Ever Thought About Strikes? Development of a Scale to Assess Attitudes and Behavioral Reactions to Strikes

Strikes are a recurrent phenomenon in many countries. However, research on strikes from a psychological perspective has been limited. By developing a sound measure to assess attitudes and behavioral reactions to strikes, we will be in a better position to evaluate these constructs in individuals and compare across studies. Therefore, we developed a scale to assess attitudes and behavioral reactions to strikes following classic scale development guidelines using four samples (total N=1369; N1=304, N2=209, N3=443, N4=413). In Study 1, we used exploratory factor analysis to reduce the generated items to a scale and showed that the strike attitude and behavioral reactions scale consists of one afective factor (negative reactions towards strikes), one cognitive factor (legitimacy of strikes), and three behavioral factors (informing oneself about strikes, strike-related social network behavior, and support of strikers). Study 2 confrmed these fve factors and showed acceptable psychometric properties. Study 3 supported the construct validity of the developed scale: the fve factors were correlated with willingness to strike and attitudes towards unions, among other variables. Study 4 further showed that the scale can also capture attitudes and behavioral reactions towards specifc strikes. Overall, these studies indicate that the strike attitude and behavioral reactions scale is a psychometrically sound measure consisting of fve factors

Is use of the general system justification scale across countries justified? Testing its measurement equivalence

System justification is a widely researched topic in social and political psychology. One major measurement instrument in system justification research is the General System Justification Scale (G-SJS). This scale has been used, among others, for comparisons across social groups in different countries. Such comparisons rely on the assumption that the scale is measurement equivalent. However, this assumption has never been comprehensively tested. Thus, the present two studies assessed the measurement equivalence of the G-SJS following classic measurement equivalence guidelines (i.e., multigroup confirmatory factor analyses) in Study 1 and using a new method for comparing larger numbers of groups in Study 2 (i.e., alignment optimization). In Study 1, we analysed the measurement equivalence in Great Britain (n = 444), Germany (n = 454), and France (n = 463). In Study 2, we used a publicly available dataset consisting of 66 samples from 30 countries (N = 13,495) to again assess the measurement equivalence of the scale. Results indicated (partial) metric equivalence, but not scalar equivalence in both studies. Overall, the studies indicate that mean comparisons across the examined countries are not warranted with the current form of the G-SJS. The scale needs to be revised for valid cross-country comparisons of means

A psychological perspective on strikes : attitudes, behavioral reactions, and willingness to participate

