Economic and Industrial Democracy 2

http://eid.sagepub.com/Democracy

Economic and Industrial

http://eid.sagepub.com/content/29/4/565The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/0143831X08096231 2008 29: 565Economic and Industrial Democracy

Claudia Bernhard-Oettel, Kerstin Isaksson and Katalin BellaaghWork: Relationships to Work-Related and General Well-Being

Patterns of Contract Motives and Work Involvement in Temporary

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden

at: can be foundEconomic and Industrial DemocracyAdditional services and information for

http://eid.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://eid.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://eid.sagepub.com/content/29/4/565.refs.htmlCitations:

What is This?

- Oct 21, 2008Version of Record >>

by Alina Maria on October 2, 2014eid.sagepub.comDownloaded from by Alina Maria on October 2, 2014eid.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Economic and Industrial Democracy 2008 Department of EconomicHistory, Uppsala University, Sweden, Vol. 29(4): 565591. DOI:10.1177/0143831X08096231www.sagepublications.com

Patterns of Contract Motives and Work Involvement in Temporary Work: Relationships

to Work-Related and General Well-BeingClaudia Bernhard-Oettel

Stockholm University

Kerstin IsakssonMlardalen University

Katalin BellaaghNational Board of Health and Welfare, Stockholm

Temporary work is characterized by heterogeneity, and contract motives and work involvement are believed to differentiate temporary workers, which may explain their divergence in terms of subjective well-being. Applying a person-oriented approach using questionnaire data from a

sample of Swedish temporary workers (N = 184), this study identified six patterns, characterized by distinct combinations of voluntary and involun-tary contract motives and work involvement. While controlling for demo-graphics, comparative analyses found differences between these patterns in terms of work-related and general well-being. These findings indicate

that knowledge about temporary work and its various consequences is enhanced by considering whole patterns instead of single variables in a

person-oriented approach.

Keywords: alternative employment, contract motives, employee well-being, person- oriented approach, work involvement

The growth of temporary employment has been discussed as a shifting of risks from organizations to the individual (Beck, 2000) since being employed on a short- or fixed-term basis may imply higher job insecurity, a loss of organizational identification and a sense of marginalization (Guest, 2004). Therefore, temporary work has fre-quently been assumed to be a stressful experience that should lead to impaired well-being. Until now, however, the empirical evidence

by Alina Maria on October 2, 2014eid.sagepub.comDownloaded from

566 Economic and Industrial Democracy 29(4)

has been mixed (De Cuyper et al., 2008). Some studies have found that temporary workers report poorer well-being than permanent employees (Benavides et al., 2000; Martens et al., 1999), while other studies report that there is no difference or even better well-being for temporary workers as compared to permanent workers (Claes et al., 2002; Sverke et al., 2000; Virtanen et al., 2002).

This study sought to clarify whether well-being of temporary workers may be better understood if the heterogeneity of individuals motives for taking on temporary contracts and their differences in individual levels of work involvement are taken into account (e.g. Ellingson et al., 1998; Isaksson et al., 2001; Tan and Tan, 2002). These aspects may be of particular relevance since there is growing evidence that traditional conceptions of the low-skilled temporary worker who prefers perma-nent employment are challenged by the increasing number of knowl-edge workers (Guest, 2004) who prefer flexibility (Marler et al., 2002) and choose temporary work as a lifestyle (Krausz, 2000). As far as con-sequences are concerned, a good fit of employment to personal prefe-rences and motivation has been found to affect job attitudes positively (Ellingson et al., 1998; Krausz, 2000; Tan and Tan, 2002) and seems to reduce role stress (Krausz, 2000). Furthermore, the centrality of work in an individuals life has earlier been discussed as a possible buffer against negative consequences of job insecurity (Sverke et al., 2002). Surprisingly few studies, however, have closely investigated the pos-sible effects of motives and involvement on well-being of temporary employees. Moreover, most previous analyses have focused on the effects of single factors (Ellingson et al., 1998; Krausz, 2000; for an exception, see De Jong et al., in press) and thereby overlooked the pos-sibility that workers motives for wanting temporary contracts, as well as their willingness to be involved in their work, may interact and shape certain patterns which may differentiate temporary workers and, subse-quently, their well-being.

This study aims to add to earlier research using an individual-based pattern approach to capture heterogeneity among temporary employ-ees (see, for example, Bernhard and Sverke, 2003; De Jong et al., in press; Marler et al., 2002; Silla et al., 2005). The particular contribution of this study is twofold: it investigates patterns of individual voluntary and involuntary contract motives in combination with work involvement and it is one of the first to explore the links these patterns may have with subjective well-being.


Bernhard-Oettel et al.: Temporary Work 567

Contract Motives and Work Involvement in Temporary Work

Previous research on temporary workers has uncovered a plethora of motives or reasons for taking on non-permanent employment (De Cuyper et al., 2005). Generally, these motives can be dichotomized into volun-tary vs involuntary (Ellingson et al., 1998).

Voluntary motives emphasize the advantages of flexibility from an employees perspective. Here, family-related motives are frequently mentioned, as the freedom and flexible time schedules of temporary assignments might facilitate the organization of childcare or other fam-ily obligations (Tan and Tan, 2002). This has been assumed to be par-ticularly attractive for women (Nollen, 1996). Also, temporary work is sometimes seen as a chance to bring in an extra income (Tan and Tan, 2002) or to increase wages (Morris and Vekker, 2001). Young individ-uals, or individuals who recently completed education, commonly work as temporaries while being in school or training (Bernasek and Kinnear, 1999; DiNatale, 2001), or because they want to gain work experi-ence in diffe rent organizations and improve their skills and knowledge (Nollen, 1996; Tan and Tan, 2002). Finally, some individuals express a personal prefe rence for temporary work that is motivated by a dis-like for the degree of commitment involved in permanent employment (Guest, 2004). However, labour statistics from the US and Europe reveal that only about 30 percent of temporary workers cite predominantly voluntary motives for seeking this form of employment (Guest, 2004).

Involuntary motives relate to circumstances in which individuals accept temporary contracts due to lack of other, more permanent alterna-tives (Morris and Vekker, 2001). Such motives may be to avoid unem-ployment (Bellaagh and Isaksson, 1999), to use temporary employment as a means to get back into the labour market (Tan and Tan, 2002) or to get permanent employment (DiNatale, 2001). The motive to re-enter the labour market has sometimes also been called the stepping-stone motive (De Jong et al., in press). Several empirical studies in Europe and North America reveal that a majority of temporary workers are com-pelled to accept whatever assignment there is in order to avoid unem-ployment (De Cuyper et al., 2005).

