Work & Stress

ISSN: 0267-8373 (Print) 1464-5335 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/twst20

Ten years on: A review of recent research on

the Job Demand–Control (-Support) model and
psychological well-being

Jan Alexander Häusser , Andreas Mojzisch , Miriam Niesel & Stefan Schulz-
Hardt

To cite this article: Jan Alexander Häusser , Andreas Mojzisch , Miriam Niesel & Stefan Schulz-
Hardt (2010) Ten years on: A review of recent research on the Job Demand–Control (-Support)
model and psychological well-being, Work & Stress, 24:1, 1-35, DOI: 10.1080/02678371003683747

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02678371003683747

Published online: 30 Mar 2010.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 13242

View related articles

Citing articles: 199 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=twst20
Work & Stress
Vol. 24, No. 1, January
March 2010, 1
35

RESEARCH ARTICLE
Ten years on: A review of recent research on the Job Demand Control
(-Support) model and psychological well-being


Jan Alexander Häusser*, Andreas Mojzisch, Miriam Niesel and
Stefan Schulz-Hardt

Economic and Social Psychology Unit, Institute of Psychology, Georg-August University

Goettingen, Germany

In 1999, van der Doef and Maes published a systematic review focusing on the Job-Demand

Control (JDC) model (Karasek, 1979) and the Job Demand
Control (-Support) (JDCS)
model (Johnson & Hall, 1988) in relation to psychological well-being. Their review covered the
period from 1979 to 1997. The present paper updates and extends this review. Covering
research from 83 studies published between 1998 and 2007, our review revealed three major
results: First, support for additive effects of demands, control, and social support on general
psychological well-being is almost always found if the sample size is sufficient. Second,
although there was consistent evidence for additive effects in relation to job-related well-being
in cross-sectional studies, support rates were lower in longitudinal data. Thus, reciprocal or
reversed causation might account for part of the association between JDC/JDCS dimensions
and job-related well-being. Finally, evidence for interactive effects as predicted by the buffer
hypotheses of the JDC/JDCS model was very weak overall. However, the pattern of results
indicates that this is due neither to spurious evidence for such interactions nor to small effect
sizes. Instead, our results suggest that buffering effects depend on whether or not demands and
control are based on qualitatively identical JDC/JDCS dimensions (matching principle).
Keywords: job demand
control (-support) model; psychological well-being; buffer hypothesis;
job satisfaction; review; work-related stress

Introduction
According to the World Health Organization, impaired psychological well-being is
one of the most prominent causes of reduced job involvement and absenteeism from
the workplace (Harnois & Gabriel, 2000). Not surprisingly, the detection of
relationships between job characteristics and psychological well-being is of central
interest in current work psychology. In 1979, Robert Karasek introduced a seminal
model that outlines the impact of adverse job characteristics on health and well-
being
the Job Demand-Control (JDC) model. Karasek (1979) identified job
demands and job control as essential job characteristics influencing well-being. In

*Corresponding author. Email: haeusser@psych.uni-goettingen.de

ISSN 0267-8373 print/ISSN 1464-5335 online

# 2010 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/02678371003683747
http://www.informaworld.com
2 J.A. Häusser et al.

the following years, social support was integrated into the model as a further
fundamental characteristic of the work environment, thereafter named the Job
Demand-Control-(Support) (JDCS) model (Johnson & Hall, 1988; Johnson, Hall, &
Theorell, 1989).

The Job Demand
Control (-Support) model

The JDC/JDCS model (a contraction that we will use throughout this paper to refer to
both models) aims to explain the occurrence of mental strain in a workplace context.
Negative consequences of work are set into relation to the two dimensions job demands
and job control. Job demands are typically operationalized in terms of quantitative
aspects such as workload and time pressure (Karasek, 1985; van der Doef & Maes,
1999a). Role conflicts as well as physical and emotional demands are also frequently
analyzed aspects of job demands (Karasek et al., 1998). The second job characteristic,
job control (also termed decision latitude), refers to the extent to which a person is
capable of controlling their tasks and general work activity. More specifically, job
control is subdivided into two major aspects: skill discretion and decision authority.
Skill discretion refers to a person’s opportunity to use specific job skills in the working
process. In contrast, decision authority refers to the extent to which a person is
autonomous in task-related decisions, such as timing and method control.
Combining the two dimensions of job demands and job control, Karasek (1979)
stated that jobs high on demands and low on control (‘‘high strain jobs’’) bear the
highest risk of illness and reduced well-being. By contrast, in jobs low on demands
and high on control (‘‘low strain jobs’’), the occurrence of adverse reactions is rather
unlikely.
Regarding the relationship between demands and control on one hand and well-
being on the other, an important distinction can be drawn between two hypotheses:
The strain hypothesis focuses on an increased likelihood of mental or physical illness
and reduced well-being for individuals working in ‘‘high strain jobs’’. It is important
to note that reduced well-being in ‘‘high strain jobs’’ as predicted by the strain
hypothesis can be the result of both additive and multiplicative effects of job
demands and control (the terms ‘‘multiplicative’’ and ‘‘interactive’’ are used
synonymously in this review) (van Vegchel, de Jonge, & Landsbergis, 2005).
In contrast, the buffer hypothesis refers exclusively to an interactive effect of
demands and control, in which control is predicted to attenuate (buffer) the negative
impact of job demands on well-being (van der Doef & Maes, 1999a). Hence, the two
hypotheses are not mutually exclusive. Rather, the buffer hypothesis can be seen as
a specific form of the strain hypothesis.
While Karasek (1989) put relatively little emphasis on the distinction between
these two types of effects, other researchers (e.g. Ganster, 1989) identified this issue
to be the main thrust of the JDC/JDCS model. Confirmation of one or the other
type of effect would lead to different implications for workplace design and different
organizational interventions to prevent strain among employees. If the buffer
hypothesis is valid, job control should be increased to counteract high strain,
whereas demands do not necessarily need to be reduced. In contrast, increasing job
control would not have the same effect if job demands and control were only
connected additively: In this case, high strain might be reduced by measures
implementing job control, but levels of strain would continue to be undesirably high
 Work & Stress 3

as long as job demands remained high. In our view, this practical relevance and the
de facto existence of these two hypotheses (de Jonge & Dormann, 2006; Ganster,
1989; van der Doef & Maes, 1999a) call for us to make a distinction between additive
and interactive (buffering) effects in this review.
As mentioned above, the JDC model was extended by integrating social support
at the workplace as a third dimension. The distinction between additive and
multiplicative effects of work characteristics can be applied to this model as well. The
JDCS model predicts work situations, characterized by high demands, low control,
and low social support, to be most harmful for workers’ well-being. Again, this
might be a result of additive as well as multiplicative effects of these three work
dimensions. According to the buffer hypothesis of the JDCS model, social support
moderates the negative impact of high strain (i.e. a combination of high demands
and low control), thus explicitly predicting a three-way interaction of job
characteristics. Specifically, Johnson and Hall (1988) predicted that increased control
buffers high demands most effectively under conditions of high social support.

Previous reviews of the JDC/JDCS model

In 1999, van der Doef and Maes published a comprehensive review on research
conducted on the JDC/JDCS model with respect to psychological well-being. Their
analyses of 63 studies, published in the period from 1979 to 1997, revealed moderate
support for additive effects but only weak support for multiplicative effects of
demands and control. In addition, almost no results in line with the buffer
hypothesis were found in longitudinal studies.
De Lange, Taris, Kompier, Houtman, & Bongers (2003) argued that the relatively
weak support for the model reported by van der Doef and Maes (1999a) might be due
to the fact that they did not take the methodological quality of studies into account.
Hence, it is conceivable that particularly those studies that were methodologically
weak failed to support the predictions of the JDC/JDCS model. Consequently, de
Lange et al. (2003) decided to include only ‘‘high quality’’ longitudinal studies in their
review. Their results showed that high-quality studies did not differ notably in their
support for the JDC/JDCS model from the mixture of high-quality and lower-quality
studies included in van der Doef and Maes’ (1999a) review. Hence, we decided not to
apply any quality-related inclusion criteria for study selection.

Review questions
As the volume of research into the JDC/JDCS model has considerably increased in
the last 10 years, the aim of the present review was to update van der Doef and Maes’
(1999a) review. Similar to van der Doef and Maes, we confined our review to the
studies measuring psychological well-being as an outcome (for reviews examining
physical health outcomes, see Belkic, Landsbergis, Schnall, & Baker, 2004; Schnall,
Landsbergis, & Baker, 1994; Theorell & Karasek, 1996; van der Doef & Maes, 1998).
Since van der Doef and Maes covered research from 1979 to 1997, we chose 1998 as
the starting point for our review.
A reappraisal of the empirical status of the JDC/JDCS model was necessary for
at least three reasons. First, the extended JDCS model was still in its infancy when
van der Doef and Maes’ (1999a) review was published. Hence, at that time there was
4 J.A. Häusser et al.

only sparse evidence regarding the existence of the postulated additive and
interactive effects of the JDCS dimensions. As a majority of studies conducted in
the last 10 years have included social support, stronger conclusions regarding the
validity of the JDCS model and a more conclusive comparison of support for
additive versus interactive effects of all three dimensions can be drawn today.
Second, 53 of the 63 studies reviewed by van der Doef and Maes used cross-sectional
designs, which are ill suited to test causal relationships. In contrast, in the last 10
years the number of longitudinal studies has steadily increased, thereby providing
more clear-cut tests of causation. Hence, we now have a better chance of determining
whether (impaired) well-being really is a consequence of the JDC/JDCS dimensions.
Third, only four of the 63 studies reviewed by van der Doef and Maes examined
burnout. In contrast, in the last 10 years research on burnout has increased
considerably. Since burnout is perhaps the most serious long-term impairment in
job-related well-being, it would be very interesting to examine the validity of the
JDC/JDCS model with regard to this outcome variable.
To summarize, our review focused on four key aspects:
1. Is there support for (i) additive and (ii) multiplicative effects of the JDC/JDCS
dimensions? And has research revealed better evidence for the model in the
last 10 years (1998
2007) compared to the time period reviewed by van der
Doef and Maes (1979
1997)?
2. Has the inclusion of social support resulted in better empirical evidence for
Karasek’s model? In particular, is there now consistent evidence for a three-
way interaction as postulated by Johnson and Hall (1988)?
3. What conclusions can be drawn regarding causation issues? Does the evidence
obtained from longitudinal studies differ from that of cross-sectional studies?
4. Which features differ between studies that support the JDC/JDCS model and
those that do not? Previous research has already identified some potential
moderators, such as gender (van der Doef & Maes, 1999a) or homogeneity of
the sample (de Lange et al., 2003). Is there consistent evidence for one of these
or further moderators?

