Safety Science 124 (2020) 104582

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Safety Science
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/safety

Work stress, personality and occupational accidents: Should we expect T

differences between men and women?
Amparo Osca , Blanca López-Araújo1
⁎

Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED), Madrid, Spain

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: This article analyses gender differences in occupational accidents from three research areas in which differences
Demand-control model have been found: occupational stress, personality and driving patterns. Specifically, it uses the Job Demand-
Neuroticism Control Model (JDC) and adds neuroticism and conscientiousness as personality variables related to accidents.
Conscientiousness Survey data were collected using an anonymous questionnaire, and the sample consisted of 652 workers (52.5%
Occupational accidents
men, with an average of 38.1 years of age, S.D. = 10.7). Hierarchical linear regression was employed to prove
Gender differences
the relationships (direct and interaction effects) to predict the number of accidents (occupational accidents and
incidents and commuting accidents). To identify gender influences, separate analyses were undertaken for fe-
male and male workers. The results demonstrate that demands and control, measured with the Job Content
Questionnaire, are not related to accidents, although they are related to working hours, kms to work and job
position. With regard to personality variables, neuroticism modulates the effect of job control, but only among
women. Conscientiousness is also directly related to accidents and modulates the effect of job demands and job
control, with differences between men and women. These results indicate three-way interactions (stres-
sors × personality × gender), so far unexplored, but which coincide with research in other areas and reinforce
the importance of developing a gender perspective in the study of occupational accidents.

1. Introduction and Backer-Grøndahl, 2012) and, second, because women obtain higher
scores than men in this variable (Costa et al., 2001). Herein, it analyses
The literature on occupational accidents shows a clear male bias the direct relationships between JD, JC, neuroticism, conscientiousness
that may be explained because the more dangerous jobs have tradi- and occupational accidentality (occupational accidents and incidents
tionally been undertaken by men (Hesmondhalgh and Baker, 2015). and commuting accidents) and their possible interactions; that is,
However, the progressive incorporation of women into traditionally whether job control, neuroticism and conscientiousness reduce or in-
male jobs (Denissen and Saguy, 2014) and the greater precariousness crease the effect of high demands. To identify whether different re-
that they suffer (OIT, 2016) require a gender perspective in the study of lationships exist in relation to gender, separate analyses have been
occupational accidents. Some researchers have alerted to this (Jensen undertaken. As far as we know analyses of three-way interactions that
et al., 2014), but there is not enough development yet to identify what have not been analyzed previously, be it because some studies have
personal and job variables influence women's occupational accidents. used a mostly male sample. Others studies have only considered the
Beside the absence of previous similar studies, the grave problem of gender as control variable. In this regard, undertaking separate analyses
occupational accidents (Eurostat, 2018), both human and social, jus- for men and women can help to identify relationships that may have
tifies our interest in this analysis. This paper is founded on three re- remained unidentified and, thus, advance the development of a gender
search areas in which gender differences have been identified but which perspective in the study of occupational accidents.
have not been previously related: occupational stress, personality and
commuting patterns. It specifically expands on the job demand-control 1.1. Job Demand-Control model (JDC) and gender differences
model (JDC) (Karasek, 1979) and incorporates neuroticism and con-
scientiousness for two reasons. First, because meta-analysis demon- Karasek’s job demand-control model (1979) is one of the most cited
strates that these traits are related to occupational accidents (e.g. Fyhri models in the study of job stress as different meta-analyses show. This

⁎
Corresponding author at: Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED), C/Juan del Rosal 10, Room: 1.45, 28040 Madrid, Spain.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (A. Osca), [email protected] (B. López-Araújo).
1
Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (UNED), C/Juan del Rosal 10, Room 1.18, 28040 Madrid, Spain.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2019.104582
Received 6 June 2019; Received in revised form 20 November 2019; Accepted 17 December 2019
Available online 31 December 2019
0925-7535/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A. Osca and B. López-Araújo Safety Science 124 (2020) 104582