However, rather than being an either/or distinction, there is growing evidence that both types of motives may coexist in various combinations. Earlier studies found moderate correlations between scales capturing voluntary and involuntary motives (Ellingson et al., 1998; Tan and Tan, 2002). A recent classification of temporary workers used three single motives chosen on theoretical grounds to reflect involuntary, voluntary



and a stepping-stone motive (De Jong et al., in press). Results of this classification show that motives can combine in several ways. One group of involuntary temps could be distinguished from a group reporting rela-tively low levels on all motives, and a third group that combined invo-luntary and stepping-stone motives.

Associations between motives and individual characteristics such as gender, age, education or family situation have been well documented (see, for example, DiNatale, 2001; Wiens-Tuers and Hill, 2002), even though the typology reported by De Jong et al. (in press) found work-related variables (e.g. position) to be more important than sociodemo-graphic factors (e.g. gender). In contrast, little research has paid attention to the psychological consequences of various motives and, when it has, it has focused on satisfaction and performance aspects (Ellingson et al., 1998; Tan and Tan, 2002). It seems plausible, however, that choosing temporary employment entirely on voluntary grounds may give a feel-ing of being in control over ones life and career (Krausz, 2000), which is known to be associated with well-being (Marler et al., 2002). Work stress and well-being have been analysed in two earlier studies, but here temporary workers were divided into voluntary vs involuntary with-out considering that both types of motives may coexist (see, for example, Krausz, 2000; Silla et al., 2005). Consequently, what a mix of voluntary and involuntary motives for taking on temporary assignments implies for subjective well-being and health remains largely unanswered.

Earlier studies on temporary workers contract preferences have com-bined their analyses with skill levels and wage differences (Marler et al., 2002) or perceived employability (Silla et al., 2005) and found that these aspects are not unrelated to each other. In this article, we suggest that another aspect to consider in regard to voluntary and involuntary contract motives and their relationship to subjective well-being is the individual level of work involvement. Work involvement is defined as a normative belief about the value of work in ones life (Kanungo, 1982: 342), which is supposed to arise as a function of past cultural condi-tions and socialization. The work involvement of temporary workers has rarely been studied; however, the level of work involvement can be expected to vary within the temporary workforce in a similar way as for permanent workers, given the divergences in temporaries background variables (Bernhard and Sverke, 2003). Temporary work is mostly allo-cated to the youngest and oldest workers; it is more typical for fairly low or fairly highly educated individuals, and women are overrepresented in temporary employment (OECD, 2002). Research on work involve-ment has found relationships between such individual factors and work



involvement; as for instance older workers are generally found to report higher work commitment (Gallie et al., 1998; Isaksson, 1990), and work involvement is positively related to educational level (Gallie et al., 1998). Although decreasing when the dual-income earners become the norm (Isaksson et al., 2004), gender differences also still seem to exist for work involvement, in line with traditional values of male breadwinners (Nswall, 2004). Thus, it is conceivable that, for example, older male temporary workers have a higher work involvement than women of the same age, or that work is less important for temporarily working high school students than for temporary workers with a completed education and high career aspirations.

The links between work involvement, temporary employment and well-being have scarcely been studied in previous research. One Swedish study comparing workers at a temporary agency and on-call workers (Isaksson et al., 2001) found that contract motives and work involvement differed between these two employment groups. Studies of unemployed samples have revealed that this factor is important for well-being especially in a situation when choices are limited (Isaksson et al., 2004). For example, it has been found that a high degree of work involvement may make it difficult to adapt to unemployment (e.g. Warr and Jackson, 1985), which should then have a negative impact on well-being. Drawing parallels to these results, it may be plausible that involuntary temporary workers with high work involvement may have difficulties coping with the threat of unemployment that is inherent in time-limited contracts. However, since the importance of work involvement and contract motives in rela-tion to temporary workers well-being and distress is largely unclear, a number of alternative hypotheses are conceivable. For example, given that work involvement is known to influence attitudes and health posi-tively, it might buffer against negative consequences of job insecurity (Sverke et al., 2002), and this may particularly be the case when insecure employment is taken involuntarily.

The Study of Patterns

Analyses of the linear associations between single variables have been the most commonly used approach for identifying the predictors of well-being for temporary workers. However, in these analyses ques-tions still remain about the possible impact of combinations of factors, including whether it is possible to have both involuntary and voluntary motives when accepting a certain contract or whether one or the other



tends to be more pronounced. Second, with respect to the consequences for well-being, it is unclear how the influence of each variable changes when they interact. In other words, the effects of having involuntary contract motives are unknown when they are combined with a high level of work involvement. Moreover, most multivariate studies use a linear statistical model assuming that the effects indeed are linear and additive. Whether or not this is the case is rarely tested.

In this light, it is only recently that the holistic view has been recon-sidered as an alternative viewpoint, which is mainly due to developments in its content, theory and methodology (Bergman et al., 2003). In this study, we chose to use a more holistic and multivariate approach in order to try to account for the complex reality that individuals expe-rience. With the individual being the entity under study (Baltes and Nesselroade, 1979: 1), a pattern approach offers better insight into the functioning totality that is formed by the interactions of the elements involved (Bergman and Magnusson, 1997). Hence, the specific patterns of elements under study become the main analytic units for an investiga-tion of individual differences (Magnusson, 1998). This way, heteroge-neity among temporary workers is accounted for by looking at patterns of variables, rather than studying each one of the factors separately or as interaction terms in a hierarchical system that would generally be very difficult to interpret.

Originally the pattern approach was applied in the developmental sciences, but even in the context of work-life studies it is now being used more frequently. Attempting to capture the heterogeneity in the temporary workforce, researchers have successfully identified patterns of individual background characteristics and related divergence in atti-tudes and well-being (Bernhard and Sverke, 2003). Marler et al. (2002) analysed diversity of the temporary workforce based on contract prefer-ences and skills, but also relations to age, wages and job alternatives. Altogether, this differentiated boundaryless workers who combined high voluntary motives with high skills from traditional temporaries, who were low skilled and preferring permanent employment. Rather simi-larly, a taxonomy of temporary workers along a two two table of the voluntaryinvoluntary dichotomy in combination with employability has been suggested and tested against well-being and satisfaction measures (Silla et al., 2005). A recent classification challenges the assumption that employment preferences are strictly voluntary vs involuntary (De Jong et al., in press); however, here, possible outcomes in terms of health and well-being were not investigated.



Aims

Overall, the aims of the present study are twofold, thereby extending previous research in several ways. The first aim is to identify patterns among temporary workers based on their voluntary and involuntary contract motives and work involvement, using an individual-oriented approach. Thus, this study goes beyond a dichotomy of a voluntary vs involuntary dimension and includes work involvement as a variable of relevance that has rarely been studied before in the temporary workforce. Also, using scales on both voluntary and involuntary motives, we adopt a broader approach capturing the variety of possible reasons for accept-ing certain contract conditions, which should increase reliability of the patterns found.

