Handbook of Organization Measurement
Role Overload
construct.role_overload
§2The established instruments
What the field already uses — named and cited, not reproduced (item wording is copyrighted and withheld pending clearance).
- Task, Job and Role Characteristics Questionnaire (Module 3) — Not specified in text (Moch, 1980b; Moch, Bartunek and Brass, 1979 cited as users)
- Task, Job and Role Characteristics (Michigan Organizational Assessment Questionnaire, Module 3) — Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins and Klesh, 1979; Seashore, Lawler, Mirvis and Cammann, 1982
- Task, Job and Role Characteristics Questionnaire (Module 3) — Not specified in chunk (referenced to source publication)
- Role Overload Scale — Walsh, Taber and Beehr (1980)
- Role Overload Scale — Beehr, Walsh and Taber, 1976
- Task, Job and Role Characteristics Questionnaire (Module 3) — Not explicitly named in this chunk (associated with Moch, Bartunek and Brass, 1979; Moch, 1980b)
- Job Characteristics Questionnaire (Task, Job and Role Characteristics) — Cammann, Fichman, Jenkins, and Klesh (referenced indirectly; original source not fully named in chunk)
- Subjective Quantitative Work Load Scale — Caplan, 1971
- Role Ambiguity, Role Overload and Nonparticipation Scales — Beehr, Walsh and Taber, 1976
§3The math on what we know
Synthesized priors from the live registry: pooled r, studies (k), total N, top study grade, and heterogeneity. Rows flagged for heterogeneity or single-study evidence are directional, not settled — read them as a central tendency.
What role overload predicts
| Outcome | r | k | N | Grade | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Work Engagement | −0.20 | 1 | 6,152 | B | single study |