Method
This review considers field studies on the strain axis of the JDC/JDCS model,
including outcomes reflecting aspects of psychological well-being. Studies were
identified by searching the PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, Business Source Premier
and MedLine databases. The following keywords were entered in the search
engines of the databases: JDC(S) model, demand, control, decision latitude, skill
discretion, social support, work characteristics, psychological well-being, Karasek,
job strain, mental health, buffer hypothesis, and strain axis. Every keyword was
entered on its own and in combination with one or two other keywords. In
addition, applying a snowball technique, the reference lists of the articles that
were retrieved were scanned to detect further relevant studies. For reasons of
consistency, inclusion criteria, analyses, and the presentation structure for results
in this review are largely similar to those employed by van der Doef and Maes
(1999a).
 Work & Stress 5

Selection of the studies

Studies had to meet the following criteria to be included: (1) publication in the
period from January 1998 to December 2007; (2) reference to the JDC/JDCS model;
(3) inclusion of the core dimensions of the JDC model, job demands and job
control; (4) examination of additive or multiplicative effects of job demands and job
control; (5) examination of participants in a work setting (i.e. studies on informal
work such as caregiving within the family and laboratory experiments were not
included); (6) examination of aspects of general psychological well-being or job-
related well-being as an outcome variable. In all, 83 studies were identified and
included in this review.
Next, these studies were categorized by the types of effects tested. Studies
examining the ‘‘buffer’’ hypothesis of the JDC model were defined as those
that explicitly included a two-way interaction term of demands and control.
Studies examining the three-way interaction between demands, control, and support
were categorized as testing the ‘‘buffer’’ hypothesis of the JDCS model. The remaining
categories consisted of studies examining additive effects of JDC, and additive effects
of JDCS.
In the studies selected, the impact of the JDC/JDCS dimensions on the following
outcome variables was examined: mental health, psychological distress, (trait)
anxiety, depression, (prolonged) fatigue, job satisfaction, and emotional exhaustion
(burnout).

Description of the studies

Population. The sample size of the studies ranged from 60 to 37,291 participants
(M 2561, SD6103). In nearly all studies, researchers employed mixed gender
samples (see Table 1). Notably, contemporary research on the JDC/JDCS model
covers a whole range of occupations. However, the model is predominantly applied
to employees in the human service sector, especially to persons employed in health
care or educational jobs. Job-related homogeneous samples (i.e. samples including
participants with similar jobs) were used in 45 (54%) studies.
Design of the studies. In 19 studies (23%), a longitudinal design was applied; all other
studies used cross-sectional data (see Table 1). In all longitudinal studies, cross-
lagged effects of work characteristics and psychological well-being were examined.
The length of time lags between the waves of the longitudinal studies varied from six
weeks to 5.8 years.
JDC versus JDCS model. Contrary to the studies included in van der Doef and
Maes’ review (1999a), effects of social support were examined in the majority of
studies (63%) covered in this review, thereby testing the JDCS model.
Measurement of JDC/JDCS dimensions. The most frequently applied instruments to
quantify job demands, control, and social support were the Job Content Ques-
tionnaire (JCQ; Karasek, 1985; Karasek et al., 1998) and JCQ-based instruments.
Psychological demands, skill discretion, decision authority, and social support (from
coworkers and from the supervisor) are the core dimensions of the JCQ, and were
included in nearly all studies in which this instrument was applied. Another
commonly used instrument was the Leiden Quality of Work Questionnaire (LQWQ)
(van der Doef & Maes, 1999b)
either a general version or job-specific versions for
 6
Table 1. Field studies applying the JDC/JDCS model to psychological well-being (1998
2007).

Results

JDC model JDCS model

Reference* Population Design Outcome(s) Add Multipl Add Multipl Remarks

1. Akerboom and 706 care staff; CS Emotional exhaustion 9


No support for task
Maes, 2006 residential institutions; Job satisfaction 9
9
control; weaker support
NL ( à, ß) Psychological distress


 for skill discretion and
supervisor support
2. Amick, Kawachi, 33,689 nurses; US (à) CS Mental health  /  /
Coakley, Lerner,

J.A. Häusser et al.

Levine, and
Colditz,1998
3. Beehr, Glaser, 115 manu-facturing CS Job satisfaction

/ /
Canali, and employees; US (à, ß) Mental health

/ /
Wallwey, 2001
4. Bourbonnais, 1741 nurses; CAN ( à) CS Psychological distress   / /
Comeau, and LTc Emotional exhaustion   / /
Vézina, 1999
5. Bourbonnais, 1891 nurses; CAN ( à) CS Psychological distress   / /
Comeau, Vézina, Emotional exhaustion 
/ /
and Dion, 1998
6. Brough and 132 correctional CS Job satisfaction 9
9
Support for job-specific
Williams, 2007 officers; AUS (à, ß) and monitoring demands.
No support for problem-
solving demands.
7. Calnan, 4135 multi- CS Mental health  /  /
Wadsworth, May, occupational;
Smith, and UK (à, ß)
Wainwright, 2004
Table 1 (Continued)
Results

JDC model JDCS model

Reference* Population Design Outcome(s) Add Multipl Add Multipl Remarks

8. Calnan, 762 general medical CS Job satisfaction  /  /

Wainwright, and practice staff; UK Mental health  /  /
Almond, 2000 (à, ß)
9. de Croon, Blonk, 1181 lorry drivers; CS Job dissatisfaction  9 / / Support only for
de Zwart, Frings- NL ( à, ß) Fatigue 
/ / psychological demands
Dresen, and (workload), not for
Broersen, 2002 physical or emotional

Work & Stress

demands
10. de Jonge, Bosma, 11,636; eight different CS Job dissatisfaction  / / /
Peter, and job sectors; NL (à, ß) Emotional exhaustion  / / /
Siegrist, 2000
11. de Jonge, 273,485; five human CS Job dissatisfaction  9 / / Support depends on
Dollard, service sectors; NL Emotional exhaustion  9 / / occupation (subsample)
Dormann, (à, ß)
Le Blanc, and
Houtman, 2000
12. de Jonge, 261 health care LTa Job satisfaction
/
/ Main effects of demands
Dormann, professionals; NL Emotional exhaustion
/
/ and social support on job
Janssen, Dollard, (à, ß) satisfaction. No main
Landeweerd, and effect of job autonomy
Nijhuis, 2001
13. de Jonge, Mulder, 212 health care CS Job satisfaction
9 / / Support only for
and Nijhuis, 1999 professionals; NL Emotional exhaustion

/ / psychological demands
(à, ß) (workload), not for
physical or emotional
demands

7
 8
Table 1 (Continued)
Results

JDC model JDCS model

Reference* Population Design Outcome(s) Add Multipl Add Multipl Remarks

14. de Jonge, van 895 health care CS Job satisfaction 9 9 / / Add: support for
Breukelen, workers; NL ( à, ß) Emotional exhaustion

/ / individual self-report
Landeweerd, and data; Multipl: support
Nijhuis, 1999 only when using
aggregated individual
data
LTb

J.A. Häusser et al.

15. de Lange, Taris, 1477 employees from Job satisfaction 9 / / / Support only for stable
Kompier, 34 companies; NL LTc Depression 9 / / / exposure to high strain.
Houtman, and (à, ß) Mixed results for the
Bongers, 2002 effect of changes in strain
16. de Lange, Taris, 668 employees from 34 LTa Job satisfaction
/
/
Kompier, companies; NL (à, ß) Depression
/
/
Houtman, and Emotional exhaustion
/
/
Bongers, 2004
17. de Lange, Taris, 1588 employees from LTa Depression
/
/ Evidence for reciprocal
Kompier, 34 companies; NL relationship
Houtman, and (à, ß)
Bongers, 2005
18. de Raeve, Vasse, 2332 multi- LTb Prolonged fatigue 9 / 9 / No support for physical
Jansen, van den occupational; NL demands and for
Brandt, and (à, ß) coworker social support.
Kant, 2007 Support for mental
demands
Table 1 (Continued)
Results

JDC model JDCS model

Reference* Population Design Outcome(s) Add Multipl Add Multipl Remarks

19. de Rijk, Le Blanc, 367 nurses from CS Emotional exhaustion  9 / / Multiplicative effects:
Schaufeli, and de intensive care units; Support only for nurses
Jonge, 1998 NL ( à, ß) with active
coping strategies
20. de Witte, 2212 young job CS Job satisfaction   / / Structured interviews
Verhofstadt, and beginners; multi- were conducted to collect
Omey, 2007 occupational; BE data

Work & Stress

(à, ß)
21. Dollard and 419 correctional CS Mental health 


Winefield, 1998 officers; AUS (à, ß) Job satisfaction 


22. Dollard, H. 813 employees in the CS Emotional exhaustion




Winefield, A. human service sector; Job satisfaction 


Winefield, and de AUS (à, ß)
Jonge, 2000
23. Escribà-Agüir 639 doctors and CS Emotional exhaustion 9
9 / Support only for doctors
and Pérez- Hoyos, nurses; ES ( à, ß) Mental health


/ and only for co-worker
2007 social support
24. Fernet, Guay, and 398 university CS Emotional exhaustion   / /
Senécal, 2004 professors; CAN
(à, ß)
25. Fillion, Tremblay, 209 palliative-care CS Job satisfaction
/
/
Truchon, Côté, nurses; CAN ( à, ß) Psychological distress
/
/
Struthers, and
Dupuis, 2007

9
 10
Table 1 (Continued)
Results

JDC model JDCS model

Reference* Population Design Outcome(s) Add Multipl Add Multipl Remarks

26. Gelsema, van der 381 nurses; NL ( à, ß) LTb Job satisfaction
/
/

Doef, Maes, Emotional exhaustion
/
/
Janssen, Psychological distress
/
/
Akerboom, and
Verhoeven, 2006
27. Griffin, Greiner, 98 civil servants; UK CS Anxiety
/
/ Main effect for skill

J.A. Häusser et al.