The second aim is to explore how these patterns of motives and work involvement differ on indicators of subjective work-related well-being (moods of anxiety and depression prior to work, work-related irritation and positive workhome interference) and general well-being (general health and life satisfaction). The outcomes were chosen to capture proxi-mal, work-related variables as well as more distal, individual long-term correlates (as suggested by Sverke et al., 2002). Limited evidence exists on the possible link between well-being, voluntary and involuntary con-tract motives, and work involvement, and here, this article makes another particular contribution to add to the understanding of temporary work and its potential implications.

Generally, earlier research guided our expectation that a high level of voluntary motives and work involvement in combination with low levels of involuntary contract motives would have positive associa-tions with well-being, whereas the opposite pattern may relate to more negative outcomes. However, largely unknown and of particular interest in this study is whether or not contradictory combinations (e.g. high level of involuntary motives combined with high volun-tary motives and/or work involvement) carry more or fewer risks in terms of workers well-being than generally positive or negative combinations.

When relating different patterns to well-being indicators, possible con-founding individual and work-related background characteristics such as age, gender, education, occupation and type of employment contract were controlled for, since they are well-researched correlates of well-being (Diener et al., 1999).



Methods

Data Collection and Sample Characteristics

The data used in this study were collected in 2004 by surveying employees from three different sectors: manufacturing, education and retail. During the time of data collection, unemployment rates in Sweden were on the rise, lying a little over 5 percent while at the same time employment growth diminished (SCB, 2004). Around 13 percent of all employment contracts were signed on a temporary basis (SCB, 2004). With respect to type of temporary employment, fixed-term arrangements are most common in Sweden, followed by on-call contracts of short duration (Bernhard-Oettel and Isaksson, 2005). In terms of data collec-tion procedure, questionnaires were distributed at the workplace. Along with the questionnaire, an accompanying letter explained the studys pur-pose and assured that participation was voluntary and responses would be kept confidential. The completed questionnaires were either returned to the research group in sealed envelopes or the sealed envelopes were collected by a coordinator in the company who forwarded them to the research group after the end of the prespecified deadline. Up to three reminders were given to employees, resulting in an overall response rate of 52 percent.

The final sample used for pattern analysis of motives and work involvement comprised 184 persons, of which 174 had completed all questions related to well-being. The respondents average age was 34 years (SD = 12.3), and slightly more women (53 percent) than men par-ticipated. Almost two out of three had an academic degree (64 percent), and the majority lived with a partner (52 percent). About one out of every four temporary workers in this sample (24 percent) were employed on-call to fill short-term vacancies for a few hours or days (on very short notice), but the majority (76 percent) had a fixed-term contract. The average working time was 29 hours per week, and many of the participants were white-collar workers (59 percent). Almost half of the sample (46 percent) worked in the educational sector, one-third in the food industry (32 percent) and only a minority (22 percent) in retail.

Measures

Table 1 presents descriptive statistics, estimates of Cronbachs alpha and the intercorrelations of all study variables. All indices have been used



and validated in earlier research in different employment settings, and in different types of contracts (see, for example, Clinton et al., 2005; Isaksson et al., 2003). Factor analyses in this sample showed that all measures had single-factor structures and demonstrated satisfactory reli-abilities of .70 or above, except for the index of involuntary contract motives ( = .60), which was slightly below the preferred limit, but was kept for theoretical reasons. Unless stated otherwise, respondents were asked to indicate their agreement on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Pattern variables. Voluntary motives for temporary contract included four items, corresponding to aspects of family, economy, self-improvement and personal preferences that resulted in a voluntary choice of temporary employment, and were adapted from Tan and Tan (2002). For instance, one item read: I have a non-permanent contract because it gives me more freedom. Involuntary motives for a temporary contract were adapted from Tan and Tan (2002), and measured by three items capturing the difficulty in finding permanent employment, e.g. I have a non-permanent contract because it was the only type of contract I could get. Work involvement was measured by three items from Kanungo (1982), e.g. The most important things that happen to me involve work.

Work-related well-being. Two scales were chosen to indicate how workers feel prior to going to work. The first scale, work-related anxiety, consisted of five items (Warr, 1990), asking how often respondents had felt, e.g. tense or uneasy before going to work in the last few weeks. In the second scale, depressive moods prior to going to work were mea-sured with three items of Warrs (1990) work-related depression scale that asked how often they had felt, e.g. depressed or miserable before going to work in the last few weeks. Furthermore, two scales were chosen to measure how work influenced life after coming home from work. Work-related irritation (Mohr et al., 2006) was measured by four items regarding the thoughts and emotions associated with problems at work, e.g. When I come home tired after work, I feel irritable. Positive workhome interference (Wagena and Geurts, 2000) was measured by four items, e.g. How often does it happen that you come home cheer-fully after a successful day at work, positively affecting the atmosphere at home?

General well-being. General health was measured using Wares (1999) general health scale of five items, including, e.g. I seem to get sick a


574 Economic and Industrial Democracy 29(4)TA

BLE

1C

orre

latio

ns, M

eans

and

Sta

ndar

d D

evia

tions

for

All

Vari

able

s and

-R

elia

bilit

ies f

or

All

Scal

es (N

=

174

)

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

1

Gen

der (

1 = fe

mal

e)

2

Age

.13

3

Educ

atio

n .22

.33

(1

= a

cade

mic

) 4

Mar

ital s

tatu

s

.03

.18

.10

(1

= c

oha

bitin

g)

5

Type

of c

ontra

ct

.10

.01

.14

.13

(1

= o

n-c

all c

ontr

act)

6

Wee

kly

work

ing

.23

.31

.31

.14

.39

ho

urs

7

Work

stat

us

.30

.36

.41

.13

.00

.22

(1

= w

hite

-col

lar

w

ork

er)

8

Sect

or

food

.28

.41

.37

.09

.24

.41

.72

in

dustr

y

9

Sect

or

edu

catio

n

.20

.59

.54

.16

.12

.29

.69

.66

10 V

olu

ntar

y co

ntr

act

.06

.

05

.02

.18

.19

.22

.16

.09

.15

m

otiv

es

11 I

nvolu

ntar

y co

ntr

act

.08

.1

1 .0

8 .02

.23

.09

.09

.05

.24

.12

m

otiv

es

12 W

ork

involv

emen

t .04

.24

.05

.18

.14

.02

.03

.12

.1

0 .0

4

.01

13 W

ork

-rela

ted

irrita

tion

.21

.0

3 .1

6 .05

.06

.13

.34

.28

.28

.08

.24

.01

14 P

ositi

ve

work

hom

e .06

.26

.08

.1

6

.13

.14

.2

2

.19

.24

.16

. .24

.34

.08

in

terfe

renc

e



15 M

ood

prio

r to

work

.05

.18

.01

.03

.05

.14

.14

-.13

.0

5 .0

4 .0

7

.04

.55

.0

1

an

xie

ty

16 M

ood

prio

r to

work

.15

.39

.35

.15

.02

.26

.37

.33

.

