The first objective of this study was to validate the JIS scale [47] in the context of Brazilian employees. This objective was achieved by having a scale for measuring subjective job insecurity with high reliability indices and a factor structure that coincides with the baseline test [47], as well as the one resulting from the Spanish validation [49]. The Spanish adaptation study pointed out the relevance of developing psychometric scales for the measurement of the phenomenon in Latin America, and more specifically in the Brazilian case where there is no precedent. It is also the first adaptation of this scale to use polychoric correlations in its confirmatory factor analysis. This method is not only more suitable for Likert-5 items, but the proposed factor extraction is more conservative with respect to multidimensionality than the principal component analysis usually used in this type of design [62]. Despite this, the test has been adjusted to a two-factor model, with the implications that will be discussed below.
The scale in the Brazilian validation presents one less item, with the elimination of the fourth item. This item, as mentioned above, had substantially lower factor weights than the rest in Spain and in the original validation, which is considered a congruent decision. One of the factors, with this elimination, is now measured in three items, which is considered acceptable for the measurement of a dimension in a psychometric instrument [74]. The reverse direction of four of the items is maintained, in order to seek fidelity with the original scale and its different versions.
The validity study of the instrument reveals significant correlations between scores in perceived job insecurity and measurements of mental health and job satisfaction. In the case of job satisfaction, an inverse correlation is found with all measurements of job insecurity in the scale, and a direct correlation with mental health. These results are consistent with the scientific literature [46, 49]. This supports not only that the scores are adequate to establish criterion validity, but also the correct behaviour of the scale in its cross-cultural adaptation to the Brazilian population. It should be noted that the correlation between the total job insecurity score and the mental health variable is higher than that observed with job satisfaction. This is in continuity with the work of Stiglbauer et al. [75] where a higher correlation of job insecurity with cognitive well-being (r = − .35***) than with variables related to job involvement (r = − .12) is observed. It also shows a high relationship between job insecurity and intention to leave (r = .48***). This leads to the conclusion that job insecurity is a high intensity phenomenon, which is more related to the negative impact consequences of its occurrence. At the same time, it shows that the impact of the phenomenon of job insecurity goes beyond the consequences in the work environment and includes personal aspects. Låstad et al. [76] also relates quantitative perceived job insecurity more strongly to the deterioration of psychological well-being (r = − .26***), than to other work-related variables such as work/family conflict (r = .18***).
In the above sense, the relationship between job insecurity and other variables, such as health, shows that job insecurity is a measure of job precariousness [11]. The conceptualisation of job insecurity is not only broad, but necessarily mutable. In this sense, we provide new evidence on the relevance of looking at job insecurity as an indicator of job insecurity, in line with other authors [77]. In fact, in line with the flexible and volatile nature of the labour market [10], definitions of job precariousness that focus solely on objective aspects do not take into account the magnitude of the phenomenon under study. Thus, proposals for conceptualising precariousness such as that by Vosko [78], whereby "precarious work can be defined as employment characterised by insecurity, low pay and limited social benefits" [p.2], reflect how job insecurity is an intrinsic element for its understanding, through a measurement of the subjective experience of job insecurity.
Another aspect to discuss is the factorialisation of the test into two dimensions. This involves discussing the multiple conceptual models of subjective job insecurity. In this sense, the validation of the instrument in Brazil opted to explore a second-order latent factor in order to give the instrument versatility. The adjustment of the two-factor model, cognitive and affective, together with the total score extracted with the second-order latent factor, allows three scores to be extracted from the test. This provides an answer to those authors who see perceived job insecurity as a one-dimensional construct [15], as it alows a total score to be obtained through the scale in Brazil. However, the results of the validation process are clear in defining a two-dimensional model (affective and cognitive). In this sense, it has been shown that the impact of affective job insecurity is differential, with higher correlations with the mental health and job satisfaction scales in the case of cognitive job insecurity. This data allows a discussion with the literature.
