Skip to main content

Table 2 Summary statistics for Workplace Social Capital items, overall scale and sub-scales in either a two-factor (i.e. Structural, Cognitive) or three-factor (i.e. Bonding, Bridging, Linking) models

From: Investigation into the metric properties of the workplace social capital questionnaire and its association with self-rated health and psychological distress amongst Greek-Cypriot registered nurses: cross-sectional descriptive study

 

2 or 3 factor modelc

Mean (SD)

Relative frequency (%) of responsesa,b

2

3

 

1

2

3

4

5

Item 1 – Our supervisor treats us with kindness and consideration.

S

L

3.56 (1.05)

4.1%

13.3%

21.0%

43.7%

16.6%

Item 2 – Our supervisor shows concern for our rights as an employee.

S

L

3.57 (1.03)

3.0%

13.3%

23.8%

40.6%

17.4%

Item 3 – We have a ‘we are together’ attitude.

C

B

3.56 (0.98)

3.3%

13.0%

19.3%

51.1%

12.2%

Item 4 – People keep each other informed about work-related issues in the work unit.

S

B

3.96 (0.74)

0.6%

5.0%

11.3%

63.3%

18.5%

Item 5 – People feel understood and accepted by each other.

C

B

3.45 (0.87)

0.6%

15.8%

27.6%

47.0%

7.2%

Item 6 – Do members of the work unit build on each other’s ideas in order to achieve the best possible outcome?

S

Br

3.49 (0.85)

0.3%

14.4%

27.6%

47.8%

7.5%

Item 7 – People in the work unit cooperate in order to help develop and apply new ideas.

S

Br

3.43 (0.86)

1.7%

12.7%

31.2%

45.9%

6.6%

Item 8 – We can trust our supervisor.

C

L

3.51 (1.03)

3.6%

12.7%

27.6%

38.1%

16.0%

 

Mean

SD

Med

Min

IQR

Max

Overall scale

 

3.57

0.69

3.63

1.6

3.0–4.0

5

Structural SC

 

3.53

0.70

3.60

1.8

3.2–4.0

5

Cognitive SC

 

3.51

0.80

3.67

1.0

3.0–4.0

5

Bonding SC

 

3.66

0.71

3.83

1.3

3.3–4.0

5

Bridging SC

 

3.47

0.77

3.50

1.0

3.0–4.0

5

Linking SC

 

3.55

0.94

3.67

1.0

3.0–4.0

5

  1. Notes – a1 = fully disagree to 5 = fully agree; except item 7 where 1 = very little to 5 = very much, bPercentages do not add up to 100% due to missing values. Missing values were very low and ranged from 4 (1.1%) to 7 (1.9%), cItems hypothesized to capture S = structural and C=Cognitive Social Capital in a 2-factor model or B=Bonding, Br = Bridging and L = Linking Social Capital in a 3-factor model