model considers two psychosocial factors as major determinants of

work stress, job demands (JD) and job demands (JC). JD refers to
physical, social or organizational aspects of a job that require sustained
physical and psychological effort. However, JC refers to an individual’s
autonomy level to decide what, how and when to do his or her work.
Both of these variables can affect stress and health directly, but JC also
plays a moderating role in the association between JD and stress, such
that employees with higher JC are less likely to be stressed out when
facing higher demands (Häusser et al., 2010). Although some research
has found that JD and JC can affect different job-related outcomes, less
research has been conducted on the influence of high demands and lack
of control regarding occupational accidents (Heo et al., 2015; Useche
et al., 2018), even though both excessive demands (Galizzi, 2013) and
the absence of control (Tucker et al., 2016) have been proven to be
related to occupational accidents.
Three of the four recent meta-analyses on the JDC model indicate
the importance of considering the gender of the samples. Luchman and
González-Morales (2013) note that the demand–control relationship
showed that mainly female samples obtained negative correlations, Fig. 1. Direct and modulated relations.
whereas mainly male samples obtained positive correlations, so a
continuation into the study of the role of gender is recommended. The be impulsive and experience more distress than others (Costa and
next meta-analysis also shows gender differences. Females perceiving McCrae, 1992). Neuroticism increases people’s perception of job stres-
their work to be highly demanding appraise demand stressors as more sors as being worse, which, in turn, has a negative impact on well-being
distressing than men do and also perceive less control over their work and health. In addition, people who score high in conscientiousness
than men (File et al., 2017). But the only meta-analysis that reviewed generally understand and follow guidelines, particularly safety guide-
the effects psychosocial work factors on physical health found, in an lines, which reduces the probability of accidents (Hogan and Foster,
important part of the studies, a significant adverse effect among men 2013). Two meta-analytical studies confirm the relationships among
(Gilbert-Ouimet et al., 2014), and this effect is ever more consistent in these two variables of personality and accidents (Beus, Dhanani and
studies of higher methodological quality. McCord, 2015; Fyhri and Backer-Grøndahl, 2012). More recently, Rau
Recently, a study with a Canadian representative population ex- et al. (2018) in a sample of elevator workers found that trait anxiety
amined the relationship between psychological work exposures and and conscientiousness could predict occupational accidents. Taken to-
work stress and also recommended identifying the differences between gether, these results substantiate the value of considering personality as
men and women (Padkapayeva et al., 2018). a key correlate of occupational accidents (see Fig. 1).
H1. According to the strain hypothesis, higher JD and lower JC (H1a H3. High scores for neuroticism are related, directly and positively, to
and H1b respectively) increase the probability of accidents the probability of accidents (occupational accidents and incidents and
(occupational accidents and incidents and commuting accidents). commuting accidents) (H3a) and indirectly by increasing the effect of
high JD and the absence of JC (H3b).
H2. According to the buffer hypotheses of the JDC model (H1c) when
JC is high it can reduce the negative effect of JD on the probability of H4. High scores for conscientiousness are related, directly and
accidents (occupational accidents and incidents and commuting negatively, to the probability of accidents (occupational accidents and
accidents). incidents and commuting accidents) (H4a) and indirectly by reducing
the effect of high JD and the absence of JC (H4b).
Separate analyses for male and female workers have been carried
out to explore possible differences with regard to gender, since results In addition, we also expect these relationships to be different de-
on other dependent variables point in this direction. pending on gender and we therefore explore these relationships in men
and women. Despite not having found previous studies of a similar
nature, the research conducted in other areas support our aim in ana-
1.2. Personality, work stress, accidents and gender
lyzing these differences. Grav et al. (2012), using a sample of 35,832
men and women, examined the relationship between personality and
Few studies on Karasek’s JDC model have incorporated personality
mental health and observed that high scores in neuroticism are worse
variables, but traits are related to how employees perceive and react to
for men than for women. Also Allen et al. (2016), using a national re-
work stress. The review of Györkös et al. (2012) analyzed the impact of
presentative sample, found neuroticism had a greater impact on men’s
personality on the JDC model. They gathered evidence that neuroticism
physical health. Some studies have tried to explain these differences.
is linked to more exposure to stress and to more physical and emotional
For example, Axfors et al. (2018) found that neuroticism has a positive
reactivity toward stress, which, in turn, has a negative impact on well-
effect on women's health because this variable is related to a higher
being and health. In addition, conscientiousness is considered a pro-
usage of health services. Nevertheless, other studies did not find more
tective factor given its consistently negative association with perceived
positive consequences for women (e.g. Vassend et al., 2018). In relation
work stress and its positive link with functional coping strategies.
to conscientiousness, Kim et al. (2016) found that female gender was
Törnroos et al. (2013) also found associations between personality
associated with higher neuroticism and lower conscientiousness, which
traits and, specifically, that high levels of neuroticism were related to
were related to higher levels of stress, and this could in turn lead to
high demands, low control and high job strain and low levels of con-
greater depressive symptoms.
scientiousness were related to low control and high job strain.
Research on road traffic accidents also highlight the gender differ-
Although the meta-analytic study of Salgado (2002) did not find
ences attributable to differences in unsafe behaviours (Herrero-
that personality factors were good predictors of accident rates, later
Fernández et al., 2016), distractions (Johansson and Fyhri, 2017) or
meta-analyses using the big five personality model (McCrae and Costa,
aggressive behaviour (Berdoulat et al., 2013). In addition, some studies
1987) found other interesting results. People who score high in neu-
consider gender as a noteworthy variable when analysing occupational
roticism can be characterized as nervous and worrying and who tend to

2
A. Osca and B. López-Araújo Safety Science 124 (2020) 104582

Table 1
Differences between men and women, descriptive statistics and correlations between variables.
M.X M.S.D W.X W.S.D t 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

*** ** ***
1. H. worked 7.91 1.38 7.32 1.59 25.19 – 0.11 0.18 0.01 0.24 −0.01 −0.04 −0.08 0.05 0.12* 0.08
2. H. home 1.38 0.89 2.15 1.48 40.40 *** −0.02 – −0.02 −0.18* −0.21** −0.16 −0.06 0.03 0.29*** −0.04 −0.08
3. Kms 21.43 22.22 18.00 20.21 4.17 * 0.11* 0.05 – −0.03 0.07 0.02 0.08 −0.12* 0.08 0.10 0.17**
4. Job level 3.00 0.97 2.83 0.99 4.86 * −0.01 0.01 −0.01 – 0.01 0.37*** −0.20*** 0.15** −0.05 −0.07 0.04
5. JD 2.08 0.65 2.15 0.62 1.85 0.33*** 0.06 0.16** 0.04 – −0.12* 0.03 −0.12 −0.02 0.05 0.08
6. JC. 2.57 0.71 2.49 0.69 1.96 0.18*** −0.01 0.03 0.36*** 0.15** – −0.08 0.24*** −0.05 −0.06 0.01
7. Neurot. 1.51 0.69 1.72 0.66 16.29 *** −0.02 0.06 −0.14** −0.05 0.12* −0.10 – −0.17** 0.02 −0.12* −0.01
8. Conscien. 3.25 0.54 3.26 0.53 0.11 0.07 0.01 0.03 0.05 −0.03 0.13* −0.29*** – −0.13* 0.03 −0.11*
9. Occ. Acc. 0.26 0.95 0.18 0.69 1.23 0.10 −0.01 0.08 −0.03 0.10 0.03 0.08 −0.05 – 0.06 0.40***
10. Occ. Inc. 0.50 1.70 0.44 1.59 0.15 0.03 −0.03 0.13* −0.21** 0.04 −0.08 0.03 −0.15** 0.08 – 0.09
11. Com. Acc. 0.20 0.61 0.14 0.41 2.07 0.10 −0.05 0.16** −0.09 0.24*** −0.01 0.04 −0.18*** 0.30*** 0.06 –

Note: Correlations of men below the diagonal, of women above.

