Validation of the Kazakh version of the Brief Index of Affective Job Satisfaction in medical universities faculty staff sample

Journal of Clinical Medicine of Kazakhstan, 2023

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.23950/jcmk/12928
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Aim: The present study aimed to perform validation and assessment of psychometric indicators of the Kazakh version of the Brief Index of Affective Job Satisfaction on the academic faculty staff. Material and methods: The translation of the Brief Index of Affective Job Satisfaction was performed following the World Health Organization guidelines on the translation and adaptation of research instruments. 715 medical educators of Kazakhstani medical universities represented the study population. Preliminary statistical analysis included Cronbach’s alpha calculation. The psychometric properties of the instrument were examined using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Results: Cronbach’s alpha obtained 0.83. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin index reached 0.830, which indicated meritorious sample adequacy. CFA identified good factorial validity of the scale: all model fit indices exceeded the threshold values. The inter-item correlation index varied between r=0.616 and r=0.716, designating an acceptable correlation between variables. The total job satisfaction level was moderate (3.15±0.78). Women reported lower rates of job satisfaction, although the difference was not statistically significant (p<0.284). Conclusion: Our findings provide support to the psychometric properties of the Kazakh version of the BIAJS as an instrument for the assessment of job satisfaction. The major advantages of the BIAJS are that it is optimally brief, highly affective, and has good internal validity.