This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I started this section to start collecting sources for this section.. and engage in discussion about an approach for this section.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 02:42, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
I started this section to start collecting sources for this section.. and engage in discussion about an approach for this section.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 02:43, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
– CaroleHenson ( talk) 02:48, 8 January 2020 (UTC)Would any of these scholarly articles be helpful?
— User:CaroleHenson
Potential sources
Collapsed as this issue has been resolved, re: an expert
|
---|
Lightningstrikers, I reverted the most recent edit here because:
See source.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 08:45, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
Thus I don't think the sentence tagged with "failed verification" deserves that tag, and I ask you to please delete it. Please bear in mind that I have been dealing with Lightningstrikers for years. He has used other monikers, like Mrm7171, in the past. He has generally tried to undermine a great deal of what I have written for the WP occupational health psychology entry, to the extent that he has gotten himself suspended and then permanently banned from WP. Now he has returned under a new name. He has trained his sites on the occupational stress entry because of its close connection to OHP. Even Lightningstrikers's claim that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is unworthy of a mention because it isn't international enough is one of the niggling things he does to try to undermine my writing. I appreciate your efforts to create a dialogue with Lightningstrikers but every dialogue turns into his pulling another rabbit out of the hat to undermine what I have written about OHP. Iss246 ( talk) 21:28, 8 January 2020 (UTC) Sorry user:CaroleHenson, I deleted the "failed verification" by mistake. I will leave it there for you to delete. Iss246 ( talk) 21:34, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
Works for me at this point.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 01:34, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
1 Psychological theories of worker stress 1.1 Demand-Control-Support Model 1.2 Effort-Reward Imbalance Model 1.3 Person-Environment Fit Model 1.4 Job Characteristics Model 1.5 Diathesis-Stress Model 1.6 Job Demands-Resources Model 2 Factors related to the abovementioned psychological theories of occupational stress 3 Negative health and other effects 4 Gender 5 Causes of occupational stress 5.1 General working conditions 5.2 Workload 5.3 Long hours 5.4 Status 5.5 Salary 5.6 Workplace bullying 5.7 Narcissism and psychopathy 5.8 Workplace conflict 5.9 Sexual harassment 5.10 Work-life balance 5.11 Occupational group 6 Prevention/Intervention 6.1 Signs and symptoms of excessive job and workplace stress Lightningstrikers ( talk) 02:22, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
Lightningstrikers, like Mrm7171, asks everyone to be respectful but he is not respectful. He does not respect me. Iss246 ( talk) 02:54, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
I did not say Mrm71! I said Mrm7171. Iss246 ( talk) 03:02, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
|
Iss246 and CaroleHenson I have opened a case at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard to resolve this and cool things down. Sorry I'm not sure how else to notify the other two editors so I put this alert here instead. Lightningstrikers ( talk) 04:28, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
Rather than engaging in an edit war:
Do you have a source, Lightningstrikers for
Traditionally clinical psychology, counseling psychology, health psychology and industrial psychology have dealt with occupational stress at both the individual and organisational level. citation needed Other professions such as medicine and occupational hygiene also deal with occupational stress. citation needed
You have been trying to add this sentence for awhile, but have not added sources.
Other than that, these edit involved a paragraph break. Not really a huge deal in the end. I don't seen that it's such a big block of text that it needs to be subdivided, though.
If you would like to expand the lede to include a summary of content within the article, that would be great! Are you interested in drafting content for the lede?– CaroleHenson ( talk) 23:43, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
I see that you are trying to revert again. I didn't want this to be an edit war. I wanted you to find sources for the sentences you have added. This has gone back and forth for awhile.
With about six people having warned you about disruptive editing, which has gotten to Level 2 twice... and is now about to go to Level 3, that could result in your being blocked. You can solve this really easily. Find sources to support your position. This is my last discussion with you until / unless you want to engage in productive conversation.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 00:15, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
CaroleHenson you added a failed verification tag for good reason [4] Why have you now deleted the tag? The source does not say occupational stress which is a very specific construct it says occupational health which is obviously very broad. Please explain? Lightningstrikers ( talk) 23:48, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
user:Lightningstrikers, the source is a respected figure in the fields of both i/o psychology and occupational health psychology. Your doppelganger Mrm7171 even cited this psychologist's work. I see no explanation for your questioning the source. Iss246 ( talk) 00:51, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
This is what I mean by niggling arguments. Spector, who is not my friend but I know who he is because of his prominence, writes about "job stress" which is synonymous with occupational stress. Iss246 ( talk) 01:16, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
The question I've asked is why are we talking about professionals in the area. Trying to say one is better than the other seems pointless. It seems very fishy to me. Can either of you please just provide some reasons why we need to be including this? Removing it would then allow us to focus on expanding the lead to include a sumnmary of all the actual content like guidelines tell us to do. Please answer my question. Lightningstrikers ( talk) 01:47, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
This is going nowhere. It won't hurt for right now to have content that is tagged with needing sources in the article.