M.X, Men Mean; M.S.D., Men Standard Deviation; W.X, Women Mean; W.S.D., Women Standard Deviation; t, t-test; H. home, Hours at home; H. Worked, Hours at
work; Job posit., Job position; JD, Job demands; JC Job control; Neurot., Neuroticism; Conscien. Conscientiousness; Occ. Acc., Occupational accidents; Occ. Inc.,
Occupational incidents; Com. Acc., Commuting accidents.
N = 652 (Men N = 342; Women N = 310).
* p < .05.
** p < .01.
*** p < .001.

commuting accidents (Fort et al., 2016), although most studies on the JD and JC were evaluated with the two subscales set by the Job
topic consider gender only as a control variable (e.g. Fyhri and Backer- Content Questionnaire by Karasek et al. (1998), as adapted to our
Grøndahl, 2012). It is for this reason that we find it important to un- country by the research team. JD subscale had seven items (e.g. “I have
dertake differentiated analyses, which entails the testing of three-way to perform my work tasks quickly”), and JC subscale had a further seven
interactions. items (e.g. “I can choose how to do my job”). These items were scored on
Given the aforementioned precedents, the present study analyses a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 0 (never) to 4 (always). The relia-
gender differences in the association between the JDC model compo- bility of the JD scale is α = 0.74 for the male group and α = 0.72 for the
nents, personality and occupational accidents, which, to our knowl- female group. The reliability of the JC scale is α = 0.84 for men and
edge, has never been tested before. In addition, other control variables α = 0.82 for women.
also related to accidents, such as age (Herrero-Fernández and Fonseca- Neuroticism and Conscientiousness were evaluated with three items
Baeza, 2017; Shen et al., 2018), experience (Jankovský et al., 2019) or each selected from the Big Five Questionnaire by Costa and McCrae
working hours were considered (Giliberti and Salerno, 2016). (1999) (e.g. Neuroticism: “I easily lose my calm”; Conscientiousness: “I
do my work attentively and without distraction”). In all three cases the
2. Method response scale was of the Likert type, and it spanned from 0 (never) to 4
(always). The reliability of the neuroticism scale for men is 0.76 and for
2.1. Procedure women 0.73; that of conscientiousness is 0.73 for men and 0.76 for
women.
The sample was selected using the incidental method, and partici- Occupational accidents were measured with one only item: “How
pation in this study was voluntary. The data collection took place in many accidents have you suffered at work within the last three years?”, as
2018 throughout the Spanish territory via an online questionnaire. The suggested by Sümer (2003). In accordance, commuting accidents were
selection criteria were paid employment and daily driving to the also evaluated with only one item: “How many accidents have you suf-
workplace. Before commencing the test, the instructions were presented fered during your journeys to and from work as a driver within the last three
to the participants and information confidentiality was guaranteed. years?”. Also, occupational incidents were measured with one only item,
Around 10% of the questionnaires were eliminated due to errors in the but regarding the last three months, since Chapman and Underwood
completion of the forms. (2000) recommend measuring shorter timescales, given that, as they
are less significant events, they are less easily remembered: “Within the
2.2. Participants last three months, how many incidents (i.e. an incident that could have
resulted in an injury but did not) have you suffered in your journeys to and
The sample was composed of 652 workers, of which 52.5% were from work?)”.
men. The average age was of 38.1 years (S.D. = 10.7). Their job po-
sition was evaluated in 5 levels, as follows: 8.3% were low-low level for 3. Results
unskilled jobs -labourer- (level 1 of the variable); 23.5% low-medium level
-shop assistants, waiters- (level 2); 36.9% medium level for technicians To prove whether significant differences exist between men and
without a university degree -plumber, electrician- (level 3); 25.9% women in these variables, t-tests were undertaken (Table 1), which
medium-high level for trained professionals with an university de- prove differences in five variables: men work longer hours in their or-
gree–school teachers, social workers- (level 4) and 3.2% high-high level ganization (t = 25.19; p < .001), but women work longer hours at
for professionals with an university master degree– doctors, professors- home (t = 40.40; p < .001). Men commute longer distances to work
(level 5). (t = 4.17; p < .05) and occupy positions of higher job level than
women (t = 4.86; p < .05). Regarding neuroticism, women present
2.3. Materials higher scores than men (t = 16.29; p < .001). Table 1 presents these
results, alongside the correlations between variables. As explained
The control variables were job position, kilometers covered from above, one can observe that, in most cases, the relationships are dif-
their homes to their workplace and daily working hours within the ferent for men and women.
organization and at home. All these were measured as one sole item. In Table 1, one can observe that the control variables show some

3
A. Osca and B. López-Araújo Safety Science 124 (2020) 104582

relationships in line with the gender differences analyzed. In men Table 2

working hours or working hours at home are not related to accidents. In Regression equation with neuroticism to predict occupational accidents, occu-
the case of women, the longer the working hours the more incidents pational incidents and commuting accidents in men and women.
(r = 0.12; p < .05) and the longer the working hours at home, the Occupational Men Women
more occupational accidents (r = 0.29; p < .001). In addition, the job accidents
position is negatively related to incidents (r = −0.21; p < .01), but I II III I II III
only in the male group. Kms to work are positively related to com-
Hours worked 0.13 0.15 0.15 0.09 0.11 0.08
muting accidents in men (r = 0.16, p < .01) and in women (r = 0.17, Hours home 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.37*** 0.37*** 0.33***
p < .01), also in the case of men these are related to incidents Kms 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.12 0.11 0.11
(r = 0.13; p < .05). Job level −0.05 −0.06 −0.05 0.04 0.05 0.02
Job demands (JD) −0.08 0.24 −0.02 −0.19
The correlations also demonstrate that neither demands nor control
Job control (JC) 0.05 −0.21 0.03 0.15
are related to accidents, with one exception: in the male group, the Neuroticism (N) 0.11 −0.12 0.09 1.03
more JD the more commuting accidents (r = 0.24; p < .001). JD X C −0.11 0.59
Personality variables also show different correlations for men and JD X N −0.44 −0.39
women. In the male group, neuroticism is not related to any of the three JC X N 0.65 −0.80*
F 0.86 0.89 1.03 6.91*** 4.01*** 3.88***
accidentality measures, but in the female group it is negatively related
R2 0.02 0.03 0.06 0.17*** 0.18 0.23*
to incidents. Conscientiousness is related to incidents in men
Occupational Men Women
(r = −0.15; p < .01) and to occupational accidents in women
incidents
(r = −0.13; p < .01) and, in both groups, with commuting accidents I II III I II III
(men: r = −0.18, p < .001; women: r = −0.11, p < .05).
The hierarchical regression analysis was employed to examine the Hours worked −0.04 −0.05 −0.05 0.07 0.04 0.03
Hours home 0.02 0.03 0.04 −0.04 −0.03 −0.04
direct and modulated relations proposed in the hypothesis. In line with
Kms 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.16 0.19* 0.18*
Hair et al. (1998) the multivariate analysis showed the extent to which Job level −0.16* −0.16* −0.17* −0.02 −0.04 −0.03
an independent variable explained the variance of a dependent variable Job demands (JD) −0.01 −0.27 0.04 −0.18
after taking into account other independent variables. Moderated Job control (JC) 0.01 −0.22 −0.04 −0.54
multiple regression was the main statistical technique used in this Neuroticism (N) 0.02 0.38 −0.20* −0.51
JD X JC 0.59 0.32
study. To test for interaction terms, we developed a hierarchical re-
JD X N −0.25 0.01
gression analysis in which the independent variables were entered in a JC X N −0.19 0.38
predetermined sequence so that ‘terms of lower order are partialled F 1.59 0.91 1.06 1.13 1.46 1.18
from those of higher order and not vice versa’ (Cohen, 1978). Interac- R2 0.03 0.04 0.06 0.03 0.07 0.09
tion terms were entered after main effects (Cohen and Cohen, 1983). Commuting Men Women
Since tolerance indexes in all the cases are higher than 0.65, multi- accidents
collinearity should not be considered to be a problem. I II III I II III