A recent meta-analysis showed that affective job insecurity tends to be more important than cognitive job insecurity in mental health [44]. Looking at the regression study designed with the Brazilian sample and general mental health as the dependent variable, the results reflect, however, a more significant R2 for cognitive job insecurity (R2 adj = .116) than for affective job insecurity (R2 adj = .022). Both dimensions of job insecurity are significant in the linear regression model. Recent literature reports such behaviour when studying the phenomenon in a statistically representative sample of subjects, in which cognitive job insecurity has a greater influence on mental health than affective job insecurity [79]. If we refer to the original validation of the instrument being validated, it is also evident that cognitive job insecurity explains more variance in the mental health measure (βstd = 0.39) than affective job insecurity (βstd = 0.05) [47]. Salas-Nicas et al. [79] argue that it is difficult to explain the differential behaviour of the two factors at the moment. Evidence of this complexity is found in the data analysed with the Spanish sample of the study, where affective job insecurity has a greater weight in the explained variance of general mental health. The direction of the Spanish data is congruent with the aforementioned meta-analysis [44]. However, it should be borne in mind that the vast majority of analyses of this phenomenon have been carried out in the European context [36, 36, 39, 80, 81]. In contrast, our results show that the phenomenon presents different levels of intensity according to the context in which it is studied, meaning that cross-cultural comparative approaches, with a psychosocial perspective, are necessary. This had already been identified as a priority and pending task in the analysis of job insecurity [16].
Cross-national comparison exercises have been little explored with Latin American countries. Having the scale adapted to the Brazilian context has allowed us to compare a sample of Spanish and Brazilian populations, which was the second objective of the study. When comparing the effect size of perceived job insecurity on mental health measured with the GHQ, the effect sizes among the Brazilian working population (R2 Adj = .138) are substantially higher than those obtained in the Spanish sample. They are higher in all cases, both for the affective dimension and the cognitive dimension. The percentage of variance explained in the case of the model developed in Spain (R2 Adj = .07) is very similar to that seen in previous studies with the same variables (R2 Adj = .06) [49) It can be concluded, therefore, that job insecurity is more relevant for understanding the mental health of workers in the Brazilian context than in a European context such as Spain.
Interpreting these results requires analysing the contrast between the social contexts of the two countries. The scientific literature has shown that job insecurity is a phenomenon mediated by conditions of poverty and resource availability [11, 82]. Thus, those who live with fewer resources experience greater job insecurity and its effects more intensely: both because the jobs they tend to have access to are more precarious, and because the cost of losing a job is higher. Studies on job insecurity around periods of economic crisis also reflect this situation of increased value of work due to the present economic instability [12, 20]. At the same time, the perception of social inequality has been found to have a moderating effect on the consequences of job insecurity [83]. If we compare inequality indicators in the Brazilian macro socio-economic context, the GINI index exceeds the Spanish one by 19.2 points according to World Bank data [55]. Regarding the employment situation in the Brazilian and Spanish contexts, we do not see very different trajectories in unemployment rates. However, the vulnerable employment rate as formulated by the ILO [84] shows that in Brazil it is 17 percentage points higher than the already high Spanish rate (11% in Spain, compared to 5% in Germany and 8% in France) [53]. Once again, we are forced to link the concept of job insecurity with expectations [85, 86], and the expectation of job development in a fragile social and occupational market can be hypothesised to influence the experience and consequences of job insecurity.
Limitations and future research
As for the limitations of this research, it would be necessary to go deeper with more data to explain why there is this differential influence between the impact of job insecurity in Spain and Brazil. In this sense, the availability of this validated psychometric scale opens up the possibility of analysing the phenomenon in the territory, which until now was not possible in these terms. Secondly, the discussion remains open regarding the differential relationship between the affective and cognitive dimensions of mental health. In this sense, a deeper understanding of the social conditions of the contexts can help us to observe the conditioning factors that intervene in the phenomenon [79] Thirdly, although the test has been translated into Portuguese, it has only been validated in the Brazilian context, so it would be necessary to develop a cross-cultural adaptation process in Portugal for its use in this context.