Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 19, 2026

Measuring Psoriasis Severity at Home
Published on: March 1, 2024
Turkish adaptation and psychometric testing of the Perceived Workplace Support Scale in people with inflammatory
Gonca Bumin1, Ezginur Gündoğmuş1, Alan Tennant2
1Department of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.
Objective:
This study aimed to adapt the Perceived Workplace Support Scale (PWSS) into Turkish and evaluate its psychometric properties among individuals diagnosed with inflammatory arthritis (IA).
Methods:
A total of 200 employed individuals with IA (mean age = 37.9 ± 10.6 years; 66.5% female) participated in the study. The cultural adaptation followed Beaton's method, including forward translation, synthesis, back-translation, expert committee review and cognitive debriefing. Construct validity was assessed using Rasch analysis. Internal consistency was examined with Cronbach's alpha, and test-retest reliability was evaluated in a subsample using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Concurrent validity was examined by correlating PWSS dimension scores with the Work Limitation Questionnaire-Short Form (WLQ-SF), Rheumatoid Arthritis Work Instability Scale (RA-WIS) and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire: General Health (WPAI: GH).
Results:
Rasch analysis supported the structural validity of the Turkish PWSS, showing adequate model fit after addressing local item dependencies. Cronbach's alpha ranged from 0.59 (manager) to 0.81 (coworker). Test-retest reliability indicated fair stability, with ICCs of 0.47 (manager), 0.52 (coworker) and 0.59 (organization). These findings suggest that the scale is more appropriate for group-level comparisons rather than individual-level assessment. The scores for PWSS subdimensions showed moderate correlations with work and health measures, supporting concurrent validity.
Conclusions:
The Turkish version of the PWSS demonstrates potential utility for assessing perceived workplace support in individuals with IA. However, given the fair level of test-retest reliability, it should be used with caution and primarily for group-level analyses.