41

.06

.

09

.33

.11

.

38

.38

de

pres

sion

17 G

ener

al h

ealth

.10

.09

.09

.0

6

.08

.08

.0

5 .12

.07

.02

.12

.11

.37

.14

.39

.28

18 L

ife sa

tisfa

ctio

n .01

.15

.05

.28

.11

.06

.04

.05

.1

4 .0

6

.06

.21

.41

.2

9

.40

.44

.37

M

.53

33

.57

.64

.52

.2

4 28

.99

.59

.3

2 .49

2.

57

3.25

2.

46

2.94

2.

46

2.32

2.

42

3.99

4.9

3 SD

.50

12

.21

.48

.50

.43

14.

10

.49

.47

.50

1.

03

1.09

.75

1.

41

.83

.8

2 .93

.7

4 1.

24

.71

.60

.71

.86

.82

.85

.86

.72

.86

For

r

.15

p

.05

; for

r

.20

p

.01

. Sc

ale

rang

e: 0

1 (v

aria

bles

1, 3

5, 7

9 [f

or th

ese v

aria

bles

the

mea

n va

lue

sym

boliz

es th

e pr

opor

tion

scor

ing

1]), 1

5 (v

aria

bles

10

17), 1

7 (v

aria

ble

18), y

ears

(varia

bles

2), h

ours/

week

(var

iabl

e 6).



little easier than other people. Life satisfaction was measured using five items of Guest and Conways (1998) scale, including, e.g. How satisfied are you with your life in general? For each of these five items assessing life satisfaction, respondents had to score their answer on a seven-point scale ranging from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 7 (very satisfied).

Confirmatory factor analysis showed that the different measures of well-being represented different latent constructs (2 (284) = 767.6, p < .001, RMSEA = .09, GFI = .76), with the six-factor model clearly outperforming possible alternative models specifying up to five different factors of well-being.

Individual and work-related background variables. Age was mea-sured in years. Weekly working hours were assessed by respondents reporting their average working hours per week. Gender (1 = female, 0 = male), education (1 = academic, 0 = other), marital status (1 = cohabiting, 0 = other), type of temporary contract (1 = on-call contract, 0 = fixed-term contract) and work status (1 = white-collar worker, 0 = blue-collar worker) were dummy variables. Two categorical variables were constructed, representing the most frequent sectors: the educational sector (1 = educational sector, 0 = other) and food industry (1 = food industry, 0 = other). Financial responsibility and organizational tenure were not included as control factors, since neither of those two variables correlated with any of the outcome variables nor significantly differed among the patterns of temporary workers.

Statistical Analysis

Before starting the data analysis, we tested whether the samples from three different sectors can be clustered and analysed jointly. The test (Boxs M = 15.29, p = .25) revealed that the variancecovariance matri-ces of voluntary and involuntary contract motives and work involvement were not significantly different across sectors; thus, data from the educa-tional sector, the food sector and the retail sector were merged.

For the purpose of identifying patterns with small within-group dif-ferences regarding contract motives and involvement, a cluster analysis was performed using the software SLEIPNER 2.1, a statistical pack-age for person-oriented analysis (Bergman et al., 2003). Classificatory analysis in SLEIPNER can be performed as in other statistical packages; however, SLEIPNER provides more detailed information about cluster homogeneity and the overall amount of explained variance. Moreover,



the program facilitates preprocessing data preparation in order to ensure that assumptions for the use of cluster analysis were met. Accordingly, data were screened and descriptive information about the multivariate data set was inspected with a special focus on the configuration of miss-ing values. The imputation of missing values was performed, using a close neighbour case to replace the missing value in an incomplete case. Imputation was restricted to one missing value per case, and this procedure resulted in the imputation of values in 12 cases. Finally, a residual analysis was used to detect and delete multivariate outliers, and two cases were omitted from further analysis.

With this complete and outlier-free data set (N = 184), cluster analy-sis was performed using standardized variable values and employing WARDs method of hierarchical cluster analysis. In this procedure, each individual initially represents a cluster, and clusters that produce the smallest increase of the overall sum of squared within-cluster Euclidian distances are merged at each step until all cases go together in one cluster. Cluster analysis procedures provide no statistical stop criteria when the best solution is found, but to obtain a manageable number of clusters regarding the number of cases and variables of our data, the last 10 itera-tions were inspected. The final decision on the number of clusters was based on the guidelines provided by Bergman et al. (2003): (1) the solu-tion selected has to be judged theoretically meaningful; (2) a sudden drop in the explained error sum of squares (ESS) of the solution may indicate that too few clusters have been reached; and (3) the explained ESS for the chosen cluster solution should preferably exceed two-thirds and minimally 50 percent of the total ESS in the one-cluster solution (Bergman, pers. comm.). Furthermore, (4) the homogeneity coefficients for each cluster should be inspected and, preferably, be under 1.00. A final cluster solution based on these guidelines cannot normally be expected to be fewer than 5 and should for practical reasons not exceed 15 (Bergman et al., 2003).

In order to analyse whether the different patterns in the chosen clus-ter solution corresponded to differences in work-related or general well-being, two separate multivariate analyses of covariance (MANCOVA) were performed on (1) work-related and (2) general well-being, while controlling for background characteristics. To investigate the multivari-ate effects in more detail, univariate F-tests were subsequently employed. Given that the indicators of well-being in each MANCOVA correlated, RoyBargman step down F-tests were then used to account for related dependent variables. In this procedure, a variable that has been tested for group differences is added to the covariates, which allows relating them to the next dependent variable tested. The dependent variables were tested



in the order they are presented in Table 1. Finally, Bonferroni post hoc tests were utilized for the investigation of between-group differences.

To ensure that the assumptions for the use of covariance analyses were met, data were screened for multicollinearity, normality, outliers and homogeneity of variancecovariance matrices (Boxs M test). The results justified the use of the above-described analyses.

Results

Patterns of Voluntary and Involuntary Contract Motives and Work Involvement

The cluster analysis results for the final 10 iterations, in terms of cluster size (range of n), ESS (value and decrease) and homogeneity coefficients (range and n above 1.00), are shown in Table 2.