Hopefully dispute resolution will step in and help sort this out.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 02:22, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
I cannot agree because I explained my actions in the section entitled "End of Argument." Lightning, you cannot by fiat without a coherent justification change my edits. Your having a feeling is not enough. Iss246 ( talk) 04:22, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
I would like to hear from Psyc12 and Sportstir who both indicated industrial posychology and occupational health psychology are the areas which deal with occupational stress. I hope we can all reach a civil resolution and come up with a great 'live" version of the lead for our readers. There has been far too much coinflict here. Hope that sounds like a fair approach? Lightningstrikers ( talk) 01:36, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
This is the draft so far.
All that is needed is a link, rather than copying text and references
|
---|
Although professionals in occupational medicine have been interested in occupational stress, the CDC indicates that the relatively new field of occupational health psychology is "all about" research and practice aimed at the prevention of "occupational stress, illness, and injury." [1] According to Paul E. Spector, other subdisciplines within psychology have been relatively absent from research on occupational stress. [2] Occupational psychologists diagnose and treat cases of occupational stress. [3] They seek to reduce occupational stress by working with individuals and in some cases changing the workplace to make it less stressful. [4] Cooper's 1986 model of occupational health suggests that for the development of programs to benefit workers to advance, collaboration is needed between occupational psychologists and clinical psychologists, and perhaps other professionals. [5] Clinical psychologists and health psychology has a history of providing expertise on health, mental health, and stress. [6] Another tangential field is counseling psychology, where in addition to expertise in to perform assessment, address normal development issues, and implement therapeutic interventions—counseling psychologists also have expertise in career development and vocational psychology. [6] Industrial and organizational psychologists have a broad skill set to address occupational stress and workplace safety, due to their expertise in organizational development, job design, training, and employee assessment, according to Spector. [6] Joseph Hurrell, a National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) researcher, states that there remains a large disconnect between these fields of psychology and general occupational health: "Psychologists need to make the relevance of OHP clear to the field of occupational medicine by focusing on outcomes of public health significance". [6] References
|
Lightningstrikers ( talk) 01:36, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
Both psych12, Sportstir and I all agree that industrial psychology and occupational health psychology are the only two professions.
Tonight I did a little research using PsycInfo.
21 (0.4%) articles published by the Journal of Counseling Psychology of the 5,029 articles it published since its founding in 1964 concerned occupational stress.
155 (0.8%) articles published by the Journal of Clinical Psychology of the 18,423 articles published since its founding in 1945 concerned occupational stress.
367 (42.4%) articles published by the Journal of Occupational Health Psychology of the 866 articles published since its founding in 1996 concerned occupational stress.
Clearly occupational stress plays a small role in counseling and clinical psychology as the leading journals in those fields indicate. Occupational stress plays a much larger, more important role in OHP. User:CaroleHenson, the argument user:Lighningstrikers is making is fallacious. It involves quibbling over minor stuff and unnecessarily magnifying small things. The situation would resemble in an odd way my arguing in the anxiety WP entry that OHP plays as important a role as clinical psychology plays; I would not make such an argument. Anxiety only plays a small role in OHP; 60 (6.9%) of the 866 Journal of Occupational Health Psychology articles concern anxiety. I am going to make a change in the occupational stress entry. I insist that Lightningstrikers leave my edits alone. Iss246 ( talk) 01:19, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
Clinical/counseling/health psychology deal with stress in general and have not been much concerned with occupational stress or other occupational issues. That has not been their focus. This is reflected in the PsycInfo data Iss246 provided. Unless someone can come up with data that shows otherwise, these fields should be struck from the lede. The only psychology fields concerned with occupational stress at present are OHP and IO, and those are the only ones that should be mentioned in the lede. Psyc12 ( talk) 14:22, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
I have started Draft:Occupational stress (lede) to start drafting content regarding of occupations in Occupational stress. So far, I see consensus about the types of occupations to look for and that the uncited content as-is should be struck out. If it works out better to comment on the draft there, and avoid filling this page, that's fine with me.
