Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29944662›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

"Could you sit down please?" A qualitative analysis of employees' experiences of standing in normally-seated workplace meetings.

Louise Mansfield, Jennifer Hall, Lee Smith, Molly Rasch, Emily Reeves, Stephen Dewitt, Benjamin Gardner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Louise MansfieldDepartment of Life Sciences, College of Health and Life Sciences, Brunel University, Uxbridge, United Kingdom.
Jennifer HallDepartment of Life Sciences, College of Health and Life Sciences, Brunel University, Uxbridge, United Kingdom.
Lee SmithThe Cambridge Centre for Sport and Exercise Sciences, Department of Life Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Molly RaschDepartment of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Emily ReevesDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Stephen DewittDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Benjamin GardnerDepartment of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1223-5934

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/N008979/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Office workers spend most of their working day sitting, and prolonged sitting has been associated with increased risk of poor health. Standing in meetings has been proposed as a strategy by which to reduce workplace sitting but little is known about the standing experience. This study documented workers' experiences of standing in normally seated meetings. Twenty-five participants (18+ years), recruited from three UK universities, volunteered to stand in 3 separate, seated meetings that they were already scheduled to attend. They were instructed to stand when and for however long they deemed appropriate, and gave semi-structured interviews after each meeting. Verbatim transcripts were analysed using Framework Analysis. Four themes, central to the experience of standing in meetings, were extracted: physical challenges to standing; implications of standing for meeting engagement; standing as norm violation; and standing as appropriation of power. Participants typically experienced some physical discomfort from prolonged standing, apparently due to choosing to stand for as long as possible, and noted practical difficulties of fully engaging in meetings while standing. Many participants experienced marked psychological discomfort due to concern at being seen to be violating a strong perceived sitting norm. While standing when leading the meeting was felt to confer a sense of power and control, when not leading the meeting participants felt uncomfortable at being misperceived to be challenging the authority of other attendees. These findings reveal important barriers to standing in normally-seated meetings, and suggest strategies for acclimatising to standing during meetings. Physical discomfort might be offset by building standing time slowly and incorporating more sit-stand transitions. Psychological discomfort may be lessened by notifying other attendees about intentions to stand. Organisational buy-in to promotional strategies for standing may be required to dispel perceptions of sitting norms, and to progress a wider workplace health and wellbeing agenda.

Indexed as

Group ProcessesStanding PositionWorkplaceAdministrative PersonnelAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicLibrariansMaleMiddle AgedSedentary BehaviorYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID29944662
PMCPMC6019091

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.