Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33123064›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2020

Viewing Meaningful Work Through the Lens of Time.

Francesco Tommasi, Andrea Ceschi, Riccardo Sartori

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Francesco TommasiHuman Sciences Department, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Andrea CeschiHuman Sciences Department, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Riccardo SartoriHuman Sciences Department, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
University of Verona · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Authors have paid considerable attention to how to define the meaningful work construct. This has led to providing comprehensive definitions in the light of different theoretical frameworks that reflect a degree of contestation within the field. Several of them have proposed definitions linked to the individuals' pervasive sense of the value of their work. Others have offered descriptions centered on their temporal, episodic nature and emphasizing the individual's occasional work experience. These definitions reflected a potential temporal condition as well as the variety of time perspectives underpinning the authors' conceptualizations of the construct. This paper conducted a broad literature review to analyze works that have adopted a temporal framework or supported a time-based definition of the construct. The analysis indicates two different conceptualizations of the construct: as a permanent/steady mindset and as a changeable/episodic experience. As a reflective paper, the present contribution develops an overall framework for views and theories on meaningful work. It reports a critical review on the matter to elevate understanding of meaningful work for further research and applied implications in work and organizational studies.

Indexed as

meaningfulnessmeaningful worktemporal frameworktime-based definitionwork and organizational psychology

Identifiers

PMID33123064
PMCPMC7566167
OpenAlexW3090101517

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.