At the first step of the analysis, working hours, hours home, Kms to Hours worked 0.11 0.03 0.03 0.11 0.06 0.03
work and job level, were entered in order to control their impact. Hours home −0.04 −0.05 −0.05 −0.06 −0.02 −0.01
Following similar works that analyze Karasek’s model (Karasek and Kms 0.24*** 0.23** 0.23** 0.30*** 0.30*** 0.29***
Theorell, 1990) and personality variables (e.g. Rodriguez et al., 2001) Job level −0.21** −0.23** −0.23** 0.12 0.16 0.12
Job demands (JD) 0.15* −0.03 0.18* −0.12
at the second step, demands (Hip. 1a), control (Hip. 1b) and personality
Job control (JC) 0.07 −0.03 −0.07 0.70
(neuroticism, Hip. 3a and conscientiousness, Hip. 4a) variables were Neuroticism (N) 0.05 −0.19 0.08 0.47
added to test whether they showed significant main effects. In addition, JD X JC 0.10 −0.08
to test the modulated hypotheses (Hip. H2, H3b and H4b), interaction JD X N 0.23 0.53
effects were evaluated at the third step of analysis. JC X N 0.08 −1.01**
F 5.48*** 4.07*** 2.90** 5.25*** 4.03*** 4.18***
As one can observe in Table 2, neither the job level variable nor that R2 0.11*** 0.14 0.15 0.14*** 0.18 0.25**
of neuroticism significantly increase the variance explained by the
control variables. This does not confirm the direct relationships pro- N = 652 (Men N = 342; Women N = 310).
posed in H1 and H3a, although one can observe two modulated re- * p < .05.
lationships in the female group (H3b). ** p < .01.
As can be seen in Fig. 2, women who score high in neuroticism *** p < .001.
suffer more occupational accidents if they occupy positions with low
control (β = −0.80; p < .05) although if they occupy positions with suffer less accidents (β = 0.74; p < .05).
higher control, their accidents are reduced and they are similar to those With regard to the interactions between demand and control with
of women with low scores in neuroticism. conscientiousness, Figs. 5 and 6 demonstrate that men with low scores
With regard to commuting accidents (Fig. 3) women with low scores in conscientiousness suffer more accidents, but, above all, in positions
in neuroticism in positions with low control suffer fewer accidents. with high demands (β = 1.42; p < .01) or high control (β = 1.91;
However, if these occupy positions with higher control, their acciden- p < .01). Therefore, when the levels of conscientiousness are high,
tality levels are similar to women who score high in neuroticism demands and control do not impact on the number of incidents.
(β = −1.01; p < .01). In the female group one can also observe similar relationships, but
In Table 3 one can observe the results when considering con- with regard to occupational accidents (Figs. 7 and 8) (JD X con-
scientiousness. The results do not show direct relationships which in- scientiousness β = 1.55, p < .01; JC X conscientiousness β = 1.34;
crease the percentage of variance explained, which does not confirm p < .01) and commuting accidents (JC X conscientiousness β = 2.48;
H4a, although some significant interactions can be observed (H4b). p < .001) (Fig. 9).
Specifically, in the male group, these are the three proposed interac-
tions in the prediction of incidents. 4. Discussion
Fig. 4 shows a significant interaction between demand and control.
Workers in positions with low demand and low control suffer more Following our interest of advancing a gender perspective in the
accidents and those in positions with more demand and more control study of occupational accidents, this study is founded on the JDC model

4
A. Osca and B. López-Araújo Safety Science 124 (2020) 104582

Fig. 2. The interaction between JC and neuroticism with regard to occupational accidents in women.

and has incorporated neuroticism for two reasons. First, the meta- the more occupational accidents they suffer, while the men with a
analyses have shown that neuroticism y conscientiousness are two of position at a higher hierarchical level suffer fewer accidents. The
the personality variables most related to occupational accidents (e.g. women in the simple occupy positions at a low level, but their level is
Fyhri and Backer-Grøndahl, 2012) and, second, the meta-analyses of not related to their JC, something we do observe in the male group.
the JDC model have suggested the need to explore gender differences Another aspect that reinforces the gender perspective is that as men
(File et al., 2017; Gilbert-Ouimet et al., 2014; Luchman and González- progress within the hierarchical order, they suffer fewer incidents.
Morales, 2013). However, the current study is the first, as far as we However, one cannot observe this protective tendency in women,
know, that explores three-way interactions (stressors × person- which indicates worse working conditions, even in positions at a higher
ality × gender), which explains the interest in the results obtained. hierarchical level. All these results confirm our initial interest in un-
The male and female workers of our sample reported having similar dertaking separate analyses, testing triple interactions, which have
jobs with regard to JD and JC, which does not coincide with previous aided in identifying relationships that would otherwise remain uni-
meta-analyses (File et al., 2017). However, our results confirm that the dentified.
relationship between JD and JC is negative for men and positive for However, when one considers the variables in the analyses, job
women (e.g. Luchman and González-Morales, 2013) and proves our demand and JC do not appear significant, thus not confirming the
expectations of finding gender differences. The variables relating to the Demand-Control model (Karasek, 1979) and H1. Our results show that
working situation of men and women show gender differences which the more objective measures of work-load and decision capacity, spe-
respond to the traditional roles ascribed to men and women in our cifically on working hours, kms to work and position level, impact more
society (European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, 2011). Men on accidents than demand and control as evaluated with Karasek’s Job
work longer hours outside the home and commute more kms to work, Content Questionnaire. Some reviews on this model observe that re-
while women work longer hours at home. These differences impact on search does not offer consistent results due to, among other reasons, the
their patterns of accidentality (Camino, Alcántara and Fontaneda, different ways of operating the variables. In this regard, they re-
2017). commend using objective and subjective measures that better identify
In the case of women, the longer working hours outside the home, these variables (Kain and Jex, 2010; Schmitz et al., 2019).