As can be seen, the explained ESS decreased sharply when all cases were merged into five or fewer clusters. Whereas the explained variance is still close to the required two-thirds in the six-cluster solution, it fell below the required absolute minimum of 50 percent in the four-cluster solution. Two of the clusters in the six-cluster solution had a homoge-neity coefficient slightly above 1.00, and this result remained the same until all cases were merged into four clusters. Cluster sizes became slightly more equal (range 1229) after the eight-cluster solution, before

TABLE 2Cluster Size (Range of N), ESS (Value and Decrease) and Homogeneity Coefficients

(Range and N above 1.00) for the Last 10 IterationsCluster Cluster Size Explained ESS Homogeneity Coefficients

Solution (Range n) Value Decrease Range n >1.0010 clusters 529 74.93 .26.90 09 clusters 1229 72.55 4.37 .35.93 08 clusters 1232 69.14 6.23 .351.11 17 clusters 1248 65.68 6.34 .441.11 16 clusters 1248 61.68 6.99 .441.12 25 clusters 1254 55.95 10.81 .591.12 24 clusters 12102 48.34 13.93 .591.12 33 clusters 38102 38.80 17.46 1.061.76 32 clusters 82102 20.59 33.33 1.062.27 21 cluster 184 0 37.67 2.00 1



large differences in cluster size appeared in the four-cluster solution. Considering all the criteria, the six-cluster solution was found to meet all statistical criteria in the most appropriate way.

Description of the Six Different Cluster Profiles

The inspection of the cluster profiles (Figure 1) provided a meaningful and distinct classification for the six-cluster solution, because all patterns differed from each other in shape, magnitude, or both. The identified patterns are described in more detail below.

Cluster 1 (n = 27): the involuntaries. The motives for working in 8 temporary employment were more often involuntary than voluntary for individuals with this pattern. Also, they expressed a relatively low level of work involvement.

Cluster 2 (n = 32): the balanced. Respondents with this pat-tern appeared to express balanced motives for taking on temporary

FIGURE 1Profiles in the Six-Cluster Solution in Voluntary and Involuntary, Contract Motives

and Work Involvement

1

2

3

4

5

Vol. contract motives Invol. contract motives Work involvement

C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6



employment, since voluntary and involuntary contract motives were reported equally often. Also, as compared to other patterns, the level of work involvement was rather high.

Cluster 3 (n = 38): the accepters. Compared to all other groups, this pattern had a shape characterized by the lowest level of involuntary motives of all the groups, whereas both work involvement and voluntary contract motives were higher. However, the means of both motive scales are below the scale midpoint, expressing more of an acceptance rather than a deliberateness regarding motives or involvement.

Cluster 4 (n = 27): the misplaced. Individuals with this pattern signed a temporary contract largely because of involuntary contract motives. Furthermore, they reported very low levels of voluntary con-tract motives and work involvement as compared to the others.

Cluster 5 (n = 12): the involved. This pattern comprised only 12 individuals, who had a rather unexpected combination of pattern vari-ables. This pattern showed the highest level of work involvement, but similar to the misplaced pattern, this pattern of the involved was typi-cally characterized by involuntary temporary work.

Cluster 6 (n = 48): the indifferent. Respondents with this pat-tern expressed a tendency for more involuntary than voluntary contract motives. However, these motives did not differ much, and with a magni-tude close to the scale midpoint, there appears to be no clear preference. In contrast, the level of work involvement was among the lowest of all groups.

Comparisons on individual and work-related demographics showed dif-ferences with respect to age (F = 4.82, p < .001), type of temporary contract (2 = 16.02, p < .01), the proportion working in the educational sector (2 = 17.51, p < .01) and the retail sector (2 = 14.17, p < .01). More specifically, the indifferent, the misplaced and the accepters were on average 30 years old whereas the involved had an average age of 46 years. The accepters and the indifferent had a higher propor-tion of on-call contract workers than the balanced and the misplaced, who were mostly employed on a fixed-term basis. Most of the involved worked in the educational sector, and the accepters had the largest share of retail workers compared to all other clusters. No differences between the clusters were found with respect to education or gender.



Differences in Work-Related and General Well-Being

The mean values of all six well-being indicators are presented and compared in Table 3. Based on estimated marginal means, controlling for covariates, a multivariate effect of the patterns was found in the MANCOVAs of work-related (multivariate F[20,636] = 2.76, p < .01) and general well-being indicators (multivariate F[10,318] = 4.11, p < .001). When the F-tests were conducted, using the Roy Bargman stepdown procedure, the effects found in the univariate F-tests remained signifi-cant, with the exception of work-related irritation. More specifically, significant differences were reported for mood of anxiety (F[5,161] = 2.83, p < .05), mood of depression (F[5,160] = 2.97, p < .05), positive workhome interference (F[5,158] = 3.35, p < .01), general health (F[5,161] = 6.02, p < .001) and life satisfaction (F[6,160] = 2.28, p


TABL

E 3

Mea

n D

iffer

ence

s of P

att

ern

s in

Work

-Rel

ated

and

Gen

eral

Wel

l-Bei

ng B

ased

on

Estim

ated

Mar

gina

l Mea

ns (M

ANCO

VA), (N

=

174

)

C1

C2

C3

C4

C5

C6

Uni

vari

ate

Step

dow

n

Mea

n

Involu

n-

Bala

nced

A

ccep

ters

M

ispla

ced

Involv

ed

Indi

ffere

nt

F

F

Com

pari

son

ta

ries

N

27

32

38

27

12

48

Work

-rel

ated

wel

l-bei

ng

Moo

d pr

ior t

o w

ork

: anx

iety

2.

22

2.54

1.

96

2.34

2.

25

2.57

2.

83*

2.83

* 3

6M

ood

prio

r to

work

: dep

ress

ion

2.55

2.

17

2.28

2.

69

1.96

2.

64

2.66

* 2.

97*

?W

ork

-rela

ted

irrita

tion

2.78

3.

04

2.28

2.

93

3.01

3.

44

3.57

**

1.61

3

6Po

sitiv

e w

ork

hom

e 2.

19

2.92

2.

21

2.23

3.

01

2.52

5.

07**

* 3.

35**

1

2; 1

5;

inte

rfere

nce

23;

24

Gen

eral

wel

l-bei

ng

Gen

eral

hea

lth

4.17

3.

98

4.31

3.

76

4.51

3.

64

6.02

***

6.02

***

16,

36

;

5

6; 3

4Li

fe sa

tisfa

ctio

n 4.

57

5.14

5.

51

4.60

5.

04

4.68

3.

29**

2.

