1. Department of Kinesiology, University of Waterloo The Experience Sampling Method: An Approach to the Study of Deadlines in Newspaper Workers The Issue Working under deadlines has been recognized as one of a number of risk factors for upper limb musculoskeletal disorders. 1 Deadlines are an inseparable part of producing a newspaper, so a better understanding of deadlines was needed to form a basis for possible interventions. Beech-Hawley, L. A, Wells, R. A, Cole D.C. B and The Worksite Upper Extremity Group B A Department of Kinesiology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo and B Institute for Work and Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Approach Results Implications for Newspaper Workers References Cited: 1. Polanyi, M., Cole, D., Beaton, D. et. al. Upper Limb work related musculoskeletal disorders among newspaper employees: cross- sectional survey results. Am. J. Ind. Med., 32:620-628, 1997. 2. Larson, R. Csikszentmihalyi, M. The experience sampling method. in Reis, H. Ed. Naturalistic Approaches to Studying Social Interaction. Jossey-Bass Inc. 1983. 3. Hart, S., Staveland, L. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In: Hancock, P.A. and Meshkati, N. eds. Human Mental Workload. Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., 1988. 4. Schreiber, J. B. and Gutek, B. Some time dimensions of work: measurement of an underlying aspect of organizational culture. J. Appl. Psych, 72(4): 642-650, 1987. A method pioneered in the behavioural sciences, the Experience Sampling Method 2, was one of a number of methods used to better understand the nature of deadlines. Questions included current work activity, workload dimensions (NASA-TLX) 3, perceived control and ability to meet the deadline. It took approximately 15 seconds to complete. Twelve participants volunteered to participate in a multi-day recording of work experience. We acknowledge the following for their contributions: Toronto Star Management and Employees, Toronto Star Steering Committee/RSI Watch and SONG/CEPU Local 87M ApproachingDeadline 1(Low) 3/1(High) 4/1(High) 4/2(High) *Normalized EMG Surface EMG of the trapezius and forearm extensors was simultaneously collected bilaterally over the entire shift for three days for five participants. Analysis to quantify muscular demand is currently in progress. Certain factors exacerbate the work pressure associated with working with deadlines in this environment:  delays in work flow from others  interruptions due to technology problems  excessive work volume /insufficient time  extra / unexpected work  inadequate staffing  compromising work quality for the sake of speed  little time for breaks. Interventions to address these issue should be the focus for prevention Collateral Findings Questionnaire Place A Mark On Each Scale That Represents The Magnitude Of Each Factor As You Were Beeped: Mental Demand* |-----------------------------------------| None Impossible Physical Demand*|------------------------------------ ---| None Impossible Time Pressure|----------------------------------------| None Rushed My Performance*|----------------------------------------| Failure Perfect Effort*|----------------------------------------| LowHigh Frustration Level*|----------------------------------------| FulfilledExasperated Feeling In Control | -----------------------------------------| Not at all Completely Do you feel that |----------------------------------------| you will make With EaseImpossible Your deadline? The Experience Sampling Method involves “beeping” participants on a pager at random intervals (40 minutes + 10 minutes) throughout the work shift, at which time a short self-report questionnaire is completed. Days were categorized as being daily- or weekly-deadline days or no-deadline days. Beeper sampling times are then expressed as “Time to Deadline” or “Time to End of Shift” (for “no deadline” days). If more than one deadline ocurred the first was used. Questionnaire data (Time Dimensions of Work, Schreiber and Gutek 4 ) on 128 low and high deadline participants indicated that people working with frequent deadlines tended to have to work together with others more to accomplish their work (synchronization), perform tasks on a specific schedule in a specific order, work at a fast pace, and work hard, more so than those who did not work with frequent deadlines. In addition they tended to have little leeway in their workday to accommodate breaks, interruptions (computer system or co-worker) or extra tasks. Focus Groups with 12 low and high deadline participants revealled that a number of themes distinguished high from low deadline persons. These included; unpredictability of workload, work flow, compromised work value, “...can’t leave work behind”, “...ergonomics out the window during deadlines”, decreased job control and restricted ability to manage WMSDs. Some interesting trends were observed in the data. Workload tended to increase close to a deadline with rapid decrease after a deadline for both weekly and daily deadlines, except where the deadline was missed, in which case, workload tended to continue rising. Perceived control and confidence in meeting the deadline tended to decrease as a deadline approached, although this trend was not as consistent across participants as the trend in workload. Qualitative analysis of patterns of work activities over different work shifts also showed differences between deadline cycles. A much larger number of statistically significant positive slopes were seen for deadline days for the workload variable. Break Keying at desk Deskwork Keying at desk Phone at desk Keying at desk Keying at desk Deskwork Keying at desk Break 1st Deadline 2nd Deadline Break Keying at desk Deskwork Keying at desk Phone at desk Keying at desk Keying at desk Deskwork Keying at desk Break 1st Deadline 2nd Deadline Twelve participants completed experience sampling booklets, most for three consecutive work days. Response rate was high throughout the sampling periods, even very close to deadlines and where workload was rated high. To analyze the data, data were standardized to Z scores for each participant over all the days sampled. A composite Workload score was compiled from the six individual NASA-TLX scales, and data for the Workload, In control, and Make Deadline variables were plotted over each data day. Linear regression analysis was done in order to compare trends between daily deadline, weekly deadline, and no deadline days. Analysis of the self reported task and posture information indicated that as a deadline approached, the same work activities/postures tended to occur in sequential samples, whereas earlier in a deadline cycle or on no-deadline days, a greater variety of work activities and postures tended to be reported. Temporal variation in work pressure was identified in the experience sampling and focus group methods, and together with the questionnaire data. Psychological and physical risk factors for WMSDs were seen to differ between deadline groups and over deadline cycles.