Stansfield, and (à, ß) Depression 9 / 9 / discretion, not for
Marmot, 2007 decision authority;
observation technique
28. Griva and Joekes, 166 secondary school CS Emotional exhaustion




2003 teachers; UK (à, ß) Job satisfaction




29. Huda, Rusli, 73 lecturers; MYS CS Job dissatisfaction  / / /
Naing, Tengku, (à, ß)
Winn, and
Rampal, 2004
30. Ippolito, Adler, 638 soldiers; US (à, ß) CS Mental health  9 / / Multiplicative effects:
Thomas, Litz, Support only for soldiers
and Hölzl, 2005 with active coping
strategies (measurement
of active coping included
social support items)
31. Janssen and 5256 multi- LTb Fatigue  /  /
Nijhuis, 2004 occupational; NL Emotional exhaustion  /  /
(à, ß) Psychological distress  /  /
Table 1 (Continued)
Results

JDC model JDCS model

Reference* Population Design Outcome(s) Add Multipl Add Multipl Remarks

32. Le Blanc, Bakker, 816 oncology care CS Emotional exhaustion 9
/ / Add: support when
Peeters, van providers; NL ( à, ß) demands are
Heesch, and operationalized as
Schaufeli, 2001 workload. No support for
job-specific emotional
demands
33. Lobban, Husted, 154 warehouse worker, CS Job satisfaction

/ /

Work & Stress

and Farewell, truck drivers and sales
1998 personal; CAN (à, ß)
34. Macklin, Smith, 84 public and 143 CS Job satisfaction 

Multiplicative effects
and Dollard, 2006 private sector employ- Psychological distress

9 (JDCS): support for
ees; AUS (à, ß) private sector workers,
but not for public sector
workers
35. Mansell and 634 dentists and public CS Job satisfaction 9 9 / / Items derived from JCQ
Brough, 2005 sector employees; NZ revealed fully supportive
(à, ß) results; A measurement
developed by Jackson
et al. (1993) revealed
partial support.
36. Mausner-Dorsch 905 multi- CS Depression
 / /
and Eaton, 2000 occupational; US
(à, ß)
37. McClenahan, 166 lecturers and CS Psychological distress 



Giles, and senior lecturers; UK Job satisfaction

11
Mallett, 2007 (à, ß)
 12
Table 1 (Continued)
Results

JDC model JDCS model

Reference* Population Design Outcome(s) Add Multipl Add Multipl Remarks

38. Morrison, Payne, 6671 employees of CS Job satisfaction 9 9 9
Support for self-report
and Wall, 2003 hospitals (multi- Mental health 9 9 9
based individual
occupational); UK measurement of JDC
(à, ß) dimensions, no support
was found when
individual measures were

J.A. Häusser et al.

aggregated at a job group
level
39. Munro, Rodwell, 60 nurses; AUS ( à, ß) CS Job satisfaction


/
and Harding, Mental health


/
1998
40. Näring, Briët, 365 Mathematics CS Emotional exhaustion 
 /
and Brouwers, teachers; NL ( à, ß)
2006
41. Neubach and 260 staff of nursing CS Emotional exhaustion   / /
Schmidt, 2006 homes for elderly Job satisfaction   / /
people; DE (à, ß)
42. Niedhammer, 680 employees of CS Depression
/
/
Chastang, David, a publication Mental health
/
/
Barouhiel, and distributing company;
Barrandon, 2006 FR (à, ß)
43. Noblet, Rodwell, 221 managers; AUS CS Job dissatisfaction
/
/
and McWilliams, (à, ß) Mental health
/
/
2001
Table 1 (Continued)
Results

JDC model JDCS model

Reference* Population Design Outcome(s) Add Multipl Add Multipl Remarks

44. Noblet, Rodwell, 1155 employees of a CS Job satisfaction 
9
Additive effects (JDCS):
and McWilliams, public sector Mental health



support only for work-
2006 organization; AUS related social support, not
(à, ß) for non-work support
45. O’Connor D., 422 general medical CS Depression  / / / No regression analyses.
O’Connor R., practitioners; UK Anxiety  / / / ANOVA
White, and (à, ß) Job satisfaction  / / /

Work & Stress

Bundred, 2000

46. Park, 2007 240 hospital employees CS Depression

(multi-occupational);
US (à, ß)
47. Parker and 268 production CS Psychological distress  9 / / Support only for
Sprigg, 1999 employees; UK ( ß) employees with proactive
coping strategies
48. Pascual, Perez- 198 secondary school CS Emotional Exhaustion




Jover, Mirambell, teachers; ES ( à, ß) Job Satisfaction



Ivañez, and Terol,
2003
49. Paterniti, 10,519 multi- LTa Depression 9 / 9 / No support in female
Niedhammer, occupational; FR subsample
Lang, and (à, ß)
Consoli, 2002

13
 14
Table 1 (Continued)
Results

JDC model JDCS model

Reference* Population Design Outcome(s) Add Multipl Add Multipl Remarks

50. Peeters and Rutte, 123 teachers; NL CS Emotional exhaustion
9 / / Support only for teachers
2005 (à, ß) with poor time
management behaviour
51. Pelfrene, Vlerick, 21419 multi- CS Depression 


Kittel, Mak, occupational; BE Fatigue 


Kornitzer, and (à, ß)

J.A. Häusser et al.

de Backer, 2002
52. Pisanti, 169 teachers; IT ( à, ß) CS Emotional exhaustion




Gagliardi, Job satisfaction 



Razzino, and
Bertini, 2003

53. Plaisir, de Buijn, 2646 multi- LTa Depression
/ / /

de Graaf, ten occupational; NL Anxiety
/ / /
Have, Beekman, (à, ß)
and Penninx, 2007
54. Pomaki and 215 secondary school CS Emotional exhaustion




Anagnostopoulou, teachers; GR (à, ß) Job satisfaction 



2003
55. Pomaki, Maes, and 3088 health care CS Emotional exhaustion 
9
Emotional exhaustion:
ter Doest, 2004 employees; NL (à, ß) Job satisfaction 

Main effect of supervisor
Depression 

support, no effect of
support from colleagues
56. Pugliesi, 1999 1114 university CS Job satisfaction 
/ /
employees; US (à, ß) Psychological distress

/ /
Table 1 (Continued)
Results

JDC model JDCS model

Reference* Population Design Outcome(s) Add Multipl Add Multipl Remarks

57. Rafferty, Friend, 164 human service CS
and Landsbergis, workers; US ( à, ß)
2001
58. Rodrı́guez, Bravo, 542 job-beginners in LTa
Peiró, and administration; BE,
Schaufeli, 2001 ES, IT, IL, UK ( à, ß)
Emotional exhaustion 9


Main effect of skill
discretion, but not of
decision authority
Job dissatisfaction 


Work & Stress

59. Rystedt, Devereux, 658 professionals and LTa Mental health
/
/
and Sverke, 2007 343 manual workers;
UK (à, ß)
60. Rydstedt, Ferrie, 6000 civil servants LTa Mental health 9 / 9 / Mental health: support
and Head, 2006 (4154 for job satisfac- Job satisfaction  /  / for cross-sectional data
tion); UK ( à, ß) only
61. Salanova, Peiró, 405 workers using IT CS Emotional exhaustion   / /
and Schaufeli, 2002 (multi-occupational);
ES ( à, ß)
62. Sann, 2003 297 secondary school CS Job satisfaction 


teachers; DE ( à, ß) Emotional exhaustion




63. Sanne, Mykletun, 5562 multi-occupa- CS Anxiety 

Multiplicative effects for
Dahl, Moen, and tional; NO ( à, ß) Depression  9 
depression were found in
Tell, 2005 men only

15
 16
Table 1 (Continued)
Results

JDC model JDCS model

Reference* Population Design Outcome(s) Add Multipl Add Multipl Remarks

64. Santavirta, 1028 teachers; FIN CS Emotional exhaustion  /  /

Solovieva, and (à, ß)
Theorell, 2007
65. Sargent and Terry, 80 university clerical LTa Job satisfaction


9 Support for non-work
2000 staff; AUS ( à, ß) support and supervisor
support. Not for co-

J.A. Häusser et al.

worker support
66. Schreurs and Taris, 336 software engineers CS Job satisfaction 9
/ / Job satisfaction: no
1998 and university staff; Fatigue

/ / support for decision
NL ( à, ß) authority in the
software engineer
subsample.
67. Shen and Gallivan, 77 IT users in a social CS Job satisfaction / 9 / / Interactions were found
2004 services office; US Depression / 9 / / for control over
(à, ß) workgroup, not for
individual autonomy
68. Shimazu A., 867 employees of a CS Job satisfaction

/ /
Shimazu M., and manufacturing plant;
Odahara, 2004 JP ( à, ß)
69. Sundin, 1561 nurses; SE ( à, ß) CS Emotional exhaustion  /  /
Hochwälder, Bildt,
and Lisspers, 2007
Table 1 (Continued)
Results

JDC model JDCS model

Reference* Population Design Outcome(s) Add Multipl Add Multipl Remarks

70. Stansfeld, Fuhrer, 7978 civil servants; UK LTa Mental Health 9
9 / Support only for men
Shipley, and (à, ß) LTb when unadjusted for
Marmot, 1999 baseline outcome
measure. No support for
LTb
71. Taris and Feij, 311 office technicians LTc Mental health  / / / No regression analyses.
2004 and machine operators ANCOVA

Work & Stress

(job newcomer); BE,
IL, NL, UK (à, ß)
72. ter Doest and de 137 health care LTa Job satisfaction
/
/ Replication of the de
Jonge, 2006 professionals; NL Emotional exhaustion
/
/ Jonge et al. (2001) study,
(à, ß) using a 2-year interval
instead of a 1-year
interval
73. Totterdell, Wood, 65 self-employeed LT Anxiety 


A time-sampling method
and Wall, 2006 portfolio workers; UK Depression



was applied
(à, ß) (measurement of JDCS
dimensions and outcomes
in a weekly diary for 26
weeks)
74. Tummers, 1204 nurses; NL (à, ß) CS Job satisfaction 
 /
Landeweerd, and Emotional exhaustion


/
Merode, 2002
75. Tyler and 155 hospital staff; CS Job satisfaction 
/ /
Cushway, 1998 multi-occupational; Mental health

/ /

17
UK (à, ß)
 18
Table 1 (Continued)
Results

JDC model JDCS model

Reference* Population Design Outcome(s) Add Multipl Add Multipl Remarks

76. van der Doef and 454 secondary school CS Job satisfaction  9 
Decision authority was
Maes, 2002 teachers; NL ( à, ß) Emotional exhaustion 
9
more supportive than task
Anxiety 9


control; workload was
Depression 9


more supportive than role
ambiguity
77. van der Doef, 4000 multi- CS Job dissatisfaction  9  9 Weak support for task

J.A. Häusser et al.