28*

13;

63

* p

.05

; **

p

.01

; ***

p

.00

1.Co

var

iate

s (ag

e, ge

nder,

ed

ucat

ion,

mar

ital s

tatu

s, ty

pe o

f tem

pora

ry c

ontra

ct, w

eekl

y w

ork

ing

hour

s, w

ork

stat

us, e

duca

tiona

l sec

tor,

food

indu

stry)

are

eval

uate

d at

the

mea

n va

lues

for t

he to

tal s

ampl

e.



a certain contract arrangement and their general view of the role work should play in their lives. Six subgroups could be differentiated in the sample studied on the basis of both statistical criteria and the require-ment of meaningful interpretation (see Bergman et al., 2003). None of the groups resembled the typical free workers (Guest, 2004: 2) or boundaryless workers (Marler et al., 2002: 425), where having a dis-tinct preference for a temporary contract is a defining aspect. Perhaps the balanced pattern may be seen as most similar to that of boundaryless temporary workers, insofar as its members had relatively high levels of voluntary contract motives. However, they reported an almost equally high level of involuntary motives. Voluntary motives compared favour-ably to invo luntary contract motives in only one group (the accepters); however, the magnitude of these motives resembled an acceptance more than true preference for temporary assignments. All other four groups identified in the sample reported a dislike of the temporary contract, but the magnitude of the involuntary motives, the relative difference between involuntary and voluntary motives and the combination with high, neu-tral or low levels of work involvement differed, and thus, resulted in four distinct profiles. Thus, in line with earlier studies, we conclude that the majority of the temporary workers reported an involuntary as com-pared to voluntary motivation for accepting the temporary contract (De Cuyper et al., 2005). However, our findings also revealed the existence of patterns in which both voluntary and involuntary motives can occur together for individuals, which is most pronounced in the balanced group or the group of the indifferent. The findings thus add to other recent evidence (see, for example, De Jong et al., in press; Tan and Tan, 2002) showing that contract motives may be inappropriately depicted if they are merely categorized as either voluntary or involuntary (see, for example, Krausz, 2000). Furthermore, it appears that work involvement indeed seems to be a rather general construct, not necessarily guiding contract choices. The majority of the groups expressed a low or neutral level of work involvement, and yet they differed in their configuration of contract motives. Also, among those with rather high work involve-ment, we find both a group with relatively balanced voluntary and invol-untary motives (the balanced), and a small group of individuals (the involved) who were involuntarily contracted on a temporary basis. As in earlier typologies involving motives, we also find differences in background characteristics, particularly with respect to age (Marler et al., 2002; Silla et al., 2005) and work-related demographics (De Jong et al., in press) such as type of employment contract and sector representation. In contrast to these studies, no differences in educational level or gender



existed, but since typologies were built on different input data and using different classification techniques, an exact replication of earlier results may perhaps not be expected.

Going beyond the scope of earlier typology tests that related temporary workers motives to their characteristics, this study adds an important component, since it is one of the few to empirically address the ques-tion of how certain patterns of motives and involvement relate to the subjective well-being of temporary workers. Interestingly, comparing the groups on work-related and general well-being showed significant differences in five of six indicators tested. Compared to the insignificant or rather small bivariate correlations between the variables, the contri-bution of the analysis of patterns becomes evident. The group labelled the indifferent in particular, and also the misplaced to a lesser degree, report the least favourable results with respect to both work-related and more general indicators of well-being. In contrast, positive tendencies were found for the group of the balanced and the involved, who expressed most positive workhome interference, and tended to report the lowest levels of depressive mood prior to work. In between these clear positive or negative trends, we find two groups, the accepters and the involuntaries, for whom conclusions are somewhat more difficult. The accepters report favourably in terms of their general well-being and express low levels of prior- to-work anxiety and work-related irrita-tion. However, they are also found to be among the groups with lowest positive workhome interfe rence. The involuntaries report favourably on general health, but when it comes to life satisfaction and positive workhome interference, unfavourable results comparable to the mis-placed or the indifferent are revealed. We therefore conclude that the involuntaries seem to show more negative than positive tendencies, whereas the accepters tend to show more positive than negative trends. The fact that the differences in well-being reached significance when controlling for individual and work-related background characteristics, and when controlling for possible overlap between the well-being indi-cators, lends further credibility to our findings.

Taking a closer look at the shapes and magnitude of the patterns, some interesting observations can be made in relation to well-being results. The balanced and the indifferent have almost identical levels of invo-luntary contract motives, and the very same is true for the involved and the misplaced. However, in each of these pairs, the groups in which this involuntary choice is equalled by high work involvement and/or voluntary contract motivation, work-related and general well-being reports are more favourable. This result supports the idea that



work involvement indeed may be a buffer factor when job insecurity is present (see Sverke et al., 2002). Thus, work involvement seems to counterbalance high involuntariness in contract motives rather than mak-ing adjustments to job insecurity and threat of job loss more difficult, as, for example, parallels to unemployment research would suggest. More evidence for the conclusion that the whole pattern matters and associates with subjective well-being is provided when comparing the accepters and the involuntaries. Both groups have almost identical work involve-ment values; however, their motive combinations mirror each other. In terms of well-being, the group that signed the contract more voluntarily tends to report better results.

Based on these findings, several conclusions can be drawn. First, this study illustrates that contract motives and work involvement may not only relate to aspects of satisfaction and performance (as has been found previously, for example, by Ellingson et al., 1998; Tan and Tan, 2002), but may also be particularly when their combined effect is seen in different patterns an important key to understanding the variations in temporary workers individual well-being. Second, effects were found both for proximal and distal outcomes (see Sverke et al., 2002), thus, working under circumstances that do not match an individuals preferences and values does not only associate with unfa-vourable spillover directly before or after work, it also even relates to more generalized indicators of subjective well-being. Third, for the management of temporary workers, several points in these findings may be of particular interest. First, managers may benefit from trying to understand what drives their temporary workforce, and what role these workers ascribe to work in their lives, since that may enable more suitable motivation and guidance corresponding to individual needs, which may be rather heterogeneous in this workforce. Also, tempo-rary work on involuntary grounds may not necessarily imply negative consequences for the individual and organization, as long as there is a balance with voluntary motives or a general interest in work as such. We furthermore feel tempted to conclude that the type of the truly voluntary temporary worker seems to be rather the exception than the norm. Finally, a very interesting observation of this study is that tem-porary work seems to be most problematic for those who ascribe work a less central role in their lives, but may feel forced to go the extra mile in order to ensure that their contract is renewed, or that employment becomes permanent.



