergus, T. A., & Benfer, N. (2020). Factor structure and incremental utility of the distress tolerance scale: A bifactor analysis. Assessment, 27(2), 297–308. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191118789496 PMID:30027747
- Sautier, L. P., Scherwath, A., Weis, J., Sarkar, S., Bosbach, M., Schendel, M., Ladehoff, N., Koch, U., & Mehnert, A. (2015). Erfassung von Arbeitsengagement bei Patienten mit hämatologischen Malignomen: Die psychometrischen Eigenschaften der deutschen Version der Utrecht Work Engagement Scale 9 (UWES-9). Die Rehabilitation, 54(5), 297–303. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1555912 PMID:26505182
- Schaufeli, W. B. (2013). The measurement of work engagement. In. R. R. Sinclair, M. Wang, & L. E. Tetrick (Eds.). Research methods in occupational health psychology: Measurement, design, and data analysis (pp. 138-153). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2012-25946-010
- Schaufeli, W. B. (2018). Work engagement in Europe. Organisational Dynamics, 47(2), 99–106. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2018.01.003
- Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2004). Job demands, job resources, and their relationship with burnout and engagement: A multi-sample study. Journal of Organisational Behavior, 25(3), 293–315. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/job.248
- Schaufeli, W. B., & Taris, T. W. (2014). A critical review of the job demands-resources model: Implications for improving work and health. In A. Editor, & B. Editor (Eds.). Bridging occupational, organisational and public health (pp. 43–68). Springer. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5640-3_4
- Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701–716. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282471
- Schaufeli, W. B., Shimazu, A., Hakanen, J., Salanova, M., & De Witte, H. (2017). An ultra-short measure for work engagement. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 35(4), 577–591. https://www.wilmarschaufeli.nl/publications/Schaufeli/516.pdf doi: https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000430
- Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(1), 71–92. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015630930326
- Schaufeli, W. B., Shimazu, A., Hakanen, J., Salanova, M., & De Witte, H. (2019). An ultra-short measure for work engagement: The UWES-3 validation across five countries. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 35(4), 577–591. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000430
- Schaufeli, W., & Bakker, A. (2004). UWES Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Preliminary Manual, 1-60.
- Schaufeli, W., & Bakker, A. (2004b). UWES: Utrecht Work Engagement Scale: preliminary manual [version 1.1, December 2004]. Occupational Health Psychology Unit, Utrecht University.
- Shimazu, A., Schaufeli, W. B., Kosugi, S., Suzuki, A., Nashiwa, H., Kato, A., Sakamoto, M., Irimajiri, H., Amano, S., Hirohata, K., Goto, R., & Kitaoka-Higashiguchi, K. (2008). Work engagement in Japan: Validation of the Japanese version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Applied Psychology, 57(3), 510–523. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2008.00333.x
- Shrestha, N. (2021). Factor analysis as a tool for survey analysis. American Journal of Applied Mathematics and Statistics, 9(1), 4–11. doi: https://doi.org/10.12691/ajams-9-1-2
- Song, H. D., Hong, A. J., & Jo, Y. (2021). Psychometric Investigation of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale-17 Using the Rasch Measurement Model. Psychological Reports, 124 (3), 1384–1411. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294120922494 PMID:32408807
- Tomietto, M., Comparcini, D., Simonetti, V., Pelusi, G., Troiani, S., Saarikoski, M., & Cicolini, G. (2016). Work-engaged nurses for a better clinical learning environment: A ward-level analysis. Journal of Nursing Management, 24(4), 475–482. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.12346 PMID:26645780
- Tomietto, M., Paro, E., Sartori, R., Maricchio, R., Clarizia, L., De Lucia, P., Pedrinelli, G., Finos, R., & the PN Nursing Group. (2019). Work engagement and perceived work ability: An evidence-based model to enhance nurses’ well-being. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 75(9), 1933–1942. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13981 PMID:30791116
- Vallières, F., McAuliffe, E., Hyland, P., Galligan, M., & Ghee, A. (2017). Measuring work engagement among community health workers in Sierra Leone: Validating the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Journal of Work and Organisational Psychology, 33(1), 41–46. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rpto.2016.12.001
- Watkins, M. W. (2017). The reliability of multidimensional neuropsychological measures: From alpha to omega. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 31(6-7), 1113–1126. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2017.1317364 PMID:28429633