Fig. 3. The interaction between JC and neuroticism with regard to commuting accidents in women.

5
A. Osca and B. López-Araújo Safety Science 124 (2020) 104582

Table 3 follow procedures (e. g. Allen et al., 2016; Grav et al., 2012).
Regression equation with conscientiousness to predict occupational accidents, This effect cannot be observed when analyzing commuting acci-
occupational incidents and commuting accidents in men and women. dents, since women who score high in neuroticism suffer more acci-
Occupational Men Women dents, above all if they occupy positions that require a high level of
accidents control. Following Hobfoll’s Resource Preservation theory (2001) it is
I II III I II III possible that occupational stress can lead to the loss of resources which
are important for driving, which increases the probability of accidents
Hours worked 0.13 0.14 0.10 0.09 0.09 0.05
Hours home 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.37*** 0.38*** 0.26** (Turner et al., 2014).
Kms 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.12 0.12 0.10 Conscientiousness, as we hypothesized (H4), is negatively related to
Job level −0.05 −0.06 −0.07 0.04 0.04 −0.03 accidentality in a direct way (Beus et al., 2015), but also in an indirect
Job demands (JD) −0.06 1.28 −0.03 −1.84
way, since it modulates the negative effect of high demand and high
Job control (JC) 0.05 −1.22 0.05 −1.40
Neuroticism (N) 0.01 −0.23 −0.09 −1.53 control. This effect is observable in men and women, although with
JD X C −0.25 0.61 some differences. In men, the modulation predicts job incidents and, in
JD X N −1.28* 1.55** women, occupational accidents and commuting accidents. According to
JC X N 1.69* 1.34** this, conscientiousness appears as more relevant in women, given the
F 0.86 0.58 1.22 6.91*** 4.10*** 4.68***
gravity of suffering an accident.
R2 0.02 0.02 0.07 0.17*** 0.18 0.27**
This higher number of interactions observed in the female group
Occupational Men Women
could be due, once more, to the type of tasks they undertake. Previous
incidents
I II III I II III studies showed that interactions within the JDC model are more
probable if emotional and mental demands are evaluated (e.g. De Jonge
Hours worked −0.04 −0.03 −0.02 0.07 0.07 0.06 et al., 2010), the second of which are more in line with male jobs given
Hours home 0.02 0.04 0.09 −0.04 −0.04 −0.01
the segmentation of the job market (Gati and Perez, 2014). It is espe-
Kms 0.09 0.08 0.05 0.16 0.17 0.16
Job level −0.16* −0.17* −0.16* −0.02 −0.03 −0.01
cially noteworthy that, although kms to work is the variable that best
Job demands (JD) −0.01 −1.82** 0.06 0.32 explains commuting accidents, in women we also detect significant
Job control (JC) 0.04 −2.02*** −0.06 0.15 interactions between personal and job position variables, which can
Neuroticism (N) −0.17* −1.53*** 0.14 0.72 indicate a greater spillover among different spheres (Offer, 2014).
JD X JC 0.74* 0.35
The consideration of three accidentality measures (occupational
JD X N 1.42** −0.55
JC X N 1.91** −0.62 accidents, commuting accidents and occupational incidents) has helped
F 1.59 1.65 3.96*** 1.13 1.06 0.98 us to observe that the incorporation of personality variables to the JDC
R2 0.03 0.06 0.19*** 0.03 0.05 0.07 model contributes to explain accidents, mainly in the female group.
Commuting Men Women This result could be an indicator of the different professional circum-
accidents stances of men and women. It also reinforces the role of job insecurity
I II III I II III in relation to gender and the importance of further exploration of these
Hours worked 0.12 0.04 0.04 0.11 0.05 0.02
differences.
Hours home −0.04 −0.04 −0.03 −0.06 −0.02 −0.13 Although we believe that the results are interesting, we must stress
Kms 0.24*** 0.22** 0.22** 0.30*** 0.31*** 0.27*** some limitations. The main limitation is the use of self-reports to
Job level −0.21 −0.24** −0.23** 0.12 0.15 0.07 measure occupational accidents, although the use of three indicators of
**
Job demands (JD) 0.16* −0.24 0.17* −0.52***
accidentality can limit any potential bias. One must also differentiate
Job control (JC) 0.07 −0.17 −0.07 −2.00***
Neuroticism (N) −0.08 −0.29 −0.05 −1.55 between the different types of demands and control (De Jonge et al.,
JD X JC 0.14 0.13 2010), given that men and women tend to carry out different jobs.
JD X N 0.33 0.66 Regarding personality traits, it is possible that there is a risk bias due to
JC X N 0.20 2.48*** neuroticism because people with higher neuroticism can record and
F 5.48*** 4.20*** 2.98** 5.25*** 3.90*** 5.96***
R2 0.11*** 0.14 0.15 0.14*** 0.17 0.32***
remember their occupational incidents and accidents. Nevertheless, we
found similar results to Törnroos et al. (2013), who found that high
N = 652 (Men N = 342; Women N = 310). levels of neuroticism were related to high demands, but only for men,
* p < .05. and it would be interesting to continue analyzing these differences.
** p < .01. Longitudinal studies could also aid in clarifying the role of neuroticism
*** p < .001. and in studying the possible curvilinear relations that this variable may
present in relation to the enforcement of preventive measures (Armon
The hypothesis of modulation between demand and control (H2) and Toker, 2013). Even so, given the complexity of this problem, it
does not take place either, although the difficulty in identifying this would be interesting to introduce other organizational and personal
relationship has also been observed (Van der Doef and Maes, 1998). variables; regarding organizational variables, sectors and their pre-
Nevertheless, a significant modulation can be observed in the predic- vention systems (Fernández-Muñiz et al., 2018) or safety climate (Liu
tion of incidents, although only in the male group. Some authors have et al., 2015). In addition, it would be interesting to deepen the study of
already observed that occupational accidents and incidents could have JD by introducing Gendaidy, Karwowski and Shoaf’s proposal (2002)
different origins (Goldenhar et al., 2003). on work compatibility. These authors differentiate between work de-
Regarding the role of neuroticism in accidentality (H3), the re- mands and energizers, which include aspects such as physical task con-
lationships are not direct, coinciding with Clarke and Robertson’s meta- tent, mental task content, physical environment, etc., and, what is most
analysis (2005), with one exception: women who score high in neuro- important, they consider that the relationship between the positive and
ticism suffer fewer incidents at work. One does observe modulated re- negative impact factors results in an important work design parameter,
lationships but gender differences also exist. Women who score high in that is, work compatibility which is related to performance and, in par-
neuroticism suffer more occupational accidents, but only when they ticular, could be related to accidents.
have low control over their work. If they can make decisions, their Regarding personal variables relating to accidents, it would also be
accidents decrease and are similar to women who score low in neuro- interesting to introduce concepts such as tiredness (Vassend et al.,
ticism. These results coincide with studies that show that neuroticism is 2018), unsafe behaviour (Herrero-Fernández et al., 2016) and/or dis-
not negative for women’s health, since it makes them more cautious and tractions (Johansson and Fyhri, 2017).

