Create a literature review research matrix, which includes research concepts that can be found and connected to

Description

Create a literature review research matrix, which includes research concepts that can be found and connected to preselected published scholarly research.

Expand All

Introduction

This assessment provides a practical opportunity to apply research skills to a literature research matrix.

Overview

For this assessment, you are being introduced to literature mapping as part of the preparation for a literature review. As you collect articles, the following resource can be used to evaluate their scientific merit.

Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP). (2018). CASP checklist: 10 questions to help you make sense of a systematic review [PDF] Download CASP checklist: 10 questions to help you make sense of a systematic review [PDF]. https://casp-uk.net/
Instructions

This assessment consists of completing a research matrix, which is a type of literature mapping/organizing that uses a table format. This matrix includes research concepts that can be found and connected to the published scholarly research provided by your faculty. Four research articles have been selected for you to read and dissect for completing the research matrix (table). The articles for this assessment are posted in the Announcements area of the courseroom. In the Literature Review Research Matrix [DOCX] Download Literature Review Research Matrix [DOCX], a sample article is completed for you as an example; you will need to complete the matrix for the remaining four articles.

Additional Requirements

Refer to the assignment scoring guide to make sure you meet the requirements of this assessment.

Competencies Measured

By successfully completing this assessment, you will demonstrate your proficiency in the course competencies through the following assessment scoring guide criteria:

Competency 1: Analyze the methodology used in scientific research.
Identify the study sample in the chosen research.
Identify the methodology used in the chosen research.
Competency 2: Evaluate the characteristics, purposes, benefits, strengths, and weaknesses of research methods.
Identify the main themes in the chosen research.
Identify the research question or questions in the chosen research.
Describe the theoretical framework of the chosen research study.
Describe the findings in the chosen research.
Competency 6: Communicate in a manner that is scholarly, professional, and consistent with the expectations for members in the identified field of study.
Communicate in a manner that is scholarly, professional, and consistent with the expectations for members of an identified field of study, using APA style and formatting.

We switch articles for each Quarter. Here are the four articles for this Survey of Research Methods course for begins January 8, 2024. You will apply the articles below to both Assessments #1 & #2 matrix assignments.

For Assessment #3, you will create your PowerPoint research proposal related to the topic of “workplace wellbeing.”

Four Required Articles for Assessment #1 & #2:

Ahmadi, E., Lundqvist, D., Bergström, G., & Macassa, G. (2023). A qualitative study of factors that managers in small companies consider important for their wellbeing. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being, 18(1), 2286669-2286669.

https://www-tandfonline-com.library.capella.edu/doi/full/10.1080/17482631.2023.2286669

Knezevic, A., Olcoń, K., Smith, L., Allan, J., & Pai, P. (2023). Wellness warriors: A qualitative exploration of healthcare staff learning to support their colleagues in the aftermath of the australian bushfires. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being, 18(1), 2167298-2167298. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482631.2023.2167298Links to an external site.

Marenus, M. W., Marzec, M., & Chen, W. (2022). Association of workplace culture of health and employee emotional wellbeing. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(19), 12318.

http://library.capella.edu/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.proquest.com%2Fscholarly-journals%2Fassociation-workplace-culture-health-employee%2Fdocview%2F2724246542%2Fse-2%3Faccountid%3D27965

Pauksztat, B., Salin, D. & Kitada, M. (2022). Bullying behavior and employee well-being: How do different forms of social support buffer against depression, anxiety and exhaustion? International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 95, 1633–1644.

http://library.capella.edu/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.proquest.com%2Fscholarly-journals%2Fbullying-behavior-employee-well-being-how-do%2Fdocview%2F2707720842%2Fse-2%3Faccountid%3D27965