Maes, and occupational; NL Psychological distress 9 9 9 9 control; good support for
Diekstra, 2000 (à, ß) decision authority and
skill discretion.
78. van Vegchel, de 2255 employees in a LTa Emotional exhaustion 


Jonge, Söderfeldt, human service
Dormann, and organization; NL
Schaufeli, 2004 (à, ß)
79. van Veldhoven, 37291 employees; CS Task satisfaction  /  /
Taris, de Jonge, multi-occupational;
and Broersen, 2005 NL ( à, ß)

80. van Yperen and 210 employees of a CS Mental health 9 9 / / Support when
Snijders, 2000 national bank; NL measurement of JDC
(à, ß) dimensions are self-report
based, not for aggregated
individual data
81. Verhoeven, Kraaij, 304 secondary school CS Job satisfaction 



Joekes, and Maes, teachers; NL ( à, ß) Emotional exhaustion



2003
Table 1 (Continued)
Results

JDC model JDCS model

Reference* Population Design Outcome(s) Add Multipl Add Multipl Remarks

82. Verhoeven, Maes, 2796 teachers; BE, CH, CS Job satisfaction 


Kraaij, and Joekes, CZ, DE, ES, FR, FIN, Emotional exhaustion 


2003 GR, IRL, IT, NL, SK,
UK (à, ß)
83. Vermeulen and 7484 multi- CS Psychological distress  / 
Structured interviews
Mustard, 2000 occupational; CAN were conducted to collect
(à, ß) data

Work & Stress

*The full references of the studies included in the review are available from the authors on request.

Note: Add: additive effects; Multipl: multiplicative effects; à: female participants; ß: male participants; CS: cross-sectional; LT: longitudinal. LTa: examines impact of T1
JDC/JDCS dimensions on T2 outcome variables; LTb: examines impact of changes in JDC/JDCS dimensions on outcomes; LTc: examines impact of stable levels of JDC/
JDCS dimensions over time on outcomes (cumulative exposure to job characteristics).

Hypothesis supported;
Hypothesis refuted;9Hypothesis partially supported; / Hypothesis not tested or results not reported.

Country codes: AUS: Australia; BE: Belgium; CH: Switzerland; CZ: Czech Republic; CAN: Canada; DE: Germany; ES: Spain; FR: France; FIN: Finland; GR: Greece;
IT: Italy, IL: Israel; IRL: Ireland; JP: Japan; MYS: Malaysia; NO: Norway; NL: Netherlands; NZ: New Zealand; SE: Sweden; SK: Slovakia; UK: United Kingdom; US:
United States.

19
20 J.A. Häusser et al.

teachers (Maes & van der Doef, 1997) or nurses (Maes, Akerboom, van der Doef, &
Verhoeven, 1999). The vast majority of studies examined subjective data obtained
from self-administered questionnaires. Only seven studies applied techniques such as
observation, structured interviews, or aggregation of the subjective individual data at
a group level (see Table 1).
Measurement of outcome variables. The studies applied either measures reflecting asp-
ects of general psychological well-being (i.e. mental health, psychological distress,
trait anxiety, depression, or fatigue) or job-related well-being (i.e., job satisfaction,
emotional exhaustion). Mental health and psychological distress were typically
assessed by the General Health Questionnaire (Goldberg & Williams, 1998). The
most commonly used instruments to examine job satisfaction were the job
satisfaction scale of the LQWQ, and Warr, Cook, and Wall’s (1979) scale of job
satisfaction. In all studies on emotional exhaustion, the Maslach Burnout Inventory
(Maslach, Jackson, & Leiter, 1996) was used.

Results
Similar to van der Doef and Maes (1999a), we distinguish between (1) outcomes
reflecting aspects of general psychological well-being and (2) outcomes reflecting
aspects of job-related well-being. Both outcomes are examined separately.
Table 1 shows a description of the 83 studies and their results with respect to each
of the four types of effect. Table 2 presents a summary of the support rates per
outcome category. In order to facilitate comparisons, findings reported by van der
Doef and Maes (1999a) were included in this table as well. For each outcome
category, this table shows the number of studies supporting each of the hypotheses in
relation to the total number of studies.
Like van der Doef and Maes (1999a) distinction is drawn between fully
supportive and partially supportive studies. Studies classified as fully supportive
reported results that unconditionally confirmed the hypothesis under study, meaning
that significant main effects for all JDC/JDCS dimensions or the predicted
multiplicative effects were found. In contrast, studies were labelled partially
supportive when the effects were in line with the hypotheses, but failed to reach
statistical significance overall, and at the same time significant effects were found for
subsamples such as a particular gender or occupational group. In the following, we
use the term (p) supportive to refer to both fully and partially supportive studies,
that is, these support rates include unconditional and conditional support.
Although van der Doef and Maes (1999a) focused on (p) support rates in their
appraisal of the JDC/JDCS model, we believe that full support rates provide
important additional information for evaluating the validity of Karasek’s model.
Forming subgroups for a substantial amount of variables like gender, occupation, or
measurement increases the likelihood of finding spurious effects for at least one
subgroup. That means support for the model under certain conditions has little
added value as long as the specific result pattern for subgroups is not replicated in
other studies. In the following, we thus first report (p) support rates, especially when
they reflect conditions commonly associated with confirmation of the model.
Subsequently
unlike van der Doef and Maes (1999a)
we explicitly report and
evaluate full support rates to provide an additional, more conservative test of the
model.
Table 2. Percentage of supportive studies to the total number of studies on each hypothesis of the JDC/JDCS model per outcome category in the
publication periods 1979
1997 (obtained from van der Doef and Maes 1999a) and 1998
2007 (present study).

JDC Model JDCS Model

Additive effects Multiplicative effects Additive effects Multiplicative effects

Total number
Outcome 1979
1997 1998
2007 1979*1997 1998
2007 1979
1997 1998
2007 1979
1997 1998
2007 of studies

Work & Stress

General psychological 68% 28/47 (60%) 48% 11/28 (39%) 47% 16/32 (50%) 40% 3/14 (21%) 43 // 47b
well-being
full support 41% 17 (36%) 13% 4 (14%) 47% 9 (28%) 0% 1 (7%)
Job satisfaction 60% 33/48 (69%) 43% 11/36 (31%) 57% 17/31 (55%) 33% 3/20 (15%) 31 // 49b
full support 37% 26 (54%) 13% 2 (6%) 57% 13 (42%) 33% 1 (5%)
Emotional exhaustion 75%a 20/35 0%a 7/27 (26%) 100%a 9/23 (39%) 0%a 1/13 (8%) 4 // 35b
(burnout) (57%)
full support 75%a 16 (46%) 0%a 4 (15%) 100%a 6 (26%) 0%a 1 (8%)
Direct measures of job- 88% / 50% / 50% / 100% / 8 // 0b
related well-being
Note: a No differentiation between different aspects of burnout was reported in these studies. b First number refers to publication period 1979
1997; second number refers
to publication period 1998*2007.

21
22 J.A. Häusser et al.