6
A. Osca and B. López-Araújo Safety Science 124 (2020) 104582

Fig. 4. The interaction between JD and JC with regard to occupational incidents in men.

Fig. 5. The interaction between JD and conscientiousness with regard to occupational incidents in men.

Fig. 6. The interaction between JC and conscientiousness with regard to occupational incidents in men.

7
A. Osca and B. López-Araújo Safety Science 124 (2020) 104582

Fig. 7. The interaction between JD and conscientiousness with regard to occupational accidents in women.

Fig. 8. The interaction between JC and conscientiousness with regard to occupational accidents in women.

Fig. 9. The interaction between JC and conscientiousness with regard to commuting accidents in women.

8
A. Osca and B. López-Araújo Safety Science 124 (2020) 104582

4.1. Conclusion Behavioral Sciences, second ed. Lawrence Earlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
Costa, P.T., McCrae, R.R., 1992. Four ways five factors are basic. Person. Individ. Differ.
13, 653–665. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(92)90236-I.
Our results suggest that extending the JDC model with neuroticism Costa, P.T., McCrae, R.R., 1999. A Five-Factor theory of personality. In: Pervin, L.A.,
and conscientiousness and gender differences contributes to a greater John, O.P. (Eds.), Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research. Guilford Press,
understanding of how to reduce the levels of occupational accidents, New York, NY, US, pp. 139–153.
Costa Jr., P.T., Terracciano, A., McCrae, R.R., 2001. Gender differences in personality
above all in women. traits across cultures: robust and surprising findings. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 81,
The execution of separate analyses by gender has enabled the 322–331. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.2.322.
identification of relationship, which might have been unnoticed in de Jonge, J., van Vegchel, N., Shimazu, A., Schaufeli, W., Dormann, C., 2010. A long-
itudinal test of the demand–control model using specific job demands and specific job
previous studies, which have used male samples (e.g. Useche et al., control. Int. J. Behav. Med. 17, 125–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12529-010-
2018) or because the gender variable is only introduced as a control 9081-1.
variable (e.g. Fyhri and Backer-Grøndahl, 2012). Also, given the ex- Denissen, A.M., Saguy, A.C., 2014. Gendered homophobia and the contradictions of
workplace discrimination for women in the building trades. Gender Soc. 28,
ploratory nature of some of the observed relationships, there is a need
381–403. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243213510781.
for further research to test our results and thus develop a gender per- European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, 2011. Risks and trends in the safety and
spective in the study of occupational accidents. health of women at work. Luxemburg: Office for Official Publications of the European
We believe that the current findings are a significant contribution to Communities. ISSN: 1831-9343. Available in: https://osha.europa.eu/en/
publications/reports/new-risks-and-trends-in-the-safety-and-health-of-women-at-
explain how job stress and personality can influence occupational ac- work.
cidents and specifically to explain gender differences. The scarcity of Eurostat, 2018. Accidents at workstatistics. European statistics. Available in: https://ec.
studies and results in this area and the magnitude of the differences europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Accidents_at_work_statistics#
Number_of_accidents.
found must be further analysed and used to design better measures to Fernández-Muñiz, B., Montes-Peón, J.M., Vázquez-Ordás, C., 2018. Occupational acci-
prevent and reduce the number of occupational accidents. The in- dents and the economic cycle in Spain 1994–2014. Saf. Sci. 106, 273–284. https://
corporation of women to the workforce and to jobs with less status and doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2016.02.029.
File, M.J., Purl, J., Griffeth, R.W., 2017. Job demands, control and support: meta-ana-
possibility of control, alongside the new occupational stressors lyzing moderator effects of gender, nationality, and occupation. Human Resour.
(Arcangeli et al., 2018), reinforces the interest to develop a gender Manage. Rev. 27, 39–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2016.09.004.
perspective in the study of occupational accidents (Jensen et al, 2014). Fort, E., Ndagire, S., Gadegbeku, B., Hours, M., Charbotel, B., 2016. Working conditions
and occupational risk exposure in employees driving for work. Accid. Anal. Prev. 89,
We believe that the results of this research will be a good start. 118–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2016.01.015.
Fyhri, A., Backer-Grøndahl, A., 2012. Personality and risk perception in transport. Accid.
Funding Anal. Prev. 49, 470–475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2012.03.017.
Galizzi, M., 2013. On the recurrence of occupational injuries and workers’ compensation
claims. Health Econ. 22, 582–599. https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.2829.
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding Gati, I., Perez, M., 2014. Gender differences in career preferences from 1990 to 2010:
agencies in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors. gaps reduced but not eliminated. J. Couns. Psychol. 61, 63–80. https://doi.org/10.
1037/a0034598.
Genaidy, A., Karwowski, A., Shoaf, C., 2002. The fundamentals of work system com-
Declaration of Competing Interest patibility theory: an integrated approach to optimization of human performance at
work. Theoret. Iss. Ergon. Sci. 3, 346–368. https://doi.org/10.1080/
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial 14639220210124076.