Methodological Considerations

There are some limitations to this study that need to be addressed, since they may affect the conclusions that can be drawn. First, this study is based on cross-sectional data, which unfortunately hampered causal infe rences. However, the results carry important meaning in that they help to discover associations for which longitudinal tests are indicated. Second, since well-being was measured with self-reported data, infe-rences for objective health conditions cannot be made. Third, the sam-ple of temporary workers studied here had an average organizational tenure of three years, which makes it possible that the respondents contract motives no longer reflect their initial reasons for accepting temporary work. It is also possible that the motive patterns reported (see, for example, the balanced) are the result of a coping mechanism to reduce cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957). Despite the difficul-ties involved, longitudinal studies are clearly warranted. The results of this study indicate that the voluntary as well as involuntary motives carry important information, but future research would benefit from an improvement of the involuntary motive scale in terms of reliability. This is particularly important since classificatory results can be improved when reliable clustering variables are used as input data (Bergman et al., 2003), a recommendation that our study as compared to many earlier typologies involving contract motives otherwise lived up to. Although comprising workers across different sectors, companies and occupations, the sample is not representative. However, with a major-ity of involuntary temporary workers, holding a fixed-term rather than an on-call contract, and being employed over a rather long period, this sample fits representative Swedish temporary worker samples rather well (see, for example, Aronsson et al., 2002; Bernhard-Oettel and Isaksson, 2005). Further research may benefit from sampling in other sectors, for example the healthcare sector, which has one of the highest shares of temporary contracts in Sweden (Holmlund and Storrie, 2002), and even other temporary contract types such as self-employment or temporary agency work to test the generalizability of our findings. Furthermore, although the sample is limited in size, recent analyses on clustering methods report a rather good robustness, showing that cluster centroids align with population centroids for samples approaching about 200 indi-viduals (Moadab, 1998). Thus, particularly for the objective to explore typical patterns, the sample size of this study appears to be suitable.

Finally, in regard to the classification methods used for identify-ing patterns, we employed the statistical package SLEIPNER, which



was conceptualized for conducting analyses within a person-oriented paradigm (Bergman et al., 2003). The use of this comprehensive pack-age helped to improve the quality of our classifications, since it pro-vided some relevant statistical criteria on the basis of which the most reliable solution of the cluster analysis could be chosen. For example, with a mere visual inspection of the cluster groups, one may tend to summarize the patterns of low voluntary, high involuntary motives and low work involvement, and indeed, in step four of the hierarchical analy-sis, the involuntaries, the misplaced and the indifferent converged into one group. However, this simplification also significantly impaired the homogeneity in this cluster, and the amount of explained variance declined to under 50 percent. In terms of well-being, the differentiated picture of more positive well-being for the group of the involuntaries as compared to the other two groups disappeared, and, thus, meaningful information had been missed. Taking this example, the strength of clear guidelines is underlined.

Conclusion

This rather exploratory study yields some important conclusions. It illustrates that temporary workers can be distinguished on the basis of their individual patterns of voluntary and involuntary contract motives, and their work involvement. More importantly, links between these pat-terns and subjective well-being could be established, while identifying groups with positive trends and particular at-risk groups in this sample. Overall, this study demonstrates the benefits of accounting for contract motives and work involvement in relation to each other, which offers a more holistic picture of how differences in well-being among tempo-rary workers may emerge. Thus, these findings underscore how a pattern approach can be utilized to bring forth a more comprehensive picture of how well-being is affected, because it helps us to understand the mean-ing of seemingly opposite views (e.g. being highly involved, but under an involuntary contract) and is able to come a bit closer to capturing the complexity of real life. Individuals rather than just single variables were in better view, which carries the advantage that the results may be easier to communicate to practitioners, who can apply them to recruitment, occupational healthcare and career coaching, for example, or even the development of political regulations for temporary employment.

In conclusion, it may be said that future studies could also benefit from using a person-oriented approach, since temporary work indeed



implies a heterogeneity that needs to be better understood (Marler et al., 2002), especially by politicians and practitioners, who need to be kept as informed as possible in their attempts to bring about a sustainable working life.

Note

This research is part of the Psycones-project (PSYchological CONtracts across Employ-ment Situations) supported by a grant from the EU, Fifth Framework Programme (HPSE-CT-2002-00121). Further information about the project is available at www.uv.es/~psycon

References

Aronsson, G., K. Gustafsson and M. Dallner (2002) Work Environment and Health in Different Types of Temporary Jobs, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psy-chology 11(2): 15175.

Baltes, P.B. and J.R. Nesselroade (1979) History and Rationale of Longitudinal Research, pp. 139 in J.R. Nesselroade and P.B. Baltes (eds) Longitudinal Research in the Study of Behavior and Development. New York: Academic Press.

Beck, U. (2000) The Brave New World of Work. Oxford: Blackwell.Bellaagh, K. and K. Isaksson (1999) Uthyrd men fast anstlld [Hired Out, But Perma-

nently Employed], Arbete och Hlsa 6. Benavides, F.G., J. Benach, A.V. Diez-Roux and C. Roman (2000) How Do Types of

Employment Relate to Health Indicators? Findings from the Second European Survey on Working Conditions, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 54: 494501.

Bergman, L.B. and D. Magnusson (1997) A Person-Oriented Approach in Research on Developmental Psychopathology, Development and Psychopathology 9(2): 291319.

Bergman, L.B., D. Magnusson and B.M. El-Khouri (2003) Studying Individual Deve-lopment in an Interindividual Context: A Person-Oriented Approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Bernasek, A. and D. Kinnear (1999) Workers Willingness to Accept Contingent Employ-ment, Journal of Economic Issues 13(2): 4619.

Bernhard, C. and M. Sverke (2003) Work Attitudes, Role Stress and Health among Dif-ferent Types of Contingent Workers in the Swedish Health Care Sector, Research and Practice in Human Resource Management 11(2): 116.

Bernhard-Oettel, C. and K. Isaksson (2005) Work-Related Well-Being and Job Characte-ristics among Temporary Workers in Sweden, pp. 177200 in N. De Cuyper, K. Isaksson and H. De Witte (eds) Employment Contracts and Well-Being among European Workers. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Claes, R., H. De Witte, R. Schalk, D. Guest, K. Isaksson, M. Krausz, G. Mohr and J.M. Peiro (2002) Het psychologisch contract van vaste en tijdelijke werknemers [The Psychological Contract of Permanent and Temporary Workers], Gedrag en Organisatie 15(6): 43655.



Clinton, M., D. Guest, A. Budjanovcanin, N. Staynvarts, M. Krausz, C. Bernhard-Oettel et al. (2005) Investigating Individual and Organizational Determinants of the Psycho-logical Contract: Data Collection and Analysis, Kings College.

De Cuyper, N., J. De Jong, H. De Witte, K. Isaksson, T. Rigotti and R. Schalk (2008) Literature Review of Theory and Research on the Psychological Impact of Temporary Employment: Towards a Conceptual Model, International Journal of Management Reviews 10(1): 2551.

De Cuyper, N., K. Isaksson, and H. De Witte (2005) Employment Contracts and Well-Being among European Workers. Aldershot: Ashgate.

De Jong, J., N. De Cuyper, H. De Witte, I. Silla and C. Bernhard-Oettel (in press) Motives for Accepting Temporary Employment: A Typology of Temporary Workers, Interna-tional Journal of Manpower.

Diener, E., E.M. Suh, R.E. Lucas and H.L. Smith (1999) Subjective Well-Being: Three Decades of Progress, Psychological Bulletin 125(2): 276302.