Unformatted Attachment Preview

CASP Checklist: 10 questions to help you make sense of a Systematic Review
How to use this appraisal tool: Three broad issues need to be considered when appraising a
systematic review study:
Are the results of the study valid? (Section A)
What are the results?
(Section B)
Will the results help locally?
(Section C)
The 10 questions on the following pages are designed to help you think about these issues
systematically. The first two questions are screening questions and can be answered quickly.
If the answer to both is “yes”, it is worth proceeding with the remaining questions. There is
some degree of overlap between the questions, you are asked to record a “yes”, “no” or
“can’t tell” to most of the questions. A number of italicised prompts are given after each
question. These are designed to remind you why the question is important. Record your
reasons for your answers in the spaces provided.
About: These checklists were designed to be used as educational pedagogic tools, as part of a
workshop setting, therefore we do not suggest a scoring system. The core CASP checklists
(randomised controlled trial & systematic review) were based on JAMA ‘Users’ guides to the
medical literature 1994 (adapted from Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, and Cook DJ), and piloted with
health care practitioners.
For each new checklist, a group of experts were assembled to develop and pilot the checklist
and the workshop format with which it would be used. Over the years overall adjustments
have been made to the format, but a recent survey of checklist users reiterated that the basic
format continues to be useful and appropriate.
Referencing: we recommend using the Harvard style citation, i.e.: Critical Appraisal Skills
Programme (2018). CASP (insert name of checklist i.e. Systematic Review) Checklist. [online]
Available at: URL. Accessed: Date Accessed.
©CASP this work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution – Non-CommercialShare A like. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-ncsa/3.0/ www.casp-uk.net
Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) part of Oxford Centre for Triple Value Healthcare Ltd www.casp-uk.net
Paper for appraisal and reference:……………………………………………………………………………………………
Section A: Are the results of the review valid?
1. Did the review address a
clearly focused question?
Yes
Can’t Tell
No
HINT: An issue can be ‘focused’ In terms of
• the population studied
• the intervention given
• the outcome considered
Comments:
2. Did the authors look for the
right type of papers?
Yes
Can’t Tell
No
HINT: ‘The best sort of studies’ would
• address the review’s question
• have an appropriate study design
(usually RCTs for papers evaluating
interventions)
Comments:
Is it worth continuing?
3. Do you think all the
important, relevant studies
were included?
Yes
Can’t Tell
No
HINT: Look for
• which bibliographic databases were
used
• follow up from reference lists
• personal contact with experts
• unpublished as well as published studies
• non-English language studies
Comments:
2
4. Did the review’s authors do
enough to assess quality of
the included studies?
Yes
Can’t Tell
No
HINT: The authors need to consider the
rigour of the studies they have identified.
Lack of rigour may affect the studies’
results (“All that glisters is not gold”
Merchant of Venice – Act II Scene 7)
Comments:
5. If the results of the review
have been combined, was it
reasonable to do so?
Yes
Can’t Tell
No
HINT: Consider whether
• results were similar from study to study
• results of all the included studies are
clearly displayed
• results of different studies are similar
• reasons for any variations in results are
discussed
Comments:
Section B: What are the results?
6. What are the overall results of the review?
HINT: Consider
• If you are clear about the review’s
‘bottom line’ results
• what these are (numerically if
appropriate)
• how were the results expressed (NNT,
odds ratio etc.)
Comments:
3
7. How precise are the results?
HINT: Look at the confidence intervals, if
given
Comments:
Section C: Will the results help locally?
8. Can the results be applied to
the local population?
Yes
Can’t Tell
No
HINT: Consider whether
• the patients covered by the review
could be sufficiently different to your
population to cause concern
• your local setting is likely to differ much
from that of the review
Comments:
9. Were all important outcomes
considered?
Yes
Can’t Tell
HINT: Consider whether
• there is other information you would
like to have seen
No
Comments:
10. Are the benefits worth the
harms and costs?
Yes
Can’t Tell
HINT: Consider
• even if this is not addressed by the
review, what do you think?
No
Comments:
4
Literature Review Research Matrix
Please note that the first row of data is meant as an example. Please read the example article (Zhang et al., 2023) as a guide for how
to dissect each article assigned.
Keep in Mind:
