Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35818457›Full record

ArticleJournal of technology in behavioral science2022

Approaches Adopted by Researchers to Measure the Quality of the Experience of People Working from Home: a Scoping Review.

Stefano Federici, Maria Laura De Filippis, Maria Laura Mele, Simone Borsci, Marco Bracalenti, Giovanni Bifolchi, Giancarlo Gaudino, Massimo Amendola, Antonello Cocco, Emilio Simonetti

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of technology in behavioral science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

10 authors.

Stefano FedericiDepartment of Philosophy, Social and Human Sciences and Education, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-5681-0633
Maria Laura De FilippisDepartment of Philosophy, Social and Human Sciences and Education, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3282-3514
Maria Laura MeleDepartment of Philosophy, Social and Human Sciences and Education, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2714-4683
Simone BorsciDepartment Learning, Data Analysis, and Technology, Cognition, Data and Education CODE Group, Faculty of Behavioural, Management and Social Sciences, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-3591-3577
Marco BracalentiDepartment of Philosophy, Social and Human Sciences and Education, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8768-3793
Giovanni BifolchiDepartment of Philosophy, Social and Human Sciences and Education, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy.
Giancarlo GaudinoDGTCSI-ISCTI, Directorate General for Management and Information and Communications Technology, Superior Institute of Communication and Information Technologies, Ministry of Economic Development, Rome, Italy.
Massimo AmendolaDGTCSI-ISCTI, Directorate General for Management and Information and Communications Technology, Superior Institute of Communication and Information Technologies, Ministry of Economic Development, Rome, Italy.
Antonello CoccoDGTCSI-ISCTI, Directorate General for Management and Information and Communications Technology, Superior Institute of Communication and Information Technologies, Ministry of Economic Development, Rome, Italy.
Emilio SimonettiDepartment of Public Service, Prime Minister's Office, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Working from home (WFH) remotely is a modality of working that requires the careful design of systems of rules and tools to enable people to exchange information and perform actions. WFH is expected to expand after the COVID-19 pandemic. How to assess and compare in a reliable way the experience of workers with different (sociotechnical) systems of WFH is a central point to supporting the diffusion of acceptable modalities of working. However, the concept of experience and how it can be measured in the domain in WFH is yet to be clearly characterized. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) methodology for scoping reviews, we systematically map the approaches used by researchers to assess WFH, identify which aspects are usually investigated, and examine how such aspects are usually measured in terms of questions and tools. Literature is collected using Scopus and Web of Science. Thirty-four records out of 323 focusing either on validating a scale, presenting theoretically the experience of workers or testing this empirically are included in the qualitative synthesis. The results highlight a lack of unified terminology and tools, with assessments of workers' experience mainly characterized by survey approaches and qualitative questions. Clustering together the most investigated aspects in the literature and reviewing how these aspects are assessed, we propose a list of 10 relevant overarching dimensions and attempt to define workers' experience in the domain of WFH remotely. This definition can be used as a tool by researchers aiming to assess the experience of workers in order to inform the design or redesign of the sociotechnical systems that enable WFH. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41347-022-00264-4.

Indexed as

AssessmentExperienceRemote workingSatisfactionWorkers’ experienceWorking from home

Identifiers

PMID35818457
PMCPMC9261248

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.