The quiet quitting scale: Development and initial validation

Editorial verdict

Methodologically sound instrument development study. The psychometric properties of the QQS are adequately demonstrated for an initial validation, but the Greek convenience sample and absence of a cut-off score limit immediate generalisability — treat the scale as promising but requiring cross-cultural replication before broad organisational application.

Executive summary

This article addresses the absence of a validated psychometric instrument for measuring quiet quitting among employees, a phenomenon that gained mainstream attention following a viral TikTok post in July 2022 and whose prevalence reportedly increased after the COVID-19 pandemic. The authors argue that a reliable and valid scale is necessary to identify quiet quitters, understand the phenomenon empirically, and inform organisational interventions. The study followed a structured instrument development process: item generation via literature review and employee interviews, expert content validation, cognitive interviews, pilot testing for face validity, item analysis, and exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis on a convenience sample of 922 Greek employees. The resulting Quiet Quitting Scale (QQS) is a nine-item, three-factor instrument measuring detachment, lack of initiative, and lack of motivation. Cronbach's alpha and McDonald's omega both exceeded 0.80, CFA fit indices were acceptable, and concurrent validity was confirmed through statistically significant correlations with burnout, job satisfaction, and turnover intention measures. The authors conclude that the QQS is a brief, reliable, and valid tool, while acknowledging limitations including a convenience sample drawn exclusively from Greece, potential social desirability bias in self-report data, and the absence of an established cut-off score.

References

1. Social Work (Scheyett A.) (2022).Quiet quitting.
2. Journal of Hospitality Marketing (Formica S., Sfodera F.) (2022).The great resignation and quiet quitting paradigm shifts: An overview of current situation and future research directions.
3. Industrial and Commercial Training (Hamouche S., Chabani Z.) (2021).COVID-19 and the new forms of employment relationship: implications and insights for human resource development.
4. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management (Liu Lastres B. et al.) (2023).A reflection on the great resignation in the hospitality and tourism industry.
5. Holistic Nursing Practice (Zuzelo PR.) (2023).Discouraging quiet quitting: Potential strategies for nurses.
6. Journal of Knowledge Management (Serenko A.) (2023).The Great Resignation: The great knowledge exodus or the onset of the great knowledge revolution?.
7. Nature (Forrester N.) (2023).Fed up and burnt out: 'Quiet quitting' hits academia.
8. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications (Lu M. et al.) (2023).Quiet quitting during COVID-19: The role of psychological empowerment.
9. Journal of Global Health (Boy Y., Sürmeli M.) (2023).Quiet quitting: A significant risk for global healthcare.
10. Work & Stress (Kristensen TS. et al.) (2005).The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory: A new tool for the assessment of burnout.
11. American Journal of Community Psychology (Spector P.) (1985).Measurement of human service staff satisfaction: Development of the Job Satisfaction Survey.
12. Health Scope (Hansen V., Pit S.) (2016).The Single Item Burnout Measure is a psychometrically sound screening tool for occupational burnout.
13. Journal of Organizational Behavior (Maslach C., Jackson SE.) (1981).The measurement of experienced burnout.
14. Industrial Health (Feldt T. et al.) (2014).The 9-item Bergen Burnout Inventory: Factorial validity across organizations and measurements of longitudinal data.
15. Educational and Psychological Measurement (Schaufeli WB. et al.) (2006).The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study.
16. Journal of Advanced Nursing (Galanis P. et al.) (2021).Nurses' burnout and associated risk factors during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis.