Iranian Journal of

---

Background & Objectives: To be able to measure the extent of job stress, it is essential to use a standardized tool based on a standard theoretical model. The study aims to test the psychometric properties and criterion validity of the Farsi version of the Effort Reward Imbalance (F-ERI) questionnaire.
Methods: The Farsi version of the ERI Questionnaire was distributed to 227 male employees in Isfahan Polyacryle Company. Internal consistency, reliability, discriminative validity, and factorial structure were evaluated. The relationship between scales and depression was measured assessed by using logistic regression to criterion validity. Data were analysed by SPSS 18 and LIZREL 8.5.
Results: Mean score of effort, reward, and overcommitment were 10.7, 41.4, and 14.2 respectively Cronbach’s alpha coefficients were 0.61, 0.85 and 0.67 and split-half coefficients were 0.53, 0.85, and 0.65. All of item-total correlations were more than 0.20 correlation between each item and its scale were more than 0.4 except for one item. Effort and overcommitement had a good fit for construct validity.
 Conclusion: Current study results indicated the Farsiversion of the Effort Reward Imbalance (F-ERI) questionnaire is a reliable and valid tool to measure psychosocial stress at work among Farsi-speaking employees. It is advisable to evaluate the tool in longitudinal studies and other industries which included female employees. We refer the investigators to see the longitudinal results of current project which is under publication.

---

Background and Objectives: Lifestyle is one of the most important indicators of improving the quality of the people's lives. Given the key role of employees as valuable human resources, the aim of this study was to evaluate the lifestyle of the employees working in Ardabil University of Medical Sciences in 2015.

Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 320 employees working in Ardabil University of Medical Sciences were randomly included. The data collecting tools were a demographic form and the Walker questionnaire, which contained two questions related to the six dimensions of lifestyle. Data were analyzed with correlation tests, Chi-square, T-test, and Linear regression using SPSS.

Results: The lifestyle score was poor in 6.9%, moderate in 75.3%, and good in 17.8% of the employees. The mean and standard deviation of lifestyle dimensions was 22.19±4.9 for health responsibility, 27.93±5.2 for spiritual growth, 24.29±4.6 for interpersonal relations, 20.51±4.4 for stress management, 17.53±4.8 for physical activity, and 23.95±4.2 for nutrition. Women had higher scores than men in most items. There were significant relationships between gender and age with stress management (P=.002), gender and health responsibility (P=.002), educational level and health responsibility (P=.001), educational level and nutrition (P=.004), income and nutrition (P=.001), and educational level and interpersonal relations (P=.003).

Conclusion: The majority of employees their lifestyle was in the middle. The lowest score was related to physical activity and stress management. Interventions for promoting physical activity and stress management among employees is proposed.