GENERAL PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING

In 48 studies [1
5, 7
9, 15
18, 21, 23, 25
27, 30, 31, 34, 36
39, 42
47, 49, 51, 53, 55, 56,
59, 60, 63, 66
67, 70, 71, 73, 75
77, 80, 83; numbers refer to the studies in Table 1],
measures of general psychological well-being were included as outcome variables. In
56% of all studies examining general psychological well-being, the General Health
Questionnaire (Goldberg & Williams, 1998) was applied. In the other studies, more
specific measures of depression, anxiety, and fatigue were applied, such as the
Symptom Checklist (SCL-90; Derogatis, 1983) or the Checklist Individual Strength
(Vercoulen et al., 1994). A longitudinal design was employed in 14 studies, that is, in
29% of all studies examining general psychological well-being.
Additive effects of JDC. Additive effects were (p) confirmed in 28 (60%) of the 47
studies testing this hypothesis. Full support for the hypothesis was found in 17
studies (36%), whereas in the remaining 11 studies only partial support was
reported. In these studies, support was only found for individual self-report
measures, but not for self-report data that were aggregated at a job or work group
level [38, 80], or depended on the operationalization of control [27, 76, 77] or
demand [18]. In study 60, support was found only in cross-sectional, but not
longitudinal data, and in study 15, support was reported only for stable exposure to
high strain, but not for changes in strain levels. In two studies [49, 70], support was
found only in a male subsample. In study 73, the hypothesis was confirmed for
anxiety, but not for depression (see also Table 1).
Additive effects of JDCS. In 32 studies, additive effects of demands, control, and
social support were examined. 16 studies (50%) revealed (p) supportive evidence.
Of these, nine studies fully supported the hypothesis (28%), whereas in the
remaining seven studies only partial confirmation was found. The confirmation
depended on the measurement of control [27, 77] or demands [18]. Supportive
evidence was found for self-report data, but not for data aggregated on a job
group level [38] or was found only in cross-sectional but not longitudinal data
[60]. In two studies (p) supportive data were reported only for a male subsample
(49, 70).
Comparison of studies supportive versus non-supportive of additive effects (JDC/JDCS).
Collapsing across the JDC and the JDCS model, comparisons between stu-
dies supportive of and studies not supportive of additive effects were conducted,
aiming at determining differences in study design, sample size, sample composition,
and operationalization of the JDC/JDCS dimensions and outcome variables.
Of the 14 studies applying a longitudinal design, nine (64%) were (p) supportive,
whereas 19 (58%) of the 33 studies applying a cross-sectional design (p) confirmed
additive effects of the JDC/JDCS model. Thus, longitudinal studies and cross-
sectional studies revealed about equal support for additive effects, x2 (1, N 47) 
0.18, ns.
Regarding sample characteristics, a significant difference was found with respect
to sample size: In (p) supportive studies, larger samples were used (M4580, SD 
7292) compared with non-supportive studies (M 669, SD 631), t(28, N 48) 
2.82, p B.01. Remarkably, all studies employing samples larger than 3000 partici-
pants (12 studies) revealed (p) supportive results. In contrast, no systematic
differences regarding gender composition of the samples were found. Similarly,
 Work & Stress 23

there were no significant differences in the job-related homogeneity of the samples

between supportive and non-supportive studies.
Finally, no difference in the application of measurement instruments between (p)
supportive and non-supportive studies was found. Neither the use of particular
instruments measuring JDC/JDCS dimensions (e.g. JCQ or LQWQ), nor the
specificity of the general well-being measure (e.g. mental health vs. depression/
anxiety and fatigue) was significantly associated with the likelihood to confirm
additive effects.
Multiplicative effects of JDC. The buffer hypothesis of the JDC model was (p) con-
firmed in 11 of the 28 studies (39%) examining interaction effects of JDC on general
psychological well-being. Full support for the hypothesis was found in only four (14%)
studies. In the seven partially supportive studies, support was only found for self-report
measures but not for data aggregated on a group level [38, 80], for individuals with
(pro-) active coping strategies [30, 47] or depended on the operationalization of the
control dimension [67, 77]. In Study 63, evidence for the buffer hypothesis was found
for males but not for females.
Multiplicative effects of JDCS. A three-way interaction of demands, control, and su-
pport was examined in 14 studies on general psychological well-being. In only three
(21%) of these studies were (p) supportive results reported. More specifically, two
studies [34, 77] found partial evidence for the three-way interaction, and only one
study [1] fully supported the hypothesis (7%). Again, support depended on the
measurement of control [77] or was found only for one occupational subsample [34].
Comparison of studies supportive versus non-supportive of multiplicative effects (JDC/
JDCS). A longitudinal design was applied in only three of the 28 studies testing the
buffer hypotheses. Only one of these three studies was in line with the model’s
predictions. In cross-sectional studies the (p) support rate amounted to 40% (10 out
of 25 studies). Due to the small number of longitudinal studies, no statistical analysis
of this difference was conducted.
A comparison of the sample sizes showed no significant differences between (p)
supportive studies (M2337, SD 2661) and non-supportive studies (M 2412,
SD 5440), t(26) 0.05, ns. Moreover, contrary to additive effects, no increased
likelihood to (p) support interactive effects was found in studies employing large
samples. No significant effects regarding gender were found, and studies with job-
related homogeneous samples were about as likely to confirm the buffer hypotheses
as studies using heterogeneous samples. Finally, no substantial differences regarding
the measurement of JDC/JDCS dimensions or outcome variables were found.

Summary: general psychological well-being

Best support was found for additive effects of JDC; this hypothesis was fully or
partially confirmed in 28 of the 47 studies (60%), of which full support was found in
17 studies (36%). Regarding the studies examining the JDCS model, support rates
were lower compared to studies examining the JDC model. Full or partial support
for additive effects of all three dimensions was found in 16 of the 32 studies (50%);
full support was found in nine studies (28%). Weaker, full, or partial support was
found for the buffer hypothesis of the JDC model. In 11 of the 28 studies (39%),
interactive effects of demands and control were reported (with full support for four
24 J.A. Häusser et al.

studies; 14%), whereas in only three studies of the 14 studies testing the buffer
hypothesis of the JDCS model was a three-way interaction of demands, control, and
social support found (with full support being found in only one study) (see also
Table 2).
With respect to study design, the support rates found in longitudinal studies were
about equal to those found in cross-sectional studies, both for additive and
multiplicative effects. Comparing fully and partially supportive with non-supportive
studies, obvious differences were found for sample size: On average, studies providing
support for additive effects used larger samples than non-supportive studies. No such
finding was evident for the buffer hypotheses. No significant differences were found
for sample composition, application of measurement instruments, or operationaliza-
tion of general psychological well-being.

JOB-RELATED WELL-BEING
In 63 studies, the validity of the JDC/JDCS model with respect to aspects of job-
related well-being was tested. Whereas van der Doef and Maes (1999a) distinguished
between three measures of job-related well-being, namely job satisfaction, burnout,
and direct measures of job-related well-being, we decided to distinguish only between
job satisfaction and emotional exhaustion (the core component of burnout) since
none of the studies selected in this review used job-related outcome measures that
cannot be classified into one of these two categories.

JOB SATISFACTION
In total, 49 studies [1, 3, 6, 8
16, 20
22, 25, 26, 28, 29, 33
35, 37
39, 41, 43
45, 48,
52, 54
56, 58, 60, 62, 65
68, 72, 74
77, 79, 81, 83] examined the effects of the JDC/
JDCS dimensions on job satisfaction. Eight studies conducted single-item measures
of job satisfaction (16%), nine studies applied Warr et al.’s (1979) 15-item scale of job
satisfaction (18%), and 11 studies applied the LQWQ (22%), an instrument to
measure JDC/JDCS dimensions that additionally includes a measure of job
satisfaction. In all but one of the studies, analyses of additive effects of job demands
and control were reported. A longitudinal design was applied in eight studies, that is,
in only 16% of the studies measuring job satisfaction as an outcome variable.
Additive effects of JDC. The existence of additive effects was (p) supported in 33 of
48 studies (69%) testing this hypothesis with respect to job satisfaction. Fully
supportive results were reported in 26 studies (54%), whereas in seven studies only
partial support was found. Within these studies, support depended on the
operationalization of control [1, 66] or of demands [6], on the measurement
instrument [37], or was only found for self-report but not aggregated group-level
data [14, 38]. In one longitudinal study [15] effects were only found for stable
exposure to strain levels, but not for changes in strain.
Additive effects of JDCS. (Partial) support for additive effects of all three dimensions
was found in 17 of 31 studies (55%). Thirteen studies were fully supportive (42%),
whereas four studies revealed only partial support. Support depended on the source
of social support [1, 44], the operationalization of demands [6], or both demands and
control [1]. Furthermore, in one study support was only found for individual self-
report but not for aggregated group-level data [38].
 Work & Stress 25

Comparison of studies supportive versus non-supportive of additive effects (JDC/JDCS).

Examination of (p) supportive and non-supportive studies revealed differences in
study design, sample size, and sample composition. Of the 48 studies eight employed a
longitudinal design, and only one was fully supportive, whereas in two studies partial
support for additive effects was reported. Thus, the (p) support rate of these studies
(three out of eight studies; 38%) was clearly lower compared to that found for cross-
sectional data (30 out of 40 studies; 75%), x2 (1, N 48) 4.36, p B.05.
In line with the results for general psychological well-being, in (p) supportive
studies larger samples were employed than in non-supportive studies (M 2731,
SD 6654 vs. M 260, SD 223), t(46) 1.43, ns, but due to large variances this
difference did not reach significance. Interestingly, all studies employing more than
1000 participants (14 studies) revealed (p) supportive results.
There was no significant difference between non-supportive and (p) supportive
studies with regard to the ratio of female to male employees. In contrast, a difference
was found regarding occupation: In non-supportive studies, job-related homoge-
neous samples were used more frequently (in 13 out of 15 studies; 87%) than in (p)
supportive studies (17 out of 33 studies; 52%), x2 (1, N 48) 5.44, pB.05.
No notable differences regarding the instruments used to measure job characteristics
or regarding the operationalization of job satisfaction were found.
Multiplicative effects of JDC. The majority of the 36 studies in which the buffer hyp-
othesis with respect to job satisfaction was examined failed to find the predicted
multiplicative effect. Only 11 studies (31%) yielded (p) support for the buffer
hypothesis, of which only two were fully supportive. In the nine partially supportive
studies, confirmation of the hypothesis depended on the measurement instrument
[35], on the operationalization of control [67, 77], of demand [9, 13] or of both
dimensions [76]. In one study [14], support was found for data aggregated at a work
group level but not for individual data; another study [38] showed the opposite
result. Finally, in Study 11, support was found for only some occupational groups.
Multiplicative effects of JDCS. In 20 studies the three-way interaction of demands,
control, and social support with respect to job satisfaction was examined. (Partial)
support was found in only three (15%) of them. Only one study reported results that
fully supported the buffer hypothesis of the JDCS model (5%). In the partially
supportive studies, support depended on the measurement of control [77] or the
source of social support [65].
Comparison of studies supportive versus non-supportive of multiplicative effects (JDC/
JDCS). Only two longitudinal studies examined the buffer hypotheses with respect
to job satisfaction. Both (p) confirmed multiplicative effects. Notably, both
longitudinal studies reported a significant three-way interaction of the JDCS
dimensions, but failed to show a significant multiplicative effect of demands and
control. However, one of the significant interaction patterns was contrary to the
model’s predictions. Due to the very small number of longitudinal studies, no
statistical comparison with the (p) support rate of cross-sectional studies (36%) was
conducted.
A more detailed examination of the (p) supportive and non-supportive studies
indicated that supportive studies used somewhat (but not significantly) larger
samples (M 1489, SD 1952) than non-supportive studies (M 640, SD818),
t(16, N 35) 1.49, ns. However, in contrast to additive effects, not all studies
26 J.A. Häusser et al.

employing samples larger than 1000 participants were (p) supportive. More
specifically, only about half (56%) of the studies exceeding this sample size revealed
(p) supportive results (nine studies). Further comparisons revealed that support for
the buffer hypotheses of the JDC/JDCS model seems to be independent of sample
composition (i.e. gender and occupation) and measurement of both JDCS
dimensions and job satisfaction.

