Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Jul;179(7):752-61.
doi: 10.7205/MILMED-D-13-00446.

Classifying U.S. Army Military Occupational Specialties using the Occupational Information Network

Anne M Gadermann  1 , Steven G Heeringa  2 , Murray B Stein  3 , Robert J Ursano  4 , Lisa J Colpe  5 , Carol S Fullerton  4 , Stephen E Gilman  6 , Michael J Gruber  7 , Matthew K Nock  8 , Anthony J Rosellini  7 , Nancy A Sampson  7 , Michael Schoenbaum  9 , Alan M Zaslavsky  7 , Ronald C Kessler  7 ; Army STARRS Collaborators
Collaborators, Affiliations

Classifying U.S. Army Military Occupational Specialties using the Occupational Information Network

Anne M Gadermann et al. Mil Med. 2014 Jul.

Abstract

Objectives: To derive job condition scales for future studies of the effects of job conditions on soldier health and job functioning across Army Military Occupation Specialties (MOSs) and Areas of Concentration (AOCs) using Department of Labor (DoL) Occupational Information Network (O*NET) ratings.

Methods: A consolidated administrative dataset was created for the "Army Study to Assess Risk and Resilience in Servicemembers" (Army STARRS) containing all soldiers on active duty between 2004 and 2009. A crosswalk between civilian occupations and MOS/AOCs (created by DoL and the Defense Manpower Data Center) was augmented to assign scores on all 246 O*NET dimensions to each soldier in the dataset. Principal components analysis was used to summarize these dimensions.

Results: Three correlated components explained the majority of O*NET dimension variance: "physical demands" (20.9% of variance), "interpersonal complexity" (17.5%), and "substantive complexity" (15.0%). Although broadly consistent with civilian studies, several discrepancies were found with civilian results reflecting potentially important differences in the structure of job conditions in the Army versus the civilian labor force.

Conclusions: Principal components scores for these scales provide a parsimonious characterization of key job conditions that can be used in future studies of the effects of MOS/AOC job conditions on diverse outcomes.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Gatchel RJ, Schultz IZ, editors. Handbook of Occupational Health and Wellness. New York, NY: Springer; 2012.
    1. Vernon HM. Health in Relation to Occupation. London, UK: Oxford University Press; 1939.
    1. Spector PE. Job Satisfaction: Application, Assessment, Causes, and Consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1997.
    1. Jackson SE, Schuler RS. A meta-analysis and conceptual critique of research on role ambiguity and role conflict in work settings. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1985;36(1):16–78.
    1. van der Doef M, Maes S. The Job Demand-Control (-Support) model and psychological well-being: a review of 20 years of empirical research. Work Stress. 1999;13(2):87–114.

Publication types