Yes, I could absolutely see this as being a separate section in the article. I don't see an issue with that. Let's see how much content can be created, based on the number of sources that can be found.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 23:15, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
I hope you are realizing that you are:
Meters Would you mind weighing in on this? It seems my next step is to take this to 3RR, unless you have other guidance for us. Thanks so much!– CaroleHenson ( talk) 01:20, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
and will take it there.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 01:47, 11 January 2020 (UTC)Reverting obvious vandalism—edits that any well-intentioned user would agree constitute vandalism, such as page blanking and adding offensive language. From: 3RR Excemptions
A part of the occupational stress article that needs more work is the section on the consequences of job stress. That could be done in the section entitled "Negative health and other effects." Iss246 ( talk) 15:24, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
I think I have all the content now that Iss246 added and edited from the draft - as well as some additional content that I gathered and the link that Psyc12 added.
What do you think about having a summary of this in the lede and moving most of it to a subsection under the "Prevention/Intervention" section?– CaroleHenson ( talk) 03:01, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
Should occupational health psychology be mentioned in the lede along with I-O? I-O is a very broad field, with stress being one small part, but the field of OHP is entirely focused on stress and other aspects of worker health/well-being? The two sources I found both linked occupational stress with OHP. Of course, this is complicated because most (not all) OHPers are also I-O psychologists. Psyc12 ( talk) 13:26, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
The lede says that IOs treat stress. Did the sources cited actually say I-Os treated stress? Or did they say I-Os might design interventions, which would involve redesigning jobs, or providing various kinds of training? If the latter, this should be restated to be more clear. To me treating stress suggests some form of psychotherapy, which IOs are generally not qualified to do. Psyc12 ( talk) 13:49, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
It looks like in the carnage there were three really good sources added by editor psyc12 to back up what I said about industrial/organizational psychology.
I like the separate section on occupations that mentions OHP and other disciplines relevant to occupational stress. Psyc12 ( talk) 13:30, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
user:Sportstir, it is important to identify the sources you looked at. I am all for sources. Iss246 ( talk) 03:55, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
User:CaroleHenson, thank you for the heads-up about the book. This is what I read. The work of an occupational psychologist involves the following: assessment at work-related tests and scales (documenting the reliability and validity of selection tests and measurement of performance)
advise on team building
advise on teamwork
development of training programs to enable workers to gain new skills
evaluate the success of training programs
coaching workers
recruitment and selection of new employees
assessment of worker performance for management.
I didn't read anything about the occupational psychologist dealing with job stress. Perhaps I missed it. Is there something about the occupational psychologist and job stress that you could document. I am not against mentioning the work of occupational psychologists. I suspect that given the above tasks in the portfolio of the occupational psychologist, dealing with employees' job stress is only a tiny part of the occupational psychologist's portfolio. Iss246 ( talk) 17:57, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
"The title "Occupational psychologist" means that the psychologists are trained and registered practitioners to treat occupational concerns. The title is unique to the United Kingdom. In Europe, the relevant title is 'Work and organizational psychologist' and in the United States, it is 'industrial and organizational psychologist'. Throughout the remainder of the world, it is one of these terms."
( edit conflict) it looks like
N. Anderson, Deniz S. Ones, H. K. Sinangil, C. Viswesvaran. Sportstir ( talk) 01:48, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
From my response to you:
More pointedly, what is your proposed language with a page number, etc. that supports the proposed language?
and
A table of contents for an entire book does me absolutely no good. No suggested of proposed language makes it hard to figure out what your real point is. i.e., This feels like Original research
– CaroleHenson ( talk) 01:52, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
If you were going to explain that section you've highlighted we would need to say IWO is the overriding international title tittle for this large field of psychology both the research and practice levels. So an occupational psychologist falls within IWO and can also be called an IWO psychologist. Sportstir ( talk) 01:26, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
User:CaroleHenson and user:Sportstir, I think we can agree on this. The portfolio of the occupational psychologist is large. It includes advise on team building, advise on teamwork, development of training programs to enable workers to gain new skills, evaluate the success of training programs, coaching workers, recruitment and selection of new employees, and assessment of worker performance for management. It may also include something do with occupational stress. Occupational stress is a relatively small part of the portfolio of the occupational psychologist. By contrast, occupational stress is a major part of the portfolio of OHP. The psychologist Paul Spector, who works in both i/o psychology and OHP, indicates as much. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) indicates as much. Iss246 ( talk) 02:51, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
It seems like there is an edit battle going on regarding the order of the sentences, but neither of you posted anything here, on the talk page. Please see WP:EDITWAR and note that if there's already an edit war situation going on, and no attempt to resolve it, admins don't have to wait for three reverts.