DiNatale, M. (2001) Characteristics of and Preference for Alternative Work Arrange-ments, Monthly Labor Review March: 2849.

Ellingson, J.E., M.L. Gruys and P.R. Sackett (1998) Factors Related to the Satisfaction and Performance of Temporary Employees, Journal of Applied Psychology 83(6): 91321.

Festinger, L. (1957) A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Gallie, D., M. White, Y. Cheng and M. Tomlinson (1998) Restructuring the Employment Relationship. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Guest, D. (2004) Flexible Employment Contracts, the Psychological Contract and Employee Outcomes: An Analysis and Review of the Evidence, International Journal of Management Reviews 5/6(1): 119.

Guest, D. and N. Conway (1998) Fairness at Work and the Psychological Contract. London: Chartered Institute of Personnel Development.

Holmlund, B. and D. Storrie (2002) Temporary Work in Turbulent Times: The Swedish Experience, The Economic Journal 112: 24569.

Isaksson, K. (1990) A Longitudinal Study of the Relationship between Frequent Job Change and Psychological Well-Being, Journal of Occupational Psychology 63: 297308.

Isaksson, K., G. Aronsson, K. Bellaagh and S. Gransson (2001) Att ofta byta arbetsplats En jmfrelse mellan uthyrda och korttidsanstllda [Changing Workplace Frequently: A Comparison of Temporary Agency Workers and On-Call Workers], Arbete och Hlsa 7.

Isaksson, K., C. Bernhard, R. Claes, H. De Witte, D. Guest, M. Krausz et al. (2003) Employment Contracts and Psychological Contracts in Europe: Results from a Pilot-study, SALTSA Report 1.

Isaksson, K., G. Johansson, K. Bellaagh and A. Sjberg (2004) Work Values among the Unemployed: Changes over Time and Some Gender Differences, Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 45(3): 20714.

Kanungo, R.N. (1982) Measurement of Job and Work Involvement, Journal of Applied Psychology 67(3): 3419.

Krausz, M. (2000) Effects of Short- and Long-Term Preference for Temporary Work upon Psychological Outcomes, International Journal of Manpower 21(8): 63547.

Magnusson, D. (1998) The Logic and Implications of a Person-Oriented Approach, pp. 3364 in R.B. Cairns, L.R. Bergman and J. Kagan (eds) Methods and Models for Studying the Individual. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.



Marler, J.H., M.W. Woodward Barringer and G.T. Milkovich (2002) Boundaryless and Traditional Contingent Employees: Worlds Apart, Journal of Organizational Behavior 23: 42553.

Martens, M.F.J., F.J.N. Nijhuis, M.P.J. van Boxtel and J.A. Knottnerus (1999) Flexible Work Schedules and Mental and Physical Health: A Study of a Working Population with Non-Traditional Working Hours, Journal of Organizational Behavior 20: 3546.

Moadab, M. (1998) En simuleringsstudie rrande knsligheten fr samplingsvara-tion vid klusteranalys [A Simulation Study Concerning the Sensitivity of Cluster Analysis towards Sampling Variation]. Stockholm: Statistical Institution, Stockholm University.

Mohr, G., A. Mueller, T. Rigotti, Z. Aycan and F. Tschan (2006) The Assessment of Psy-chological Strain in Work Contexts: Concerning the Structural Equivalency of Nine Language Adaptations of the Irritation Scale, European Journal of Psychological Assessment 22(3): 198206.

Morris, M.D.S. and A. Vekker (2001) An Alternative Look at Temporary Workers, Their Choices, and the Growth of Temporary Employment, Journal of Labor Research 12(2): 37390.

Nswall, K. (2004) Job Insecurity from a Stress Perspective, doctoral dissertation, Stockholm University.

Nollen, S.D. (1996) Negative Aspects of Temporary Employment, Journal of Labor Research 17(4): 56782.

OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) (2002) OECD Employ-ment Outlook. Paris: OECD.

SCB (Statistics Sweden) (2004) Arbetskraftsunderskningarna 2004 [Labour Force Sur-vey 2004].

Silla, I., F. Gracia and J.M. Peiro (2005) Job Insecurity and Health-Related Outcomes among Different Types of Temporary Workers, Economic and Industrial Democracy 26(1): 89117.

Sverke, M., J. Hellgren and K. Nswall (2002) No Security: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Job Insecurity and its Consequences, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 7(3): 24264.

Sverke, M., D.G. Gallagher and J. Hellgren (2000) Alternative Work Arrangements: Job Stress, Well-Being, and Work Attitudes among Employees with Different Employment Contracts, pp. 14567 in K. Isaksson, L. Hogstedt, C. Eriksson and T. Theorell (eds) Health Effects of the New Labour Market. New York: Plenum.

Tan, H.-H. and C.-P. Tan (2002) Temporary Workers in Singapore: What Drives Them?, Journal of Psychology 136(1): 83102.

Virtanen, P., J. Vathera, M. Kivimki, J. Pentti and J. Ferrie (2002) Employment Security and Health, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 56: 56974.

Wagena, E. and S. Geurts (2000) SWING. Ontwikkleing en validering van de Survey Wek-thuis Interferentie-Njimegen [SWING: Development and Validation of the WorkHome Interference Survey, Njimegen], Gedrag och Organisatie 28(3): 13858.

Ware, J.E. (1999) SF-36 Health Survey, pp. 122746 in M.E. Maruish (ed.) The Use of Psychological Testing for Treatment Planning and Outcomes Assessment, 2nd edn. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Warr, P. (1990) The Measurement of Well-Being and Other Aspects of Mental Health, Journal of Occupational Psychology 63(3): 193210.

Warr, P. and P. Jackson (1985) Factors Influencing the Psychological Impact of Prolonged Unemployment and Re-Employment, Psychological Medicine 15: 795807.



Wiens-Tuers, B.A. and E.T. Hill (2002) How Did We Get Here from There? Movement into Temporary Employment, Journal of Economic Issues 16(2): 30311.

Claudia Bernhard-Oettelis a PhD student at the Department of Psy-

chology at Stockholm University. Her main research interests concern temporary work,

psychological contracts, employability, health and well-being.

Kerstin Isakssonis Professor of Psychology at the School

of Sustainable Development of Society and Technology, Mlardalen University

in Vsters. Research areas are work and organizational psychology, mainly with a

focus on social relations in the workplace, e.g. psychological contracts.

Katalin Bellaaghis a behavioural scientist employed at the

National Board of Health and Welfare, which is a government agency under the Ministry of Health and Social Affairs in

Sweden. She works with methodological issues within health and medical service

supervision.


Economic and Industrial Democracy 2

Documents

Transcript of Economic and Industrial Democracy 2