Assessment of Workplace Bullying and Harassment: Reliability and Validity of a Japanese Version of the Negative Acts Questionnaire

Assessment of Workplace Bullying and Harassment: Reliability and Validity of a Japanese Version of the Negative Acts Questionnaire: Jiro TAKAKI, et al. Department of Public Health, Okayama University Graduate School of Medicine, Dentistry and Pharmaceutical Sciences-Objectives: Interest in workplace bullying and harassment has been increasing in Japan At present, the Negative Acts Questionnaire (NAQ) is one of the most frequently used questionnaires for assessing these issues The purpose of this study was to develop a Japanese version of the NAQ Methods: We translated the original version of the NAQ using a back-translation method Participants in this study were recruited from 737 workers at a manufacturing company in Japan Data were obtained from questionnaires completed by 517 respondents (response rate 70.1%) Results: We used a cross-validation approach A three-factor model was obtained from exploratory factor analyses The confirmatory factor analysis for this model revealed values of 0.94, 0.91, 0.95, and 0.054 for the goodness-of-fit index, the adjusted goodness-of-fit index, the comparative fit index, and the root mean square error of approximation, respectively Pearson's correlation coefficients for the NAQ scores with the Job Content Questionnaire (JCQ) support scores and the Effort-Reward Imbalance Questionnaire scores for respect and job security were significant (p<0.001) and the direction of these associations were consistent with our expectations, with the exceptions of the correlations between the NAQ sexual harassment score and the JCQ support scores Cronbach's alpha coefficients for the scores on the entire NAQ scale and on three subscales (person-related bullying, work-related bullying, and sexual harassment) were 0.90, 0.84, 0.60, and 0.60, respectively Conclusions: A Japanese version of the NAQ was developed and it appears to have acceptable levels of internal consistency reliability and factor- and construct-validity (J Occup Health 2009, 52 74-81)