Is there a way to resolve this? Find out what other readers of the article and this talk page think? Explain more fully what the issue is?– CaroleHenson ( talk) 06:11, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
@ Sportstir and CaroleHenson: Sportstir, I justify putting the sentence "The subfield of occupational health psychology has made occupational stress a major research focus" at the beginning of the second paragraph on two grounds. First, the CDC identifies OHP as the leading arm of research on occupational stress. Second, the psychologist Paul Spector, who is a leading researcher in both i/o psychology and OHP, identifies OHP as a leading arm of research on occupational stress. Spector also describes how i/o psychology was slow to endorse research on occupational stress. Sportstir, you may have experts who can weigh in too. That is only fair. Please weigh in with their expert opinion. Iss246 ( talk) 03:34, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
user:Sportstir, why doesn't the sentence I entered not belong in the lede? Iss246 ( talk) 17:18, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
user:Sportstir, you have 129 edits on Wikipedia as of today. And I have more than 12,000. When did you become an expert on Wikipedia? And when did you become an expert on what is "a tiny little field" and what isn't. Your comment is insulting. Iss246 ( talk) 20:06, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
It isn't clear to me why it is important to say that the study of occupational stress comes mainly from I-O-occupational psychology. My reading of sources like Cooper and Dewe's Stress a Brief History (I provided the full cite earlier) does not say that. They talk about the early development of the study of occupational stress, and they mention quite a few individuals. Some might have been I-O-Os but many are not. One of the most influential early works is Katz and Kahn's The Social Psychology of Organizations that is the origin of role stress theory/research. Some are from other fields. I just don't see where Cooper and Dewe single out I-O-O as the dominant field that set things moving. Many of the major figures like Theorell and Frankenhaeser aren't even psychologists. I think it is fine to mention that the roots of occupational stress come from many disciplines including I-O-O, but it is not accurate to say it comes mainly from I-O-O, and this is true in the US, the UK and Europe. Note Cooper and Dewe are from the UK, not the US. Psyc12 ( talk) 21:59, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
The following sentence "Occupational stress is primarily assessed, treated and researched by Industrial and organizational psychologists" is factually incorrect. I-O psychologists do not treat stress--that is the domain of clinical psychology, and the study of occupational stress is multi-disciplinary. There are people from many fields studying it. It is fine to say I-Os are involved in assessment and research, and perhaps interventions to reduce stress, but is not the same as treating it. I doubt that the sources cited, if they are reliable, actually say this. I raised this issue before. What do these sources actually say? Psyc12 ( talk) 22:03, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
User:Sportstir, i/o psychology is not "particularly" concerned with occupational stress. It is concerned with occupational stress much the way other disciplines are concerned, disciplines such as occupational health psychology and human factor psychology and ergonomics. You do not have a source to indicate that i/o psychology is the preeminent discipline concerned with occupational stress. Iss246 ( talk) 23:21, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
User:Sportstir, I asked to have the matter taken up on the Noticeboard. I placed a message to that effect on your talk page. Better to have WP editors adjudicate the matter. Iss246 ( talk) 23:39, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
User:Sportstir, thank you for the correction. I goofed. It was the Vinchur-Koppes chapter that I meant to delete. I haven't looked at it in a few months. Please tell me the page in which Vinchur and Koppes cover occupational stress. I remember that the Vinchur-Koppes chapter was about leadership, performance appraisal, and the usual topics found in i/o psychology but not about occupational stress. I remember them writing that job stress was beyond the scope of the chapter. Correct me if I am wrong. Thanks. Iss246 ( talk) 00:05, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
User:Sportstir Please see the occupational stress talk page.. Did you read all the references you cite in the first paragraph? I think you missed something because you don't need all those citations in the first paragraph. For example, Vinchur and Koppes wrote "topics of relatively recent interest such as organizational communication and stress are beyond the scope of this narrative." One or two citations is enough to cement your point. Iss246 ( talk) 14:14, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
By: Peter M. Hart & Cary L. Cooper? Even in 2001 occupational stress has an entire chapter devoted to the topic. Can you explain what problem you have with this source? Sportstir ( talk) 21:15, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
The Hart-Cooper chapter should remain. If I deleted it earlier, I did it by mistake. The Griffin-Clarke chapter should remain. The Ones et al. reference should be deleted because it barely mentioned job stress. Iss246 ( talk) 17:46, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
I started this section to start collecting sources for this section.. and engage in discussion about an approach for this section.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 02:42, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
I started this section to start collecting sources for this section.. and engage in discussion about an approach for this section.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 02:43, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
– CaroleHenson ( talk) 02:48, 8 January 2020 (UTC)Would any of these scholarly articles be helpful?