1). This is not merely an assignment for you to find information in an article and copy and paste information into the columns in the
below matrix. Read and analyze the authors’ work in each article and evaluate it based on the assigned readings for this course and
then offer your evaluation of what you read. You are to offer the content to reflect that you are an informed consumer of research.
2). There is much variation in published primary research articles and reports. Not all authors will include all the same information,
verbatim or at all, based on the headings in the columns below. If that is the case, you will need to offer your own analysis of what
the information should be in a logical manner aligned to the other information in the source that is provided. There should be no blank
cells in the below matrix.
3). Communicate your input in a manner that is completely scholarly, professional, and consistent with the expectations for members
of an identified field of study, using APA style and formatting, with few or no errors and include a formal APA style reference list.
1
Parenthetical
Citation
Identify the
main
concepts;
often the
“keywords”
are helpful
for
identifying
main
concepts
(Zhang et al., 2023)
Ethical
leadership,
moral efficacy,
cognitive theory,
role congruity
theory, team
ethical climate
Provide the
research
question(s)
and/or
hypotheses
(word-for-word)
and state if the
questions/
hypotheses were
properly aligned
to the research
method and
design
H1: Supervisors’
ethical leadership
reduces graduate
students’
acceptance of
academic
misconduct.
H2: Moral efficacy
mediates the
relationship
between
supervisors’
ethical leadership
and graduate
students’ attitudes
toward academic
misconduct.
H3: The
relationship
between ethical
leadership and
graduate students’
moral efficacy is
stronger for
female than male
supervisors.
H4: The indirect
effect of ethical
leadership on
Conceptual
or Theoretical
Framework (if
not provided,
offer your
analysis of
what
framework
was applied
or what
would be a
logical one to
have applied)
Populatio
n
descriptio
n, Sample
descriptio
n, “N=”
(number
of actual
participan
ts)
Research
method
(approach)
& design
applied (do
not included
data
collection
and data
analysis
information)
Summary of Findings (in
your own words)
Social cognitive
theory and role
congruity theory
Study 1:
Graduate
business
school
students from
Eastern
China. Total
N = 301 with
90 male
participants
and 211
female
graduate
students.
Study 2: 159
graduate
business
students.
Quantitative
Methodology
with survey
designs
For Study 1: H1 was supported
with the finding that the effect of
ethical leadership on attitudes
toward academic misconduct was
statistically significant. H2 was
supported with a finding that
supervisors’ ethical leadership
and students attitudes toward
academic misconduct was
mediated by moral efficacy. H3
was supported finding that the
positive relationship between
supervisors’ ethical leadership
and moral efficacy was stronger
for female supervisors. That same
relationship was not significant
when supervisors were male,
supporting H4. Study 2 used a
manipulation to test the
hypotheses when high and low
ethical leadership was
differentiated. All four hypotheses
were supported.
2
Parenthetical
Citation
Identify the
main
concepts;
often the
“keywords”
are helpful
for
identifying
main
concepts
Provide the
research
question(s)
and/or
hypotheses
(word-for-word)
and state if the
questions/
hypotheses were
properly aligned
to the research
method and
design
Conceptual
or Theoretical
Framework (if
not provided,
offer your
analysis of
what
framework
was applied
or what
would be a
logical one to
have applied)
Populatio
n
descriptio
n, Sample
descriptio
n, “N=”
(number
of actual
participan
ts)
Research
method
(approach)
& design
applied (do
not included
data
collection
and data
analysis
information)
Summary of Findings (in
your own words)
students’ attitudes
towards academic
misconduct via
moral efficacy is
moderated by
supervisors’
gender.
H5: Ethical climate
mediates the
relationship
between
supervisors’
ethical leadership
and graduate
students’ attitudes
toward academic
misconduct.
These hypotheses
were well-aligned
with the
quantitative
methodology and
the statistical
relationships
among variables
noted in the
hypotheses.
3
Parenthetical
Citation
Identify the
main
concepts;
often the
“keywords”
are helpful
for
identifying
main
concepts
Provide the
research
question(s)
and/or
hypotheses
(word-for-word)
and state if the
questions/
hypotheses were
properly aligned
to the research
method and
design
Conceptual
or Theoretical
Framework (if
not provided,
offer your
analysis of
what
framework
was applied
or what
would be a
logical one to
have applied)
Populatio
n
descriptio
n, Sample
descriptio
n, “N=”
(number
of actual
participan
ts)
Research
method
(approach)
& design
applied (do
not included
data
collection
and data
analysis
information)
Summary of Findings (in
your own words)
References