Gilbert-Ouimet, M., Trudel, X., Brisson, C., Milot, A., Vézina, M., 2014. Adverse effects of
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ- psychosocial work factors on blood pressure: systematic review of studies on demand-
ence the work reported in this paper. control-support and effort-reward imbalance models. Scand. J. Work Environ. Health
40, 109–132. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3390.
Giliberti, C., Salerno, S., 2016. Gender differences and commuting accidents in Italy:
References INAIL Data Base analysis on fatalities (2009–2013). La Medicina Del Lavoro 107 (6),
462–472. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.uned.es/login.aspx?
Allen, M.S., Magee, C.A., Vella, S.A., 2016. Personality, hedonic balance and the quality direct=true&db=cmedm&AN=27976664&lang=es&site=ehost-live.
and quantity of sleep in adulthood. Psychol. Health 31, 1091–1107. https://doi.org/ Goldenhar, L.M., Williams, L.J., Swanson, N.G., 2003. Modelling relationships between
10.1080/08870446.2016.1178745. job stressors and injury and near-miss outcomes for construction labourers. Work
Arcangeli, G., Giorgi, G., Mucci, N., Bernaud, J.-L., Di Fabio, A., 2018. Editorial: emerging Stress 17, 218–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370310001616144.
and re-emerging organizational features, work transitions, and occupational risk Grav, S., Stordal, E., Romild, U.K., Hellzen, O., 2012. The relationship among neuroti-
factors: the good, the bad, the right. Interdiscip. Perspect. Front. Psychol. 9, 1533. cism, extraversion, and depression in the HUNT Study: in relation to age and gender.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01533. Iss. Ment. Health Nurs. 33, 777–785. https://doi.org/10.3109/01612840.2012.
Armon, G., Toker, S., 2013. The role of personality in predicting repeat participation in 713082.
periodic health screening. J. Pers. 81, 452–464. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy. Györkös, C., Becker, J., Massoudi, K., de Bruin, G.P., Rossier, J., 2012. The impact of
12021. personality and culture on the job demands-control model of job stress. Swiss J.
Axfors, C., Hellgren, C., Volgsten, H., Skoog Svanberg, A., Ekselius, L., Wikström, A.K., Psychol. 71, 21–28. https://doi.org/10.1024/1421-0185/a000065.
Sundström-Poromaa, I., 2018. Neuroticism is associated with higher antenatal care Hair, J., et al., 1998. In Multivariate Data Analysis, fifth ed. Prentice-Hall International
utilization in obstetric low-risk women. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. https://doi.org/ Publishers, Inc, Upper Saddle reviver, New Jersey, USA.
10.1111/aogs.13506. Häusser, J.A., Mojzisch, A., Niesel, M., Schulz-Hardt, S., 2010. Ten years on: a review of
Berdoulat, E., Vavassori, D., Sastre, M.T.M., 2013. Driving anger, emotional and instru- recent research on the job demand-control (-support) model and psychological well-
mental aggressiveness, and impulsiveness in the prediction of aggressive and trans- being. Work Stress 24, 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678371003683747.
gressive driving. Accid. Anal. Prev. 50, 758–767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap. Heo, Y.-S., Leem, J.-H., Park, S.-G., Jung, D.-Y., Kim, H.-C., 2015. Job stress as a risk
2012.06.029. factor for absences among manual workers: a 12-month follow-up study. Ind. Health
Beus, J.M., Dhanani, L.Y., McCord, M.A., 2015. A meta-analysis of personality and 53, 542–552. https://doi.org/10.2486/indhealth.2015-0021.
workplace safety: addressing unanswered questions. J. Appl. Psychol. 100, 481–498. Herrero-Fernández, D., Fonseca-Baeza, S., 2017. Angry thoughts in Spanish drivers and
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037916. their relationship with crash-related events the mediation effect of aggressive and
Camino López, Miguel A., González Alcántara, Óscar J., Fontaneda, Ignacio, 2017. risky driving. Accid. Anal. Prev. 106, 99–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2017.
Gender differences in commuting injuries in spain and their impact on injury pre- 05.015.
vention. Biomed. Res. Int. 2017, 1–11. https://www.hindawi.com/journals/bmri/ Herrero-Fernández, D., Macía-Guerrero, P., Silvano-Chaparro, L., Merino, L., Jenchura,
2017/3834827/https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/3834827. E.C., 2016. Risky behavior in young adult pedestrians: Personality determinants,
Chapman, P., Underwood, G., 2000. Forgetting near-accidents: the roles of severity, correlates with risk perception, and gender differences. Transp. Res. Part F: Traff.
culpability and experience in the poor recall of dangerous driving situations. Appl. Psychol. Behav. 36, 14–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2015.11.007.
Cogn. Psychol. 14, 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0720(200001) Hesmondhalgh, D., Baker, S., 2015. Sex, gender and work segregation in the cultural
14:1<31::AID-ACP622>3.0.CO;2-9. industries. Sociol. Rev. 63 (Suppl 1), 23–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-954X.
Clarke, S., Robertson, I., 2005. A meta-analytic review of the Big Five personality factors 12238.
and accident involvement in occupational and non-occupational settings. J. Occupat. Hogan, J., Foster, J., 2013. Multifaceted personality predictors of workplace safety per-
Org. Psychol. 78, 355–376. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317905X26183. formance: more than conscientiousness. Human Perform. 26, 20–43. https://doi.org/
Cohen, J., 1978. Partialed products are interactions; partialed powers are curve compo- 10.1080/08959285.2012.736899.
nents. Psychol. Bull. 85, 858–866. Jankovský, M., Allman, M., Allmanová, Z., Ferenčík, M., Merganič, J., Messingerová, V.,
Cohen, J.B., Cohen, P., 1983. Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the 2019. Is timber haulage safe? A ten year study of occupational accidents. Saf. Sci.

