Journal of Health and Medical Sciences

This article describes the “Wellbeing Process” model which is based on the Demands-Resources-Individual Effects (DRIVE) approach developed in occupational stress research. This model requires measurement of many variables and this is often not practical with established questionnaires due to their length. In order to remove this problem a short questionnaire (the Wellbeing Process Questionnaire, WPQ) was developed and validated. This enabled the well-being process to be evaluated and established predictors of positive and negative appraisals and outcomes defined. Results using this measuring instrument in a range of samples from different occupational sectors will be described. One issue with measures of wellbeing at work is that they may be influenced by the extent to which the person aims to present a socially desirable profile or lie about their wellbeing. This was examined in the study presented here. The results showed that measures related to negative outcomes were associated with scores on the lie scale. In contrast, positive outcomes and “the good job score” (the difference between positive appraisals/outcomes and negative appraisals/outcomes) were not correlated with scores on the lie scale. This result demonstrates the suitability of the WPQ for investigating wellbeing at work.


Introduction
Our approach to wellbeing at work has been to consider it as a process.This was based on occupational stress research and the development of the Demands-Resources-Individual Effects (DRIVE) model (Mark & Smith, 2008, 2011, 2012, 2018a, 2018b).This model emphasised the importance of measuring potentially negative job characteristics, such as job demands, resources that help one deal with challenges, such as control and support, and individual differences in coping styles.A major feature of the model was that it is relatively easy to add new variables.This has led to the inclusion of positive outcomes, such as life satisfaction, positive affect and happiness (Smith, 2011a(Smith, , 2011b;;Smith & Wadsworth, 2011;Smith, Wadsworth, Chaplin, Allen, & Mark, 2011;Wadsworth, Chaplin, Allen, & Smith, 2010).These positive outcomes are generally referred to as wellbeing.Our approach to wellbeing has been to include both positive and negative job characteristics (e.g.demands, control and support), appraisals (e.g.perceived stress and job satisfaction), individual differences (e.g.positive personality and negative coping) and outcomes (anxiety/depression and happiness).Other variables that have been included in the model relate to ethnicity (Capasso, Zurlo, & Smith, 2016a, 2016b, 2018;Zurlo, Vallone, & Smith, 2018), psychological contract fulfilment (Ahmad, Firman, Smith, & Smith, 2018a, 2018b), resilience, burnout and work-life balance (Omosehin & Smith, 2019) and training attitudes (Nor & Smith, 2018).
The addition of many factors leads to very long measuring instruments which reduce compliance and take time to complete.The Wellbeing Process Questionnaire (WPQ -Williams & Smith, 2012, 2016, 2018a, 2018b;Williams, Pendlebury & Smith, 2017;Williams, Thomas & Smith, 2017) and the Smith Wellbeing Questionnaire (SWELL -Smith & Smith, 2017a, 2017b, 2017c;Fan & Smith, 2017a, 2017b, 2018) were developed based on the use of short items that were shown to be highly correlated with longer established measuring instruments.These short questionnaires have been shown to have good reliability and validity.As well as in extensive cross-sectional research, the WPQ has been used in longitudinal studies which provide a better indication of causality (Galvin, 2016;Nelson, 2017).One potential problem with all measures of wellbeing at work is the extent to which they are influenced by the person trying to give a favourable impression of themselves.This has led to the development of "lie scales" which provide the researcher with a measure that can be co-varied to adjust for favourable impression biases (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1991;Framingham, 2019).
The aim of the present study was to examine whether associations between the predictor variables of the WPQ and outcomes were influenced by impression management (scores on the lie scale).These analyses were carried out for both positive and negative outcomes independently and combined into a single "good job" score (the difference between the positive outcomes/appraisals and the negative outcomes/appraisals).

Methods
This study involved a survey of the well-being of university staff.It was carried out with the informed consent of the volunteers and approval from the ethics committee, School of Psychology, Cardiff University.University staff (academic, technical and administrative) were recruited by an advert on the university noticeboard and were asked to complete an online survey presented using Qualtrics software.They were paid £10 for completing the survey, which is shown in Appendix 1.

Participants
One hundred and fifteen members of staff (age range 21-60 years; 37 male; 66 single; 106 white British) completed the survey.

Measures
The following measures were derived from the survey: Ø Negative job characteristics Ø Positive job characteristics Ø Positive personality Ø Negative coping Ø Positive outcomes Ø Negative outcomes Ø Difference between positive and negative outcomes Ø Lie scale score

Statistical analysis
The above measures were dichotomised using a median split and logistic regressions carried out with the positive and negative outcomes, and the difference between them as dependent variables.