Zhang G., Zhang T., Mao S., Xu Q., & Ma X. (2023). Supervisors’ ethical leadership and graduate students’ attitudes toward academic
misconduct. PLoS One, 8(4) 1-17. 10.1371/journal.pone.0283032
4
International Journal of
Environmental Research
and Public Health
Article
Association of Workplace Culture of Health and Employee
Emotional Wellbeing
Michele Wolf Marenus 1,2 , Mary Marzec 2 and Weiyun Chen 1, *
1
2
*
Citation: Marenus, M.W.; Marzec, M.;
Chen, W. Association of Workplace
Culture of Health and Employee
Emotional Wellbeing. Int. J. Environ.
School of Kinesiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
Virgin Pulse Institute, Providence, RI 02902, USA
Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-(734)-615-0376
Abstract: The study aimed to examine associations between workplace culture of health and employee work engagement, stress, and depression. Employees (n = 6235) across 16 companies voluntarily completed the Workplace Culture of Health (COH) Scale and provided data including stress,
depression, and biometrics through health risk assessments and screening. We used linear regression
analysis with COH scores as the independent variable to predict work engagement, stress, and depression. We included age, gender, job class, organization, and biometrics as covariates in the models.
The models showed that total COH scores were a significant predictor of employee work engagement
(b = 0.75, p < 0.001), stress (b = −0.08, p < 0.001), and depression (b = 0.08, p < 0.001). Job class was also a significant predictor of work engagement (b = 2.18, p < 0.001), stress (b = 0.95, p < 0.001), and depression (b = 1.03, p = 0.02). Gender was a predictor of stress (b = −0.32, p < 0.001). Overall, findings indicate a strong workplace culture of health is associated with higher work engagement and lower employee stress and depression independent of individual health status. Measuring cultural wellbeing supportiveness can help inform implementation plans for companies to improve the emotional wellbeing of their employees. Keywords: workplace; culture of health; employee wellbeing; mental health; stress; work engagement; gender; job class Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 12318. https://doi.org/10.3390/ ijerph191912318 Academic Editors: Robin Orr, Jill Joyce, Robert Lockie and Jay Dawes Received: 12 August 2022 Accepted: 26 September 2022 Published: 28 September 2022 Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). 1. Introduction Employee emotional health and wellbeing have become a critical concern for organizations today [1]. A 2021 survey found that 76% of U.S. employees reported at least one symptom of a mental health condition, with the most common symptoms being burnout, depressive feelings, and anxious thoughts [2]. Estimates suggest that 28% of US adults report high stress and approximately 8% experience clinical depression [3,4]. It is likely these numbers are under representative due to many not seeking or having access to treatment. Many employers offer workplace health promotion programs to support and improve the health and wellbeing of their employees [5]. Research has shown that establishing a culture of health in the workplace may help facilitate the effectiveness of health promotion initiatives [6–8]. Workplace culture of health refers to the influence of the characteristics of the physical and social environment on behaviors and attitudes related to health and wellbeing in the workplace [9,10]. The primary constructs of workplace culture of health include leadership, policies, programs, supervisor support, peer support, and morale. Theories such as the social-ecological model support the influence of culture as a way to target behavior change. The social-ecological model posits that individuals’ behaviors and health outcomes are influenced interactively by individual, interpersonal, community (workplace) and policy level [11]. In the workplace, interpersonal factors such as coworker relationships and supervisor role modeling and community factors such as access to healthy food options or space to be physically active can positively influence employees’ health choices in the Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 12318. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191912318 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 12318 2 of 13 workplace [12–14]. In the workplace, socioecological approaches move beyond convincing individual employees to make healthier choices. It necessitates the organizations to create an environment that makes choosing healthy behaviors the easy and convenient choice [6]. Many workplace promotion programs address specific individual health-related behaviors such as smoking cessation or nutrition support [5]. These particular programs, however, may only apply to a subset of employees. Influencing culture through interpersonal, community, and policy level factors can reach employees regardless of where they are in their health journey or their participation in workplace health programs [15]. Further, employees’ health status can shift quickly and frequently, and having a culture that supports employees in all stages can also help address these evolving health concerns. In recent literature, workplace culture of health has been conceptualized and assessed at both the employer and employee level [16,17]. Employer-level measures are completed by a single representative typically involved in the wellness initiative. This singular perspective may not comprehensively assess the organization’s culture. Nevertheless, positive outcomes have been associated with employer-level health culture. Goetzel and colleagues observed that companies with a high internal culture of health had greater appreciation in company stock price when compared to companies with low internal culture of health [18]. A longitudinal study of 21 employers found that improvement in an organization’s culture of health predicted improved employee health risks [19]. Employee-level culture of health measures assesses how the organization supports health and wellbeing from the employee perspective. Previous studies using employee level culture of health measures observed that culture of health is associated with higher levels of job satisfaction and retention [15], work engagement [16], and healthy behaviors such as physical activity and healthy eating [20]. A 2016 on US government employees (n = 4703) found that workplace culture of health was negatively correlated with anxiety and depression [21]. Similar results were observed in employees in China, where higher ratings of workplace culture of health were associated with better psychological wellbeing [22]. Domains of workplace culture of health such as leadership and coworkers support have been found to decrease employee health risk [8] and promote positive health behaviors [20]. However, there is only one U.S.-based study that has examined workplace health culture and emotional wellbeing from employees’ perspective [21]. Other studies in this area have measured workplace culture of health from the employer-level, which may not capture a comprehensive perspective [18,19]. In addition, that study did not use a validated research tool to measure workplace culture of health, limiting its generalizability [21]. There is a need to assess workplace health culture using evidence-based measures. It is also unknown the impact of physical health status on ratings of workplace culture of health and its effect on emotional wellbeing. Further, few studies have examined job class and gender differences in regard to the relationship between workplace culture of health and employee emotional health outcomes. A study with employees (n = 880) at a Korean life insurance company found that job classification moderated the relationship between job satisfaction (which was associated with culture of health), and job retention, where supervisors are more likely to stay in their current position if they are satisfied with their jobs than non-supervisors. Another study showed no differences by gender in workplace culture of health scores [23]. However, research has shown that there are differences in stress [24] and depressive symptoms [25] by gender, warranting further exploration in this area. Understanding differences in gender and job class outcomes can help organizations understand the impact of cultural supports within the complex social arena of workplace environments. While many studies have examined the relationship between workplace culture of health and employee health outcomes, few studies have looked specifically at emotional wellbeing. In addition, existing studies have not taken into account the existing physical health status of employees in that relationship, and examined the way gender and job class may play a role in the effects of workplace culture on wellbeing. Further, there is a need for Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 12318 3 of 13 studies to use a validated metric to assess workplace culture of health from the employee perspective across organizations. The purpose of this study was twofold: (1) to determine if there are differences by gender and job class in workplace culture of health scores, work engagement, stress, and depression, and (2) to examine associations between workplace culture of health and work engagement, stress, and depression while controlling for age, gender, job class, and biometric data in a large sample of working adults in the U.S. We hypothesized that there would be gender and job class differences by employee health outcome. In addition, we hypothesized that there would be a positive relationship between workplace health culture and employee health outcomes, even while controlling of individual level factors. Results from this study can help inform the design and implementation of emotional health interventions and show evidence of the benefits of taking a culture of health approach to workplace wellbeing programs. Further, this research can help understand how communitylevel factors may influence individual outcomes to advance our knowledge of the social ecological model in the field of workplace health promotion. 