— User:CaroleHenson
Potential sources
Collapsed as this issue has been resolved, re: an expert
|
---|
Lightningstrikers, I reverted the most recent edit here because:
See source.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 08:45, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
Thus I don't think the sentence tagged with "failed verification" deserves that tag, and I ask you to please delete it. Please bear in mind that I have been dealing with Lightningstrikers for years. He has used other monikers, like Mrm7171, in the past. He has generally tried to undermine a great deal of what I have written for the WP occupational health psychology entry, to the extent that he has gotten himself suspended and then permanently banned from WP. Now he has returned under a new name. He has trained his sites on the occupational stress entry because of its close connection to OHP. Even Lightningstrikers's claim that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is unworthy of a mention because it isn't international enough is one of the niggling things he does to try to undermine my writing. I appreciate your efforts to create a dialogue with Lightningstrikers but every dialogue turns into his pulling another rabbit out of the hat to undermine what I have written about OHP. Iss246 ( talk) 21:28, 8 January 2020 (UTC) Sorry user:CaroleHenson, I deleted the "failed verification" by mistake. I will leave it there for you to delete. Iss246 ( talk) 21:34, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
Works for me at this point.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 01:34, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
1 Psychological theories of worker stress 1.1 Demand-Control-Support Model 1.2 Effort-Reward Imbalance Model 1.3 Person-Environment Fit Model 1.4 Job Characteristics Model 1.5 Diathesis-Stress Model 1.6 Job Demands-Resources Model 2 Factors related to the abovementioned psychological theories of occupational stress 3 Negative health and other effects 4 Gender 5 Causes of occupational stress 5.1 General working conditions 5.2 Workload 5.3 Long hours 5.4 Status 5.5 Salary 5.6 Workplace bullying 5.7 Narcissism and psychopathy 5.8 Workplace conflict 5.9 Sexual harassment 5.10 Work-life balance 5.11 Occupational group 6 Prevention/Intervention 6.1 Signs and symptoms of excessive job and workplace stress Lightningstrikers ( talk) 02:22, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
Lightningstrikers, like Mrm7171, asks everyone to be respectful but he is not respectful. He does not respect me. Iss246 ( talk) 02:54, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
I did not say Mrm71! I said Mrm7171. Iss246 ( talk) 03:02, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
|
Iss246 and CaroleHenson I have opened a case at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard to resolve this and cool things down. Sorry I'm not sure how else to notify the other two editors so I put this alert here instead. Lightningstrikers ( talk) 04:28, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
Rather than engaging in an edit war:
Do you have a source, Lightningstrikers for
Traditionally clinical psychology, counseling psychology, health psychology and industrial psychology have dealt with occupational stress at both the individual and organisational level. citation needed Other professions such as medicine and occupational hygiene also deal with occupational stress. citation needed
You have been trying to add this sentence for awhile, but have not added sources.
Other than that, these edit involved a paragraph break. Not really a huge deal in the end. I don't seen that it's such a big block of text that it needs to be subdivided, though.
If you would like to expand the lede to include a summary of content within the article, that would be great! Are you interested in drafting content for the lede?– CaroleHenson ( talk) 23:43, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
I see that you are trying to revert again. I didn't want this to be an edit war. I wanted you to find sources for the sentences you have added. This has gone back and forth for awhile.
With about six people having warned you about disruptive editing, which has gotten to Level 2 twice... and is now about to go to Level 3, that could result in your being blocked. You can solve this really easily. Find sources to support your position. This is my last discussion with you until / unless you want to engage in productive conversation.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 00:15, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
CaroleHenson you added a failed verification tag for good reason [4] Why have you now deleted the tag? The source does not say occupational stress which is a very specific construct it says occupational health which is obviously very broad. Please explain? Lightningstrikers ( talk) 23:48, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
user:Lightningstrikers, the source is a respected figure in the fields of both i/o psychology and occupational health psychology. Your doppelganger Mrm7171 even cited this psychologist's work. I see no explanation for your questioning the source. Iss246 ( talk) 00:51, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
This is what I mean by niggling arguments. Spector, who is not my friend but I know who he is because of his prominence, writes about "job stress" which is synonymous with occupational stress. Iss246 ( talk) 01:16, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
The question I've asked is why are we talking about professionals in the area. Trying to say one is better than the other seems pointless. It seems very fishy to me. Can either of you please just provide some reasons why we need to be including this? Removing it would then allow us to focus on expanding the lead to include a sumnmary of all the actual content like guidelines tell us to do. Please answer my question. Lightningstrikers ( talk) 01:47, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
This is going nowhere. It won't hurt for right now to have content that is tagged with needing sources in the article.