Summary: job satisfaction

Studies in which job satisfaction was examined as an outcome variable provided
good partial and full support for additive effects of demands and control: In 33 of
the 48 studies (69%), a significant association of these two job characteristics with
job satisfaction was shown (with full support being found for 26 studies; 54%). With
regard to the JDCS model, (p) support was found in 17 of the 31 studies (55%)
testing for additive effects (full support: 13 studies; 42%). Thus, there is robust
evidence for additive effects of the JDC/JDCS dimensions with respect to job
satisfaction. In contrast, in the 36 of such studies testing the buffer hypothesis of the
JDC model, partial or full support was found in only 11 studies (31%) of which two
were fully supportive. For the JDCS model, in only three of the 20 studies (15%)
testing the buffer hypothesis was partial or full support reported (full support was
found in only one of these studies). (See also Table 2).
With respect to additive effects, longitudinal studies were less supportive than
cross-sectional studies. A similar result was evident for multiplicative effects of
control and demands. By contrast, testing for a three-way interaction of the JDCS
dimensions, one longitudinal study revealed partial support.
For additive effects, comparisons between supportive and non-supportive studies
revealed a tendency for (p) supportive studies to employ larger samples, although
(due to high variances) these differences failed to reach statistical significance.
Moreover, all studies employing more than 1000 participants found (p) support for
additive effects, whereas this was not evident for multiplicative effects. No gender
effects were found, but studies based on occupation-heterogeneous samples provided
more support for additive effects than studies based on homogeneous samples. This
effect was not found for the buffer hypotheses of the two models.
Finally, no differences between supportive and non-supportive studies were
found with regard to measurement instruments.

EMOTIONAL EXHAUSTION
The concept of burnout can be subdivided into three dimensions: emotional
exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment (professional
efficacy) (Maslach, 1998; Maslach, Schaufeli, & Leiter, 2001). Emotional exhaustion
is the core dimension of burnout with the most robust relationship to job-related
stressors (Maslach et al., 2001). Moreover, during the study selection phase it became
evident that emotional exhaustion was examined notably more often than the two
remaining dimensions. For these two reasons, we focused exclusively on emotional
exhaustion as an outcome variable.
The validity of the JDC/JDCS model with respect to emotional exhaustion was
examined in 35 studies [1, 4, 5, 10
14, 16, 19, 22
24, 26, 28, 31, 32, 40, 41, 48, 50, 52,
 Work & Stress 27

54, 55, 57, 61, 62, 64, 69, 72, 74, 76, 78, 81, 82]. In seven of these studies (20%) a
longitudinal design was applied.
Additive effects of JDC. (Partial) support for additive effects of JDC was obtained in
20 of the 35 studies that tested emotional exhaustion (57%). Sixteen studies revealed
full support for additive effects (46%). In four studies, support for the hypothesis was
conditional and depended on the operationalization of control [1, 57] or demands
[32]. In Study 23, support was found for only one occupational group.
Additive effects of JDCS. (Partial) support for additive effects of JDCS was found in
nine of 23 studies (39%). In six studies, fully supportive results (26%) were reported.
In three studies, support depended on the operationalization of demands and control
[76], the source of social support [55, 23], or was found for one occupational group
only [23].
Comparison of studies supportive versus non-supportive of additive effects (JDC/JDCS).
In seven studies of the 35 that applied the model to emotional exhaustion a
longitudinal design was used. These studies provided somewhat weaker support (three
out of seven studies; 43%) for additive effects than cross-sectional studies (17 out of 28
studies; 61%), but due to the small number of longitudinal studies, this difference failed
to reach significance, x2 (1, N 35) .73, ns.
Significantly, larger samples were employed in (p) supporting studies (M 1916,
SD 2624) than in non-supportive studies (M 403, SD 331), t(20) 2.55, p B.05.
Remarkably, all studies employing more than 1500 individuals (nine studies) were
fully supportive. In contrast, support for additive effects was not associated with
differences in sample composition (i.e. gender and occupation) and measurement of
JDC/JDCS dimensions.
Multiplicative effects of JDC. In 27 of the 35 studies that examined emotional exhau-
stion, the interaction of demands and control with respect to emotional exhaustion
was tested. Seven of those studies (26%) yielded (p) support and only four (15%)
revealed full support for the buffer hypothesis. Support depended on occupational
group [11], and in two studies, the buffering effect of control was found only for
employees with active coping strategies [19] or poor time management behaviour
[50].
Multiplicative effects of JDCS. Only one study out of 13 that tested the three-way
interaction with respect to emotional exhaustion fully confirmed the buffer
hypothesis of the JDCS model, whereas the 12 remaining studies revealed non-
supportive results.
Comparison of studies supportive versus non-supportive of multiplicative effects (JDC/
JDCS). A longitudinal design was applied in only two such studies that examined
emotional exhaustion, and one was supportive. Due to the very low sample size, no
statistical comparison with the (p) support rate of cross-sectional studies (28%) was
conducted. However, it is important to note that the supportive longitudinal study
reported a significant two-way interaction as predicted by the JDC model, but no
significant multiplicative effect of all three JDCS dimensions were found in
longitudinal data. Furthermore one study reported an interaction pattern contrary
to the buffer hypothesis of the JDC model.
No significant differences in sample size, sample composition, and measurement
instruments between (p) supportive and non-supportive studies were found.
28 J.A. Häusser et al.

Summary: emotional exhaustion

Summarizing the results of the 35 studies applying the JDC model to emotional
exhaustion, in 20 of the studies (57%), additive effects of demands and control were
partially or fully supported, (16 studies; 46%) fully confirmed the hypothesis.
Regarding the 23 studies in which it was applied to the JDCS model, (p) support
for additive effects was found in nine of the studies (39%) of which full support was
found in six studies (26%). Only weak evidence was obtained for the buffer
hypothesis: Significant demand
control interactions were reported in seven (26%) of
the 27 studies (full support: four studies; 15%) and there was almost no support at all
for interactive effects as predicted by the JDCS model (one out of 13 studies) (See
also Table 2).
Regarding design of the studies that applied the JDC and JDCS models to
emotional exhaustion, (p) support for additive effects was lower in longitudinal
studies compared to cross-sectional studies. Only two longitudinal studies examined
the buffer hypothesis of the JDC model, one of which was supportive, whereas the
only study testing for the three-way interaction of demands, control, and support
failed to show a significant effect. Further comparisons between (p) supportive and
non-supportive studies showed that sample size had an effect on the likelihood of
finding support for additive but not multiplicative effects. No significant differences
were found regarding gender, job-related homogeneity, or measurement issues.

Discussion
Our main objective was to review research on the JDC/JDCS model with respect to
psychological well-being published in the period 1998
2007, thereby updating the
review by van der Doef and Maes (1999a). In what follows, we will summarize and
discuss our major findings. Looking ahead, we will raise issues that deserve further
attention and refer to some that no longer require any further investigation.

JDC model versus JDCS model

In the first part of our discussion, we compare the overall validity of the JDC and the
JDCS model without differentiating between additive and interactive effects. In sum,
a total of 237 tests of the JDC model were conducted by the studies included in our
review (140 tests of additive effects and 97 tests of interactive effects). Of these, 115
(49%) provided (p) support and 74 provided full support: (31%). In comparison, a
total of 144 tests of the JDCS model were conducted (92 tests of additive effects and
52 tests of interactive effects). Of these 53 (37%) provided (p) support and 35 (24%)
provided full support. Thus, overall there is somewhat weaker support for the JDCS
compared to the JDC model.
At first glance, the reduced support rates for the JDCS model compared to the
JDC model seem to indicate problems associated with the social support dimension.
For example, social support can be accompanied by explicit or implicit negative
emotional meanings, like condemning a person for being in need of help, thereby
undermining the beneficial effect of social support and leading to reduced self-
esteem and well-being (cf. Semmer et al., 2008). However, in our analyses it is likely
that the reduced support rates result from a mere stochastic effect: To illustrate, the
JDCS model predicts a significant main effect of social support in addition to the
 Work & Stress 29

main effects of demands and control that are predicted by the JDC model. Since
including an additional criterion for the model to be approved reduces its likelihood
of being confirmed, it is generally more difficult to obtain support for the JDCS
model as compared to the JDC model. This stochastical interpretation is further
substantiated by the following additional findings: When main effects for all three
JDCS dimensions were simultaneously entered in the regression analyses, significant
effects of social support and control were found in about 60% of the studies, whereas
a main effect of demands was reported in 80% of these studies. Hence, support for
the social support dimension is about equal to that for the other two JDCS
dimensions. A similar (although statistically more complex) argument can be made
for interactive effects. Taking these stochastical issues into account, both models
seem to be supported equally well.