2. Methods 2.1. Participants and Data Collection This study is based on a sample from the Virgin Pulse’s database of workplace culture of health assessment. The culture assessment was administered via Virgin Pulse online platform to U.S. based employees of consenting organizations. Eighteen organizations expressed interest in participating and were given summary reports and wellbeing strategy recommendations. The organizations were from a variety of industries, including higher education, health care, real estate, technology, non-profits, financial services, hospitality, manufacturing, utility, and retail. Each organization helped facilitate employees to take the assessments using the Virgin Pulse platform and via email. Assessments were launched between December 2018 and November 2019 and were available to employees for approximately one month during that date range. Employee participation was voluntary. Prior to completing the survey, all participants were informed and consented to allow the use of the anonymized data for research. There was a participation rate of 14% across organizations. Participants in this study took the Workplace Culture of Health Scale and gave permission to use matched data from the employees’ health risk assessment data. Health risk assessments (HRA) are an instrument used to collect an employee’s health information that can include biometric data and self-report data, typically provided by an independent 3rd party through one’s employer. Of the 18 organizations that participated, 16 organizations also provided HRA data. The final study sample was comprised of 6235 employees across 16 organizations. 2.2. Measures 2.2.1. Workplace Culture of Health (COH) Scale The Workplace Culture of Health (COH) scale is a 42-item questionnaire designed to measure employee assessment of how their workplace supports health [10]. Participants were asked to rate to what extent they agree or disagree with the statements provided. Responses range from 5 (strongly agree) to 1 (strongly disagree). The scale has been shown to be reliable and valid [10]. This study used a shortened version of the COH scale (24 items). Domains measured in the scale include leadership, policies, programs, supervisor support, coworker support, values, morale, and work engagement. Each subscale was comprised of two items, with the exception of values that has one item and morale that has six items. Scores for each domain and for the total scale are calculated by dividing the total points by the total points possible, then multiplying by 100 to get a summative index score. In accordance with the scale developers, the engagement domain is not included in the total score so it can be analyzed as an outcome variable. Previous research using the full Workplace COH Scale has shown high levels of internal consistency, with Cronbach alpha coefficients ranging from 0.91–0.97. This is consistent with the Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 12318 4 of 13 reliability found in this study for the total score, with a Cronbach alpha of 0.92 [10]. The Cronbach alphas for each subscale were as follows: leadership (α = 0.84), policies (α = 0.67), programs (α = 0.58), supervisor support (α = 0.85), coworker support (α = 0.69), morale (α = 0.83), and work engagement (α = 0.81). Job classification was also an item on the workplace COH scale, where participants were asked to select if they were a “supervisor”, meaning they had direct reports, or “individual contributor”, indicating they had no direct reports. Individual contributors are referred to as non-supervisor employees. 2.2.2. Stress Stress was measured through a single item self-report question, “in the last month, how do you rate your stress?” Responses ranged from 0 (no stress) to 10 (high stress). This measure was included with the Workplace COH Scale. 2.2.3. Depression The Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety (PHQ-2) is a 2-item measure designed for a person to self-rate how frequently they experienced depressive symptoms in the past two weeks [26]. This measure was included in the HRA. The participants were asked to rate how often they have been bothered by the statements provided in the questionnaire within the last two weeks. Items on the PHQ-2 include: (1) “little interest or pleasure in doing things” and (2) feeling down, depressed, or hopeless”. Responses to statements range from never experiencing symptoms (0) to experiencing them every day (3). Total scores were calculated by averaging the scores on each item. Individuals who scored 0 to 2 were given a score of 100, from 3 to 4 were given a score of 50, and 5 and 6 were given a score of 0. Scores of 50 or below are indicators of major depressive disorder. Higher scores for depression indicate a lower risk of depression. Previous research has shown this scale has a strong internal reliability with a Cronbach alpha coefficient of 0.83 [26]. 