Perspectives on randomization and readiness for change in a workplace intervention study
Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Book chapter › Research › peer-review
Standard
Perspectives on randomization and readiness for change in a workplace intervention study. / Nabe-Nielsen, Kirsten; Persson, Roger; Nielsen, Karina; Olsen, Ole; Carneiro, Isabella Gomes; Garde, Anne Helene.
Derailed Organizational Interventions for Stress and Well-Being: Confessions of Failure and Solutions for Success. ed. / Maria Karanika-Murray; Caroline Biron. Netherlands : Springer Science+Business Media, 2015. p. 201-208.Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Book chapter › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - CHAP
T1 - Perspectives on randomization and readiness for change in a workplace intervention study
AU - Nabe-Nielsen, Kirsten
AU - Persson, Roger
AU - Nielsen, Karina
AU - Olsen, Ole
AU - Carneiro, Isabella Gomes
AU - Garde, Anne Helene
PY - 2015
Y1 - 2015
N2 - Randomization is often recommended above self-selection when allocating participants into intervention or control groups. One source of confounding in non-randomized studies is the participants’ attitudes towards the intervention. Because randomized workplace interventions are not always feasible, it is important to investigate differences between study groups in readiness for change. To meet this aim, we used data from an intervention study of the effects of work-time control. The study design entailed both self-selection (i.e. non-random) and random allocation into intervention and control groups. Some team leaders rejected randomization because they considered it to be fairest to increase work-time control among employees in most need. Others accepted randomization arguing that it was fairer to allocate a potential benefi t by random. We found no difference in readiness for changes when comparing the self-selected intervention and control groups. In contrast, the randomized intervention group reported higher readiness for change when compared with both the randomized control group and the self-selected intervention group. This suggests that self-selection into intervention and control groups may refl ect the local leaders’ rather than the employees’ readiness for changes and that randomization may infl uence the participants’ attitude towards the intervention perhaps by evoking an experience of ‘winning or losing in the lottery’.
AB - Randomization is often recommended above self-selection when allocating participants into intervention or control groups. One source of confounding in non-randomized studies is the participants’ attitudes towards the intervention. Because randomized workplace interventions are not always feasible, it is important to investigate differences between study groups in readiness for change. To meet this aim, we used data from an intervention study of the effects of work-time control. The study design entailed both self-selection (i.e. non-random) and random allocation into intervention and control groups. Some team leaders rejected randomization because they considered it to be fairest to increase work-time control among employees in most need. Others accepted randomization arguing that it was fairer to allocate a potential benefi t by random. We found no difference in readiness for changes when comparing the self-selected intervention and control groups. In contrast, the randomized intervention group reported higher readiness for change when compared with both the randomized control group and the self-selected intervention group. This suggests that self-selection into intervention and control groups may refl ect the local leaders’ rather than the employees’ readiness for changes and that randomization may infl uence the participants’ attitude towards the intervention perhaps by evoking an experience of ‘winning or losing in the lottery’.
KW - Bias
KW - Confounding
KW - Quasi-experimental
KW - Readiness for change
KW - Self-selection
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84944595902&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/978-94-017-9867-9_23
DO - 10.1007/978-94-017-9867-9_23
M3 - Book chapter
AN - SCOPUS:84944595902
SN - 9789401798662
SP - 201
EP - 208
BT - Derailed Organizational Interventions for Stress and Well-Being
A2 - Karanika-Murray, Maria
A2 - Biron, Caroline
PB - Springer Science+Business Media
CY - Netherlands
ER -
ID: 157752227