Additive effects
As a next step, we now summarize and discuss the empirical support for additive
effects, collapsing across the JDC and JDCS models. According to van der Doef and
Maes (1999a), research published in the period 1979
1997 provided considerable
support for additive effects of the JDC/JDCS dimensions (see Table 2). A total of
232 tests of additive effects were conducted in the studies included in our review. Of
these 232 tests, 132 (57%) provided at least partial support for additive effects, with a
full support rate of 42%. Better (p) support for additive effects was obtained with
increasing sample sizes and was always found if sample size was sufficiently large (all
studies employing samples larger than 3000 participants found significant additive
effects). We conclude that the existence of additive effects has been established
beyond doubt. Hence, there is no need for further correlational studies providing
evidence for main effects of the JDCS dimensions on psychological well-being.
However, whereas the existence of this association is no longer in doubt, the
underlying causal connection still calls for further examination. Therefore, we took
a closer look at the longitudinal studies. In the 19 longitudinal studies, 29 tests
of additive effects were conducted. Of these, 15 tests (52%) yielded full or partial
evidence for additive effects. Hence, the longitudinal studies provide somewhat
weaker support for additive effects overall compared to 117 fully or partially
supportive tests out of 203 tests (58%) conducted in cross-sectional studies.
Nonetheless, compared to the data reported by van der Doef and Maes (1999a),
the support rates derived from longitudinal data have clearly increased.
Looking at these findings in more detail, it becomes evident that the somewhat
lower support rates for additive effects in longitudinal studies compared to cross-
sectional studies can only be observed for indicators of job-related well-being, but
not for general psychological well-being. Since support rates of cross-sectional and
longitudinal studies are on a comparable level regarding general psychological well-
being (cross-sectional: 58% vs. longitudinal: 64%), it can be concluded that demands,
control, and social support indeed additively influence general psychological well-
being.
Conversely, with respect to job-related well-being, support rates of longitudinal
studies were clearly lower compared to cross-sectional studies (cross-sectional: 69%
vs. longitudinal: 40%). We believe that this difference is an indicator that
the associations between JDCS dimensions and job-related well-being found in
30 J.A. Häusser et al.

cross-sectional research are, at least partially, due to reciprocal or reversed causation.

Thus, employees who are dissatisfied with their job
irrespective of the cause of their
dissatisfaction
are likely to attribute their negative affect to characteristics of their
job, that is, they report higher levels of demands and lower levels of control and
social support.
Finally, our analysis of gender as a potentially confounding factor revealed no
significant differences in the likelihood of confirming the JDC/JDCS model
depending on the ratio of women to men in the sample. In other words, there was
no evidence of a reduced validity of the JDC/JDCS model for women compared to
men, which was supposed in earlier research (van der Doef & Maes, 1999a).

Multiplicative effects
As reported by van der Doef and Maes (1999a), research published between 1979
and 1997 provided only unsatisfactory support for interactive effects (see Table 2).
Similarly, in our analyses, only 29 of 97 tests (30%) provided (p) support for the
demand
control interaction (full support: 13%). Moreover, only seven of 52 tests
(13%) provided (p) support for the interaction of demands, control, and social
support (full support: three studies; 6%). To summarize, the body of evidence paints
a gloomy picture of the JDC(S) interaction.
We perceive at least three possible reasons for the low support rates for
multiplicative effects: First, the idea of buffering effects might simply be incorrect,
and data confirming the buffer hypotheses might have been type-I-errors (see also
Taris, 2006). If this conclusion were true, we would expect that
by chance

significant interaction pointing in the reversed direction should have been found
roughly equally often as significant interactions in line with the buffer hypothesis.
Such hypothesis-inconsistent interactions would mean that low control buffers the
effects of high demands (JDC), and control buffers high demands only in the absence
of social support (JDCS). In fact, only two of these interaction patterns running
counter to the buffer hypothesis were observed in the studies examined in this review,
whereas 36 significant interactions were in line with the model’s prediction. Although
we cannot exclude that this is due to publication bias, we believe that the evidence as
a whole contradicts this first explanation. In other words, the occurrence of
significant interactions is unlikely to be due to chance alone, hence we believe that
buffering effects do exist.
Second, the effect sizes of the multiplicative effects might be substantially lower
than the effect sizes for additive effects. Therefore, it might be more difficult to
find significant evidence for multiplicative as compared to additive effects.
Unfortunately, since the studies included in our review typically did not report
effect sizes, no systematic examination was conducted in this review. However, if the
reduced support rates for multiplicative compared to additive effects were due to
lower effect sizes, then studies employing larger samples should be more likely to find
significant multiplicative effects than studies using smaller samples. This, however,
was not the case. Hence, it is unlikely that the reduced support rates for
multiplicative effects are due to small effect sizes.
The third explanation for the difficulties in finding buffering effects, which seems
to be the most plausible, refers to a potential moderator identified in former
research: the degree to which demands and control match. Contradicting the
 Work & Stress 31

assumption of JDC/JDCS dimensions to be global and unidimensional constructs,

demands and control may have to refer to the same level of functioning to show
buffering effects (cf. Viswesvaran, Sanchez, & Fisher, 1999). For example, scheduling
control is expected to compensate for cognitive demands such as workload, whereas
this type of control might be less capable of buffering the impact of emotional
demands such as being confronted with suffering in healthcare jobs.
To the best of our knowledge, so far no review of the existing research has tested
this idea. Therefore, we conducted explorative data analyses to examine whether a
better match of demands and control is associated with a higher likelihood of finding
significant interactions. Classifying the tests of the buffer hypothesis, two categories
reflecting different levels of match were defined: The first category comprised tests in
which demands and control refer to the same level of functioning. That is, demands
were operationalized as work load or time pressure, and control was operationalized
as task, timing, scheduling, or pacing control; thus, both JDC dimensions refer to
the time aspect of work at a task level. Furthermore, studies using sample-specific
operationalizations of demands and control were included in this category. In all, we
identified 20 tests that could be classified into this category. All tests that were based
on global and unspecific measures of demands and control and tests that clearly did
not match (e.g. interactions of emotional demands and timing control) were
classified into the second category of non-matching tests (76 tests). In line with
the idea of matching, our results showed that significantly better support was found
in the tests of the first category (50%), compared to non-matching studies (25%), x2
(1, N 96) 4.69, pB.05. This finding is a strong indicator for the benefit of using
demand and control operationalizations referring to qualitatively identical dimen-
sions of functioning.
Note that in addition we found evidence for a linear relationship between the
degree to which demands and control match and the likelihood of finding significant
interactions. A more differentiated classification of the studies defined as not
matching resulted in a third category. This category contained tests with at least a
rudimental degree of match
that is, tests measuring workload as demands, but
applying the more global measure of decision latitude to operationalize control.
Thus, whereas demands refer to time pressure at a task level, control refers to
autonomy at the job level. Conducting a comparison between the three categories
resulting from this more differentiated classification, best support for multiplicative
effects was found in the tests applying matching JDC operationalizations (50%); 36%
of the tests with a lower degree of match (workload-decision latitude interactions)
revealed a significant buffering effect, and the weakest support was found for tests
that based on global operationalizations or definitely non-matching JDC dimensions
(12%), x2 (2, N 96) 9.28, p B.05.
Recently, de Jonge and Dormann (2003, 2006) extended this idea by including
different types of strain in their considerations. Their triple match principle states that
buffering effects are most likely to be found when demands, control, and strains are
based on qualitatively identical dimensions. To illustrate, emotional control (e.g.
access to professional supervision) is likely to buffer the relationship between
emotional demands (e.g. working with delinquent minors) and emotional strain (e.g.
emotional exhaustion). Preliminary support for the triple match principle comes
from two longitudinal studies (de Jonge & Dormann, 2006) showing that the
likelihood of finding interactive effects was linearly related to the degree of match
32 J.A. Häusser et al.

between demands, control, and strains. Unfortunately, in virtually all of the studies
included in our review measurements of demands, control, and strains were not
based on identical dimensions, because in the vast majority of studies, measures of
cognitive demands (workload) and emotional strains (well-being) were applied; thus,
a triple match was not realized. As a consequence, sufficient data have not yet been
gathered to allow the matching principle to be tested.
As the idea of matching is profoundly reasonable, its neglect might be one reason
for the current lack of support for the buffer hypotheses. We consider this
explanation to be the most convincing one. Consequently, we strongly recommend
further research into this topic, as the matching principle may well turn out to a key
issue in this area of research.
Regarding causation, only six longitudinal studies examined multiplicative effects
of the JDC/JDCS model by including a total of 13 tests of the buffer hypotheses. Of
these 13 tests, three were (p) supportive and full support was found in two tests.
Interestingly, the longitudinal studies did not provide weaker support for the
multiplicative effects compared to the cross-sectional studies. This tentatively
suggests that most of the support for multiplicative effects obtained in cross-
sectional studies is not due to reversed causation.
Finally, as for additive effects, no significant gender differences with respect to
the validity of the JDC/JDCS model were found. This finding suggests that the
weaker support in studies employing predominantly female participants reported in
earlier research (e.g. van der Doef & Maes, 1999a) might be due to gender-
confounded variables such as working hours per week or the double burden of job
strains and family life.

Which issues deserve further attention in future research?

It is important to note that the JDC/JDCS model is an environmental model aiming
to explain how the objective work environment affects psychological health.
However, the measurement of JDC/JDCS dimensions in former as well as in
contemporary research relies on subjective appraisals, thereby making measurement
of work characteristics vulnerable to self-report bias and heightening the probability
of reversed or reciprocal causation. Although there is evidence that variance in self-
report measures of work conditions can largely be attributed to variations in the
objective work environment (see Spector, 1992), future research should develop
methods that provide a more objective measurement of work characteristics.
Notably, although van der Doef and Maes (1999a) recommended the development
and application of more objective methods and instruments 10 years ago, only four
studies included in our review applied methods other than subjective self-reports.
We strongly agree with van der Doef and Maes’ (1999a) appeal, emphasizing the
importance of their recommendation, as the stagnancy in the development of more
objective methods is to be overcome. However, as objective work characteristics and
the subjective perception of them might affect psychological well-being it would be
most expedient to apply measures of both (e.g. Rau, Morling, & Rösler, 2010).
Several researchers have noted that cross-sectional designs are inappropriate for
showing unidirectional causation (e.g. de Lange et al., 2003; Zapf, Dormann, &
Frese, 1996). The number of longitudinal studies has increased in the last decade
compared to the two previous decades, providing more clear-cut tests of causation.
 Work & Stress 33

When reversed causation occurs, a challenge for these studies is to test whether the
reversed causal relationships are due to real or perceived changes in the work
environment (cf. de Lange, Taris, Kompier, Houtman, & Bongers, 2004). Thus,
impaired psychological well-being can not only impact workers’ perception of the
work environment, but can also lead to job change or modifications within the job,
resulting in more negative circumstances (cf. Dalgard et al., 2009).
Furthermore, only a few experimental studies on the JDC/JDCS model have been
conducted so far (e.g. Hockey & Earle, 2006; Searle, Bright, & Bochner, 2001).
Experiments not only provide valuable information about the causal relationships,
but also enable a systematic examination of the triple match principle outlined above.
We hence encourage researchers to employ more experimental paradigms. In doing
so, they should aim to increase the ecological validity of their experiments, for
example, by using settings similar to real work environments or by increasing the
duration of the simulated work tasks.
Finally, considering the large amount of research and the number of previous
reviews (e.g. Belkic et al., 2004; Van der Doef & Maes, 1998, 1999a; de Lange et al.,
2003) available, we think that the time has come to conduct a systematic meta-
analysis, allowing a quantitative test of both additive and multiplicative effects and
moderating variables such as sample size or the degree to which demands and
control match.