Results
The first logistic regression carried out used negative outcomes as the dependent variable.The results are shown in Table 1 and there were significant effects of the lie scale and the absence of positive work characteristics.The second logistic regression used positive outcomes as the dependent variable.There were significant effects of positive personality and positive work characteristics.There was no significant effect of lie scale scores.The final regression used a composite wellbeing score (positive outcomes -negative outcomes) as the dependent variable.This again showed significant effects of positive personality and positive work characteristics but no significant effects of the lie scale.

Discussion
The development of the wellbeing process model has involved several stages.The first was the development of a conceptual framework based on the DRIVE model.This model included positive and negative job characteristics, appraisals and outcomes.In order to adopt a multi-variate approach it was important to measure a large number of different factors.To do this using many of the established questionnaires would have resulted in extremely long surveys which would have reduced compliance and would not be appropriate for many real-life situations.Short items were, therefore, developed and these were shown to be correlated with the longer measures from which they were developed.The reliability and validity of the WPQ was established in surveys involving different occupational sectors.One key feature of the DRIVE model is the ability to add new predictors and outcomes.Studies have investigated variables such as ethnicity and culture, resilience, work-lifebalance, psychological contract fulfilment and burnout.Other similar measuring instruments (e.g. the SWELL) have included questions about the physical working environment (e.g.noise exposure), working hours, presenteeism, absenteeism and musculoskeletal disorders.
One area that has not been addressed is whether impression biases influence scores on the WPQ.This was examined in the present study and it was found that lie scale scores were related to the reporting of negative outcomes.In contrast to this, lie scale scores did not predict positive outcomes or wellbeing scores based on the difference between positive and negative scores.This result shows the importance of including both positive and negative measures in the questionnaire and suggests that a short lie scale is included in future research on wellbeing at work.Disagree strongly Agree strongly 23.I feel that I have the social support I need (For example: There is someone who will listen to me when I need to talk, there is someone who will give me good advice, there is someone who shows me love and affection)

Appendix: The
Disagree strongly Agree strongly 24.I feel that I can provide the social support that others need (For example: There is someone who I listen to when they need to talk, there is someone who I can provide with help for their problems) Disagree strongly Agree strongly 25.When I find myself in stressful situations, I take a problem-focused approach (e.g.I take one step at a time, I change things about the situation or myself to deal with the issue, I don't let my feelings interfere too much).Disagree strongly Agree strongly 28.When I find myself in stressful situations, I wish for things to improve (e.g.I hope a miracle will happen, I wish I could change things about myself or circumstances, I daydream about a better situation).
I find myself in stressful situations, I look for social support (e.g.I talk to someone to get more information, I ask someone for advice, I talk to someone about how I'm feeling).I find myself in stressful situations, I blame myself (e.g.I criticize or lecture myself, I realise I brought the problem on myself).

Table 1 .
Significant predictors of negative outcomes

Table 2 .
Significant predictors of positive outcomes and the lie scale

Table 3 .
Significant predictors of wellbeing (positive outcomes -negative outcomes) and the lie scale it difficult to withdraw from my work obligations.(For example: work is always on my mind, I find it difficult to relax when I get home from work, people close to me say I sacrifice too much for my job).Overall, I feel that I have positive self-esteem (For example: On the whole I am satisfied with myself, I am able to do things as well as most other people, I feel that I am a person of worth) I feel that I do not have the time I need to get my work done (for example: I am under constant time pressure, interrupted in my work, or overwhelmed by responsibility or work demands) Overall, I feel that I have low self-esteem (For example: At times, I feel that I am no good at all, at times I feel useless, I am inclined to feel that I am a failure) When I find myself in stressful situations, I try to avoid the problem (e.g.I keep things to myself, I go on as if nothing has happened, I try to make myself feel better by eating/drinking/smoking).In the past week, how many of your experiences have been uplifting (i.e. made you feel happy or joyful, or gave a sense of satisfaction)?How much is your rating of life stress above influenced by one or more specific stressful life events (e.g. a death in the family, separation, family or financial crisis)?Overall, I feel that I am satisfied with my life (For example: In most ways my life is close to my ideal, so far I have gotten the important things I want in life) I feel that I lead a purposeful and meaningful life (e.g.I am engaged and interested in my daily activities, I actively contribute to the happiness and well-being of others, I am a good person and live a good life).Were you ever greedy by helping yourself to more than your share of anything?