Streiks haben in der Arbeitswelt eine lange Tradition. Gewerkschaften nutzen sie seit Jahrzehnten in allen Ländern und Sektoren, um bei Tarifverhandlungen Druck auf die Arbeitgebenden auszuüben. Dementsprechend hat die Forschung zu Streiks ein breites Spektrum von Fragen abgedeckt. Diese wurden jedoch weitgehend auf einer anderen als der individuellen Ebene behandelt. Mehr über die individuelle Perspektive auf Streiks zu wissen, ist jedoch wichtig, um den Veränderungen in der Arbeitswelt zu begegnen. Ziel meiner Dissertation ist es daher, einen Überblick über die bestehende Forschung zu Streiks auf individueller Ebene zu geben und diese Forschung durch eine neu entwickelte Skala zur Messung von Einstellungen und Verhaltensabsichten zu Streiks zu erweitern. In einem ersten Schritt habe ich eine systematische Literaturrecherche durchgeführt, um den aktuellen Stand des Forschungsfeldes zu Streiks aus individueller Perspektive zu bewerten. Der zweite Schritt bestand in der Entwicklung einer Skala zur Messung von Streikeinstellungen und Verhaltensreaktionen auf Streiks. Ergänzt wurde dies durch eine Studie zur Überprüfung der Messäquivalenz der Skala in Stichproben aus dem Vereinigten Königreich, Deutschland und Frankreich. In einem dritten Schritt untersuchte ich die Unterschiede zwischen den drei Ländern hinsichtlich ihrer Streikeinstellungen und replizierte die beobachteten Unterschiede zwischen deutschen und französischen Stichproben im Rahmen einer weiteren Studie. Schließlich habe ich in einem vierten Schritt gezeigt, dass sowohl dispositionelle als auch kontextuelle Aspekte die Streikeinstellungen beeinflussen können. Die dispositionelle Tendenz, Ungerechtigkeiten wahrzunehmen, sagte in einer deutschen und einer französischen Stichprobe eine positivere Streikeinstellung voraus. In der sechsten und letzten Studie meiner Dissertation untersuchte ich den Einfluss der Heimarbeit als kontextuellen Faktor auf die Streikeinstellung und stellte fest, dass Personen, die von zu Hause arbeiteten, eine negativere Einstellung zu Streiks hatten als diejenigen, die im Büro arbeiteten. Meine Dissertation bietet somit einen Überblick über die bestehende Forschung zu Streiks auf individueller Ebene und neue Erkenntnisse über Streikeinstellungen. Diese Erkenntnisse betreffen Unterschiede zwischen den Ländern, zwischen Gewerkschaftsmitgliedern und Nichtmitgliedern sowie Unterschiede in Bezug auf dispositionelle und kontextuelle Faktoren. Dies können nur erste Schritte sein, um ein besseres Verständnis von Streiks aus einer individuellen Perspektive zu erlangen. In meiner Dissertation fordere ich daher zukünftige Forschung dazu auf diese Perspektive einzunehmen, um unser Wissen über Streiks zu erweitern.Strikes have a long-lasting tradition in the world of work. Unions have used them for decades across countries and sectors to exert pressure on employers during collective bargaining. Accordingly, research on strikes has covered a wide range of questions. These have however widely been addressed on other than individual levels. Knowing more about the individual’s perspective on strikes is nonetheless important to face changes in the world of work. The aim of my dissertation is therefore to offer an overview of existing individual-level research on strikes and extend this research using a newly developed measure to assess attitudes and behavioral intentions to strikes. In a first step, I conducted a systematic literature review to evaluate the current state of the research field on strikes from an individual-level perspective. The second step consisted of a scale development to assess strike attitudes and behavioral reactions to strikes. This was supplemented by a study testing the measurement equivalence of the scale in samples from the United Kingdom, Germany, and France. As a third step, I assessed differences in the three countries in their strike attitudes and replicated the observed differences between German and French samples as part of another study. Finally, and as a fourth step, I showed that dispositional as well as contextual aspects can influence strike attitudes. The dispositional tendency to perceive injustices predicted more positive strike attitudes in a German and a French sample. In the sixth and final study of my dissertation, I examined the influence of working from home as a contextual factor influencing strike attitudes and observed that people working from home reported more negative attitudes to strike than those working in the office. My dissertation thus provides an overview of existing research on strikes from an individual perspective and new insights into strike attitudes. These insights cover differences across countries, between union members and non-members, and differences relating to dispositional and contextual factors. These can only be first steps in gaining a better understanding of strikes from an individual-level perspective. Hence, my dissertation calls for research adopting this perspective to further extend our knowledge of strikes.Strikes have a long-lasting tradition in the world of work. Unions have used them for decades across countries and sectors to exert pressure on employers during collective bargaining. Accordingly, research on strikes has covered a wide range of questions. These have however widely been addressed on other than individual levels. Knowing more about the individual’s perspective on strikes is nonetheless important to face changes in the world of work. The aim of my dissertation is therefore to offer an overview of existing individual-level research on strikes and extend this research using a newly developed measure to assess attitudes and behavioral intentions to strikes. In a first step, I conducted a systematic literature review to evaluate the current state of the research field on strikes from an individual-level perspective. The second step consisted of a scale development to assess strike attitudes and behavioral reactions to strikes. This was supplemented by a study testing the measurement equivalence of the scale in samples from the United Kingdom, Germany, and France. As a third step, I assessed differences in the three countries in their strike attitudes and replicated the observed differences between German and French samples as part of another study. Finally, and as a fourth step, I showed that dispositional as well as contextual aspects can influence strike attitudes. The dispositional tendency to perceive injustices predicted more positive strike attitudes in a German and a French sample. In the sixth and final study of my dissertation, I examined the influence of working from home as a contextual factor influencing strike attitudes and observed that people working from home reported more negative attitudes to strike than those working in the office. My dissertation thus provides an overview of existing research on strikes from an individual perspective and new insights into strike attitudes. These insights cover differences across countries, between union members and non-members, and differences relating to dispositional and contextual factors. These can only be first steps in gaining a better understanding of strikes from an individual-level perspective. Hence, my dissertation calls for research adopting this perspective to further extend our knowledge of strikes