Hopefully dispute resolution will step in and help sort this out.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 02:22, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
I cannot agree because I explained my actions in the section entitled "End of Argument." Lightning, you cannot by fiat without a coherent justification change my edits. Your having a feeling is not enough. Iss246 ( talk) 04:22, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
I would like to hear from Psyc12 and Sportstir who both indicated industrial posychology and occupational health psychology are the areas which deal with occupational stress. I hope we can all reach a civil resolution and come up with a great 'live" version of the lead for our readers. There has been far too much coinflict here. Hope that sounds like a fair approach? Lightningstrikers ( talk) 01:36, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
This is the draft so far.
All that is needed is a link, rather than copying text and references
|
---|
Although professionals in occupational medicine have been interested in occupational stress, the CDC indicates that the relatively new field of occupational health psychology is "all about" research and practice aimed at the prevention of "occupational stress, illness, and injury." [1] According to Paul E. Spector, other subdisciplines within psychology have been relatively absent from research on occupational stress. [2] Occupational psychologists diagnose and treat cases of occupational stress. [3] They seek to reduce occupational stress by working with individuals and in some cases changing the workplace to make it less stressful. [4] Cooper's 1986 model of occupational health suggests that for the development of programs to benefit workers to advance, collaboration is needed between occupational psychologists and clinical psychologists, and perhaps other professionals. [5] Clinical psychologists and health psychology has a history of providing expertise on health, mental health, and stress. [6] Another tangential field is counseling psychology, where in addition to expertise in to perform assessment, address normal development issues, and implement therapeutic interventions—counseling psychologists also have expertise in career development and vocational psychology. [6] Industrial and organizational psychologists have a broad skill set to address occupational stress and workplace safety, due to their expertise in organizational development, job design, training, and employee assessment, according to Spector. [6] Joseph Hurrell, a National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) researcher, states that there remains a large disconnect between these fields of psychology and general occupational health: "Psychologists need to make the relevance of OHP clear to the field of occupational medicine by focusing on outcomes of public health significance". [6] References
|
Lightningstrikers ( talk) 01:36, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
Both psych12, Sportstir and I all agree that industrial psychology and occupational health psychology are the only two professions.
Tonight I did a little research using PsycInfo.
21 (0.4%) articles published by the Journal of Counseling Psychology of the 5,029 articles it published since its founding in 1964 concerned occupational stress.
155 (0.8%) articles published by the Journal of Clinical Psychology of the 18,423 articles published since its founding in 1945 concerned occupational stress.
367 (42.4%) articles published by the Journal of Occupational Health Psychology of the 866 articles published since its founding in 1996 concerned occupational stress.
Clearly occupational stress plays a small role in counseling and clinical psychology as the leading journals in those fields indicate. Occupational stress plays a much larger, more important role in OHP. User:CaroleHenson, the argument user:Lighningstrikers is making is fallacious. It involves quibbling over minor stuff and unnecessarily magnifying small things. The situation would resemble in an odd way my arguing in the anxiety WP entry that OHP plays as important a role as clinical psychology plays; I would not make such an argument. Anxiety only plays a small role in OHP; 60 (6.9%) of the 866 Journal of Occupational Health Psychology articles concern anxiety. I am going to make a change in the occupational stress entry. I insist that Lightningstrikers leave my edits alone. Iss246 ( talk) 01:19, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
Clinical/counseling/health psychology deal with stress in general and have not been much concerned with occupational stress or other occupational issues. That has not been their focus. This is reflected in the PsycInfo data Iss246 provided. Unless someone can come up with data that shows otherwise, these fields should be struck from the lede. The only psychology fields concerned with occupational stress at present are OHP and IO, and those are the only ones that should be mentioned in the lede. Psyc12 ( talk) 14:22, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
I have started Draft:Occupational stress (lede) to start drafting content regarding of occupations in Occupational stress. So far, I see consensus about the types of occupations to look for and that the uncited content as-is should be struck out. If it works out better to comment on the draft there, and avoid filling this page, that's fine with me.