9
A. Osca and B. López-Araújo Safety Science 124 (2020) 104582

113, 154–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2018.11.018. Padkapayeva, K., Gilbert-Ouimet, M., Bielecky, A., Ibrahim, S., Mustard, C., 2018.
Jensen, S.Q., Kyed, M., Christensen, A.-D., Bloksgaard, L., Hansen, C.D., Nielsen, K.J., Gender/sex differences in the relationship between psychosocial work exposures and
2014. A gender perspective on occupational accidents. Saf. Sci. 64, 190–198. https:// work and life stress. Ann. Work Expos. Health 62, 416–425.
doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2013.12.004. Rau, P.P., Liao, P.C., Guo, Z., Zheng, J., Jing, B., 2018. Personality factors and safety
Johansson, O.J., Fyhri, A., 2017. “Maybe I will just send a quick text…” – an examination attitudes predict safety behaviour and accidents in elevator workers. Int. J. Occupat.
of drivers’ distractions, causes, and potential interventions. Front. Psychol. 8, 1957. Saf. Ergon. 7, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.2018.1493259.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01957. Rodriguez, I., Bravo, M.J., Peiró, J.M., Schaufeli, W., 2001. The Demands-Control-Support
Kain, J., Jex, S., 2010. Karasek’s (1979) job demands-control model: a summary of cur- model, locus of control and job dissatisfaction: a longitudinal study. Work Stress 5,
rent issues and recommendations for future research. In: In: Perrewé, P.L., Ganster, 97–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370110066968.
D.C. (Eds.), New Developments in Theoretical and Conceptual Approaches to Job Salgado, J., 2002. The Big Five personality dimensions and counterproductive beha-
Stress, vol. 8. Emerald Group Publishing, Bingley, pp. 237–268. https://doi.org/10. viours. Int. J. Sel. Assess. 10, 117–125. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2389.00198.
1108/S1479-3555(2010)0000008009. Shen, B., Qu, W., Ge, Y., Sun, X., Zhang, K., 2018. The relationship between personalities
Karasek, R., 1979. Job demand-control model: a summary of current issues and re- and self-report positive driving behavior in a Chinese sample. PLoS ONE 13 (1).
commendations for future research. In: Perrewé, P.L., Ganster, D.C. (Eds.), New Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.uned.es/login.aspx?direct=
Developments in Theoretical and Conceptual Approaches to Job Stress. Emerald true&db=psyh&AN=2018-16969-001&lang=es&site=ehost-live.
Group Publishing, Bingley, UK, pp. 237–268. Schmitz, L.L., McCluney, C.L., Sonnega, A., Hicken, M.T., 2019. Interpreting subjective
Karasek, R., Brisson, C., Kawakami, N., Houtman, I., Bongers, P., Amick, B., 1998. The Job and objective measures of job resources: the importance of sociodemographic con-
Content Questionnaire (JCQ): an instrument for internationally comparative assess- text. 18 pages. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 16. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ments of psychosocial job characteristics. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 3, 322–355. ijerph16173058.
https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.3.4.322. Sümer, N., 2003. Personality and behavioral predictors of traffic accidents: testing a
Karasek, R.A., Theorell, T., 1990. Healthy Work: Stress, Productivity and the contextual mediated model. Accid. Anal. Prev. 35, 949–964. https://doi.org/10.
Reconstruction of Working Life. Basic Books, New York. 1016/S0001-4575(02)00103-3.
Kim, S.E., Kim, H., Cho, J., Kwon, M., Chang, Y., Ryu, S., Shin, H., Kim, H., 2016. Direct Törnroos, M., Hintsanen, M., Hintsa, T., Jokela, M., Pulkki-Råback, L., Hutri-Kähönen, N.,
and indirect effects of five factor personality and gender on depressive symptoms Keltikangas-Järvinen, L., 2013. Associations between Five-Factor Model traits and
mediated by perceived stress. PLoS One 11 (4), e0154140. https://doi.org/10.1371/ perceived job strain: a population-based study. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 18,
journal.pone.0154140. PMID: 27120051; PubMed Central PMCID: 492–500. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033987.
PMCPMC4847785. Tucker, P., Albrecht, S., Kecklund, G., Beckers, D.G.J., Leineweber, C., 2016. Work time
Liu, X., Huang, G., Huang, H., Wang, S., Xiao, Y., Chen, W., 2015. Safety climate, safety control, sleep & accident risk: a prospective cohort study. Chronobiol. Int. 33,
behavior, and worker injuries in the Chinese manufacturing industry. Saf. Sci. 78, 619–629. https://doi.org/10.3109/07420528.2016.1167723.
173–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.04.023. Turner, N., Hershcovis, M.S., Reich, T.C., Totterdell, P., 2014. Work–family interference,
Luchman, J.N., González-Morales, M.G., 2013. Demands, control, and support: a meta- psychological distress, and workplace injuries. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 87,
analytic review of work characteristics interrelationships. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 715–732. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12071.
18, 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030541. Useche, S., Montoro, L., Cendales, B., Gómez, V., 2018. Job strain in public transport
McCrae, R.R., Costa, P.T., 1987. Validation of the five-factor model of personality across drivers: data to assess the relationship between demand-control model indicators,
instruments and observers. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 52, 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1037/ traffic accidents and sanctions. Data In Brief 19, 293–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
0022-3514.52.1.81. dib.2018.05.036.
Offer, S., 2014. The costs of thinking about work and family: Mental labor, work–family Van der Doef, M., Maes, S., 1998. The job demand-control(-support) model and physical
spillover, and gender inequality among parents in dual-earner families. Sociol. Forum health outcomes: a review of the strain and buffer hypotheses. Psychol. Health 13,
29, 916–936. https://doi.org/10.1111/socf.12126. 909–936. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870449808407440.
Organización Internacional del Trabajo. OIT, 2016. Las mujeres en el trabajo. Available Vassend, O., Roysamb, E., Nielsen, C.S., Czajkowski, N.O., 2018. Fatigue symptoms in
in: http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/—dgreports/—dcomm/—publ/ relation to neuroticism, anxiety-depression, and musculoskeletal pain. A longitudinal
documents/publication/wcms_457094.pdf. twin study. PLoS One 13. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198594.

10