Overall conclusions
Summarizing our analyses of additive effects and multiplicative effects as predicted
by the JDC/JDCS model, two major conclusions can be drawn: First, additive effects
are consistently found when sufficiently large samples are employed. Regarding
causation, the result pattern points to a unidirectional relationship between JDC/
JDCS dimensions and general psychological well-being, whereas the correlations
between JDC/JDCS dimensions and job-related well-being seem to be, at least
partially, due to reversed causation. As the existence of additive effects is no longer in
doubt, there is no further need for cross-sectional examination of main effects of the
JDC/JDCS dimensions on psychological well-being.
Second, turning towards multiplicative effects, the empirical status of the buffer
hypotheses is less conclusive: Only weak empirical support for multiplicative effects
has been obtained to date. This issue was recently addressed in an important
theoretical article by Taris (2006). Interpreting the body of evidence presented by van
der Doef and Maes (1999a), Taris raised the question whether the buffer hypothesis
is a ‘‘zombie theory’’ that should have died from lack of empirical evidence but
persists in theoretical debate and empirical research. Indeed, both van der Doef and
Maes and we found unsatisfactory evidence for the buffer hypotheses of the JDC/
JDCS model. However, since only two interaction patterns running counter to the
buffer hypotheses were observed in the studies included in our analyses, we do not
believe the buffer hypothesis to be ‘‘zombie theory.’’ As demonstrated by our
exploratory analysis, a better match of demands and control is associated with a
higher likelihood of finding significant interactions. Therefore, in our view, buffering
effects do exist, but as a large part of the evidence is based on studies using non-
matching operationalizations of the JDC/JDCS dimensions, significant buffering
effects were only found in a minority of studies. Hence, we are confident that far
34 J.A. Häusser et al.

more support for the buffer hypothesis will be obtained in the future once the
matching principle has been fully realized in empirical tests of the JDC/JDCS model.

References
Belkic, K., Landsbergis, P.A., Schnall, P.L., & Baker, D. (2004). Is job strain a major source
of cardiovascular disease risk? Scandinavian Journal of Work Environment and Health, 30,
85
128.
Dalgard, O.S., Sørensen, T., Sandanger, I., Nygård, J.F., Svensson, E., & Reas, D.L. (2009).
Job demands, job control, and mental health in an 11-year follow-up study: Normal and
reversed relationships. Work & Stress, 23, 284
296.
de Jonge, J., & Dormann, C. (2003). The DISC model: Demand-induced strain compensation
mechanisms in job stress. In M.F. Dollard, A.H. Winefield & H.R. Winefield (Eds.),
Occupational stress in the service professions (pp. 43
74). London: Taylor & Francis.
de Jonge, J., & Dormann, C. (2006). Stressors, resources and strain at work: A longitudinal
test of the triple-match principle. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1359
1374.
de Lange, A.H., Taris, T.W., Kompier, M.A.J., Houtman, I.L.D., & Bongers, P.M. (2003). The
very best of the millennium: Longitudinal research and the demand-control (-support)
model. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 8, 282
305.
de Lange, A.H., Taris, T.W., Kompier, M.A.J., Houtman, I.L.D., & Bongers, P.M. (2004). The
relationships between work characteristics and mental health: Examining normal, reversed
and reciprocal relationships in a 4-wave study. Work & Stress, 18, 149
166.
Derogatis, L.R. (1983). SCL-90: Administration, scoring and procedures manual-II (2nd ed.).
Clinical Psychometric Research, Baltimore.
Ganster, D.C. (1989). Worker control and well-being: A review of research in the workplace. In
S.L. Sauter, J.J. Hurrell & C.L. Cooper (Eds.), Job control and worker health (pp. 375
411).
Chichester: Wiley.
Goldberg, D., & Williams, P. (1998). A user’s guide to the general health questionnaire. Oxford:
NFER-Nelson The Basingstoke Press.
Harnois, G., & Gabriel, P. (2000). Mental health and work: Impact, issues and good practices.
Geneva: World Health Organisation/International Labour Organisation.
Hockey, G.R.J., & Earle, F. (2006). Control over the scheduling of simulated office work
reduces the impact of workload on mental fatigue and task performance. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Applied, 12, 50
65.
Johnson, J.V., & Hall, E.M. (1988). Job strain, work place social support, and cardiovascular
disease: A cross-sectional study of a random sample of the Swedish working population.
American Journal of Public Health, 78, 1336
1342.
Johnson, J.V., Hall, E.M., & Theorell, T. (1989). Combined effects of job strain and social
isolation on cardiovascular disease morbidity and mortality in a random sample of the
Swedish male working population. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment and Health,
15, 271
279.
Karasek, R.A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude and mental strain: Implications for
job redesign. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 285
308.
Karasek, R.A. (1985). Job content questionnaire and user’s guide. Los Angeles: University of
Southern California, Department of Industrial and System Engineering.
Karasek, R.A. (1989). Control in the workplace and its health-related aspects. In S.L. Sauter,
J.J. Hurrell & C.L. Cooper (Eds.), Job Control and Worker Health (pp. 129
160). Chichester:
Wiley.
Karasek, R.A., Brisson, C., Kawakami, N., Houtman, I., Bongers, P., & Amick, B. (1998). The
job content questionnaire (JCQ): An instrument for internationally comparative assessment
of psychosocial job characteristics. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3, 322
355.
 Work & Stress 35

Maes, S., Akerboom, S., van der Doef, M., & Verhoeven, C. (1999). De Leidse Arbeids
Kwaliteits Schaal voor Verpleegkundigen (LAKS-V) [The Leiden quality of work life
questionnaire for nurses (LQWLQ-nurses)]. Health Psychology, Leiden University, Leiden,
the Netherlands.
Maes, S., & van der Doef, M. (1997). Leidse Arbeids Kwaliteit Schaal voor Docenten (LAKS-
DOC) [Leiden quality of work scale for teachers]. Section Clinical and Health Psychology,
Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Maslach, C. (1998). A multidimensional theory of burnout. In C.L. Cooper (Ed.), Theories of
organizational stress (pp. 68
85). New York: Oxford University Press.
Maslach, C., Jackson, S.E. & Leiter, M.P. (1996). Maslach burnout inventory manual (3rd ed.).
Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Press.
Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W.B., & Leiter, M.P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of
Psychology, 52, 397
422.
Rau, R., Morling, K., & Rösler, U. (2010). Is there a relationship between major depression
and both objective assessed and perceived job demand and job control? Work & Stress, 24,
Schnall, P.L., Landsbergis, P.A., & Baker, D. (1994). Job strain and cardiovascular disease.
Annual Review of Public Health, 15, 381
411.
Searle, B.J., Bright, J.E.H., & Bochner, S. (2001). Helping people to sort it out: The role of
social support in the job strain model. Work & Stress, 15, 328
346.
Semmer, N.K., Elfering, A., Jacobshagen, N., Perrot, T., Beehr, T.A., & Boos, N. (2008). The
emotional meaning of instrumental social support. International Journal of Stress Manage-
ment, 15, 235
251.
Spector, P.R. (1992). A consideration of the validity and meaning of self-report measures of
job conditions. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 7, 123
151.
Taris, T.W. (2006). Bricks without clay: On urban myths in occupational health psychology.
Work & Stress, 20, 99
104.
Theorell, T.G., & Karasek, R.A. (1996). Current issues relating to psychosocial job strain and
cardiovascular disease research. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1, 9
26.
van der Doef, M., & Maes, S. (1998). The job demand-control (support) model and physical
health outcomes: A review of the strain and buffer hypotheses. Psychology and Health, 13,
909
936.
van der Doef, M., & Maes, S. (1999a). The job demand-control (-support) model and
psychological well-being: A review of 20 years of empirical research. Work & Stress, 13,
87
114.
van der Doef, M., & Maes, S. (1999b). The Leiden quality of work questionnaire: Its
construction, factor structure and psychometric qualities. Psychological Reports, 85,
954
962.
Van Vegchel, N., de Jonge, J., & Landsbergis, P.A. (2005). Occupational stress in (inter)action:
The interplay between job demands and job resources. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
26, 535
560.
Vercoulen, J.H., Swanink, C.M., Fennis, J.F., Galama, J.M., van der Meer, J.W., & Bleijenberg,
G. (1994). Dimensional assessment of chronic fatigue syndrome. Journal of Psychosomatic
Research, 38, 383
392.
Viswesvaran, C., Sanchez, J.I., & Fisher, J. (1999). The role of social support in the process of
work stress: A meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54, 314
334.
Warr, P., Cook, C., & Wall, T. (1979). Scales for the measurement of some work attitudes and
aspects of psychological well-being. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 52, 129
148.
Zapf, D., Dormann, C., & Frese, M. (1996). Longitudinal studies in organizational stress
research: A review of the literature with reference to methodological issues. Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, 1, 145
169.