Yes, I could absolutely see this as being a separate section in the article. I don't see an issue with that. Let's see how much content can be created, based on the number of sources that can be found.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 23:15, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
I hope you are realizing that you are:
Meters Would you mind weighing in on this? It seems my next step is to take this to 3RR, unless you have other guidance for us. Thanks so much!– CaroleHenson ( talk) 01:20, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
and will take it there.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 01:47, 11 January 2020 (UTC)Reverting obvious vandalism—edits that any well-intentioned user would agree constitute vandalism, such as page blanking and adding offensive language. From: 3RR Excemptions
A part of the occupational stress article that needs more work is the section on the consequences of job stress. That could be done in the section entitled "Negative health and other effects." Iss246 ( talk) 15:24, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
I think I have all the content now that Iss246 added and edited from the draft - as well as some additional content that I gathered and the link that Psyc12 added.
What do you think about having a summary of this in the lede and moving most of it to a subsection under the "Prevention/Intervention" section?– CaroleHenson ( talk) 03:01, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
Should occupational health psychology be mentioned in the lede along with I-O? I-O is a very broad field, with stress being one small part, but the field of OHP is entirely focused on stress and other aspects of worker health/well-being? The two sources I found both linked occupational stress with OHP. Of course, this is complicated because most (not all) OHPers are also I-O psychologists. Psyc12 ( talk) 13:26, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
The lede says that IOs treat stress. Did the sources cited actually say I-Os treated stress? Or did they say I-Os might design interventions, which would involve redesigning jobs, or providing various kinds of training? If the latter, this should be restated to be more clear. To me treating stress suggests some form of psychotherapy, which IOs are generally not qualified to do. Psyc12 ( talk) 13:49, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
It looks like in the carnage there were three really good sources added by editor psyc12 to back up what I said about industrial/organizational psychology.
I like the separate section on occupations that mentions OHP and other disciplines relevant to occupational stress. Psyc12 ( talk) 13:30, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
user:Sportstir, it is important to identify the sources you looked at. I am all for sources. Iss246 ( talk) 03:55, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
User:CaroleHenson, thank you for the heads-up about the book. This is what I read. The work of an occupational psychologist involves the following: assessment at work-related tests and scales (documenting the reliability and validity of selection tests and measurement of performance)
advise on team building
advise on teamwork
development of training programs to enable workers to gain new skills
evaluate the success of training programs
coaching workers
recruitment and selection of new employees
assessment of worker performance for management.
I didn't read anything about the occupational psychologist dealing with job stress. Perhaps I missed it. Is there something about the occupational psychologist and job stress that you could document. I am not against mentioning the work of occupational psychologists. I suspect that given the above tasks in the portfolio of the occupational psychologist, dealing with employees' job stress is only a tiny part of the occupational psychologist's portfolio. Iss246 ( talk) 17:57, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
"The title "Occupational psychologist" means that the psychologists are trained and registered practitioners to treat occupational concerns. The title is unique to the United Kingdom. In Europe, the relevant title is 'Work and organizational psychologist' and in the United States, it is 'industrial and organizational psychologist'. Throughout the remainder of the world, it is one of these terms."
( edit conflict) it looks like
N. Anderson, Deniz S. Ones, H. K. Sinangil, C. Viswesvaran. Sportstir ( talk) 01:48, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
From my response to you:
More pointedly, what is your proposed language with a page number, etc. that supports the proposed language?
and
A table of contents for an entire book does me absolutely no good. No suggested of proposed language makes it hard to figure out what your real point is. i.e., This feels like Original research
– CaroleHenson ( talk) 01:52, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
If you were going to explain that section you've highlighted we would need to say IWO is the overriding international title tittle for this large field of psychology both the research and practice levels. So an occupational psychologist falls within IWO and can also be called an IWO psychologist. Sportstir ( talk) 01:26, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
User:CaroleHenson and user:Sportstir, I think we can agree on this. The portfolio of the occupational psychologist is large. It includes advise on team building, advise on teamwork, development of training programs to enable workers to gain new skills, evaluate the success of training programs, coaching workers, recruitment and selection of new employees, and assessment of worker performance for management. It may also include something do with occupational stress. Occupational stress is a relatively small part of the portfolio of the occupational psychologist. By contrast, occupational stress is a major part of the portfolio of OHP. The psychologist Paul Spector, who works in both i/o psychology and OHP, indicates as much. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) indicates as much. Iss246 ( talk) 02:51, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
It seems like there is an edit battle going on regarding the order of the sentences, but neither of you posted anything here, on the talk page. Please see WP:EDITWAR and note that if there's already an edit war situation going on, and no attempt to resolve it, admins don't have to wait for three reverts.