2.2.4. Biometric Screening Data Validated biometric data was collected through the HRA and included: (1) body mass index (BMI), (2) blood pressure, (3) non-HDL cholesterol, and (4) glucose. Pulse pressure was calculated by subtracting diastolic blood pressure from systolic blood pressure. Pulse pressure was used in the regression models to assist with potential multicollinearity issues due to the relationship between systolic and diastolic blood pressure. 2.3. Data Analysis Descriptive statistics including mean and standard deviations were calculated for each variable for the total sample, by job class, and by gender. To explore the relationships between COH scores and employee health outcome variables, bivariate correlations, independent sample t-tests, and regression models were performed. Bivariate correlations were conducted for all continuous variables. A linear regression model was conducted to determine the extent to which work engagement, stress, and depression were associated with COH scores while controlling for gender, job class, age, biometric data, and organization. The categories for gender were male and female. The reference group for gender was female in the regression models. The categories for job class were supervisor and non-supervisor. Non-supervisor was the reference group in the regression models. Organization number was included as a categorical variable, and was used to control for any between group differences. Full results of the model are included in Appendix B. The assumption of normality was checked using skewness and kurtosis, which was found to be within normal range for all variables with the exception of depression scores. Multivariate normality was checked using Q-Q plots and the residuals were found to be normally distributed. Multicollinearity was checked for each regression model using the variance inflation factor (VIF). Multicollinearity for each independent variable was tested using VIF and Tolerance (T) scores. The values of VIF for all independent variables ranged from 1.05–1.4 (0.01), an indication of no Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 12318 5 of 13 multicollinearity. The assumption of homoscedasticity was checked using plotted residuals and was found having non-constant variance for the models, therefore, robust standard errors were used to address the violation [27]. Autocorrelation was checked using ACF plots and the Durbin-Watson test. The Durbin-Watson test statistics ranged from 1.89–1.94, indicating the model did not violate the assumption of autocorrelation [28]. Due to the fact that there were only minor violations of the assumptions of the generalized linear model and that normal distribution of variables is not an assumption of linear regression, we proceeded with analyzing the data [29]. Subsequently, standardized regression coefficients were analyzed to assess the relative importance of each independent variable individually predicting each dependent variable. In addition, t-tests were run to determine differences in COH scores and primary outcome variables by gender and by job class. All analysis was performed using R [30]. 3. Results 3.1. Participant Characteristics Tables 1 and 2 show demographic data and descriptive statistics of each study variable by gender, and by job class. Approximately 64% of the sample identified as female, and approximately 19% classified themselves as a supervisor. The average age for the total sample was 45 years old. Regarding employee perception of workplace culture of health, scores above 80 on the COH total score indicate a “high” health culture, scores between 79 to 65 indicate a “medium” health culture, and scores below 65 is considered “low” [31]. The average COH score was 73.86, falling in the “medium” score range for workplace COH. The average stress score was 5.47 out of 10, with over 24% of the sample reporting a score of 8 or higher. Scores from 1 to 3 indicate low stress, from 4 to 7 moderate stress, and scores above 8 indicate extreme stress level [4]. Regarding depression, scores on the PHQ-2 of 50 or below indicate major depression disorder is likely [26]. Our average score of 96.87 indicated there was little to no average risk of depression in our sample, with approximately 5% of the sample was at medium to high risk for depression. Table 1. Descriptive statistics and results of t-test comparison of employee outcome variable by gender. Female (n = 4007) COH Score Engagement Stress Depression Male (n = 2228) Mean SD Mean SD t df p d 73.43 80.91 5.61 96.64 13.03 13.45 2.57 14.18 74.64 81.73 5.21 97.27 12.74 13.96 2.63 13.12 −3.58 −2.24 5.70 −1.78 4691 4460 4512 4908 Purchase answer to see full attachment