Measurement Equivalence

We tested the Measurement Equivalence of the General System Justification Scale in two studies. The data of Study 1 and the syntax used in both studies is available in this project. The data from Brandt et al. (2020) that we used for our Study 2 is available at: https://osf.io/qw47m/

Breast cancer risk inBRCA1/2mutation carriers and noncarriers under prospective intensified surveillance

Comparably little is known about breast cancer (BC) risks in women from families tested negative forBRCA1/2mutations despite an indicative family history, as opposed toBRCA1/2mutation carriers. We determined the age-dependent risks of first and contralateral breast cancer (FBC, CBC) both in noncarriers and carriers ofBRCA1/2mutations, who participated in an intensified breast imaging surveillance program. The study was conducted between January 1, 2005, and September 30, 2017, at 12 university centers of the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer. Two cohorts were prospectively followed up for incident FBC (n= 4,380; 16,398 person-years [PY], median baseline age: 39 years) and CBC (n= 2,993; 10,090 PY, median baseline age: 42 years). Cumulative FBC risk at age 60 was 61.8% (95% CI 52.8-70.9%) forBRCA1mutation carriers, 43.2% (95% CI 32.1-56.3%) forBRCA2mutation carriers and 15.7% (95% CI 11.9-20.4%) for noncarriers. FBC risks were significantly higher than in the general population, with incidence rate ratios of 23.9 (95% CI 18.9-29.8) forBRCA1mutation carriers, 13.5 (95% CI 9.2-19.1) forBRCA2mutation carriers and 4.9 (95% CI 3.8-6.3) forBRCA1/2noncarriers. Cumulative CBC risk 10 years after FBC was 25.1% (95% CI 19.6-31.9%) forBRCA1mutation carriers, 6.6% (95% CI 3.4-12.5%) forBRCA2mutation carriers and 3.6% (95% CI 2.2-5.7%) for noncarriers. CBC risk in noncarriers was similar to women with unilateral BC from the general population. Further studies are needed to confirm whether less intensified surveillance is justified in women fromBRCA1/2negative families with elevated risk

High-risk breast cancer surveillance with MRI: 10-year experience from the German consortium for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer

Purpose To report on 10 years of high-risk service screening with annual MRI in the German Consortium for Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (GC-HBOC). Methods A cohort of 4,573 high-risk, previously unaffected women (954 BRCA1 carriers, 598 BRCA2 carriers, 3021 BRCA1/2 non-carriers) participating in the GC-HBOC surveillance program was prospectively followed. Screening outcomes for 14,142 screening rounds with MRI between 2006 and 2015 were analyzed and stratified by risk group, type of screening round, and age. Results A total of 221 primary breast cancers (185 invasive, 36 in situ) were diagnosed within 12 months of an annual screening round with MRI. Of all cancers, 84.5% (174/206, 15 unknown) were stage 0 or I. In BRCA1 carriers, 16.9% (10/59, 5 unknown) of all incident cancers (screen-detected and interval cancers combined) and in BRCA2 carriers 12.5% (3/24, 4 unknown) were stage IIA or higher, compared to only 4.8% (2/42, 2 unknown) in high-risk BRCA1/2 non-carriers. Program sensitivity was 89.6% (95% CI 84.9-93.0) with no significant differences in sensitivity between risk groups or by age. Specificity was significantly lower in the first screening round (84.6%, 95% CI 83.6-85.7) than in subsequent screening rounds (91.1%, 95% CI 90.6-91.7), p < 0.001. Cancer detection rates (CDRs) and as a result positive predictive values were strongly dependent on type of screening round, risk group and patient age. CDRs ranged from 43.5 (95% CI 29.8-62.9) for the first screening round in BRCA2 carriers to 2.9 parts per thousand (95% CI 1.3-6.3) for subsequent screening rounds in high-risk non-carriers in the age group 30 to 39 years. Conclusions High-risk screening with MRI was successfully implemented in the GC-HBOC with high sensitivity and specificity. Risk prediction and inclusion criteria in high-risk non-carriers need to be adjusted to improve CDRs and thus screening efficacy in these patients