Is there a way to resolve this? Find out what other readers of the article and this talk page think? Explain more fully what the issue is?– CaroleHenson ( talk) 06:11, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
@ Sportstir and CaroleHenson: Sportstir, I justify putting the sentence "The subfield of occupational health psychology has made occupational stress a major research focus" at the beginning of the second paragraph on two grounds. First, the CDC identifies OHP as the leading arm of research on occupational stress. Second, the psychologist Paul Spector, who is a leading researcher in both i/o psychology and OHP, identifies OHP as a leading arm of research on occupational stress. Spector also describes how i/o psychology was slow to endorse research on occupational stress. Sportstir, you may have experts who can weigh in too. That is only fair. Please weigh in with their expert opinion. Iss246 ( talk) 03:34, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
user:Sportstir, why doesn't the sentence I entered not belong in the lede? Iss246 ( talk) 17:18, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
user:Sportstir, you have 129 edits on Wikipedia as of today. And I have more than 12,000. When did you become an expert on Wikipedia? And when did you become an expert on what is "a tiny little field" and what isn't. Your comment is insulting. Iss246 ( talk) 20:06, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
It isn't clear to me why it is important to say that the study of occupational stress comes mainly from I-O-occupational psychology. My reading of sources like Cooper and Dewe's Stress a Brief History (I provided the full cite earlier) does not say that. They talk about the early development of the study of occupational stress, and they mention quite a few individuals. Some might have been I-O-Os but many are not. One of the most influential early works is Katz and Kahn's The Social Psychology of Organizations that is the origin of role stress theory/research. Some are from other fields. I just don't see where Cooper and Dewe single out I-O-O as the dominant field that set things moving. Many of the major figures like Theorell and Frankenhaeser aren't even psychologists. I think it is fine to mention that the roots of occupational stress come from many disciplines including I-O-O, but it is not accurate to say it comes mainly from I-O-O, and this is true in the US, the UK and Europe. Note Cooper and Dewe are from the UK, not the US. Psyc12 ( talk) 21:59, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
The following sentence "Occupational stress is primarily assessed, treated and researched by Industrial and organizational psychologists" is factually incorrect. I-O psychologists do not treat stress--that is the domain of clinical psychology, and the study of occupational stress is multi-disciplinary. There are people from many fields studying it. It is fine to say I-Os are involved in assessment and research, and perhaps interventions to reduce stress, but is not the same as treating it. I doubt that the sources cited, if they are reliable, actually say this. I raised this issue before. What do these sources actually say? Psyc12 ( talk) 22:03, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
User:Sportstir, i/o psychology is not "particularly" concerned with occupational stress. It is concerned with occupational stress much the way other disciplines are concerned, disciplines such as occupational health psychology and human factor psychology and ergonomics. You do not have a source to indicate that i/o psychology is the preeminent discipline concerned with occupational stress. Iss246 ( talk) 23:21, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
User:Sportstir, I asked to have the matter taken up on the Noticeboard. I placed a message to that effect on your talk page. Better to have WP editors adjudicate the matter. Iss246 ( talk) 23:39, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
User:Sportstir, thank you for the correction. I goofed. It was the Vinchur-Koppes chapter that I meant to delete. I haven't looked at it in a few months. Please tell me the page in which Vinchur and Koppes cover occupational stress. I remember that the Vinchur-Koppes chapter was about leadership, performance appraisal, and the usual topics found in i/o psychology but not about occupational stress. I remember them writing that job stress was beyond the scope of the chapter. Correct me if I am wrong. Thanks. Iss246 ( talk) 00:05, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
User:Sportstir Please see the occupational stress talk page.. Did you read all the references you cite in the first paragraph? I think you missed something because you don't need all those citations in the first paragraph. For example, Vinchur and Koppes wrote "topics of relatively recent interest such as organizational communication and stress are beyond the scope of this narrative." One or two citations is enough to cement your point. Iss246 ( talk) 14:14, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
By: Peter M. Hart & Cary L. Cooper? Even in 2001 occupational stress has an entire chapter devoted to the topic. Can you explain what problem you have with this source? Sportstir ( talk) 21:15, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
The Hart-Cooper chapter should remain. If I deleted it earlier, I did it by mistake. The Griffin-Clarke chapter should remain. The Ones et al. reference should be deleted because it barely mentioned job stress. Iss246 ( talk) 17:46, 18 September 2020 (UTC)