Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37016443›Full record

ArticleBMC psychology2023

It all depends on which side of the fence you are standing: agent and recipient perspectives are differently linked with job crafting.

Marta Roczniewska, Magdalena Marszałek

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Marta RoczniewskaLIME Department, Karolinska Istitutet, Stokholm, Sweden. marta.roczniewska@ki.se.
Magdalena MarszałekSWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Sopot Campus, Sopot, Poland.

Funding

Swedish Research Council for Health, Working life and Welfare (FORTE) 2019-00543
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn social contexts, people may view themselves as agents, who are in control of the environment, or recipients, who succumb to what others have decided. Here, we investigated how these perspectives determine job crafting (JC)-self-initiated employee behaviors targeted at altering job characteristics to fit them with one's needs.

methodsStudy 1 tested the relationships between chronic agent-recipient tendencies and JC in a cross-lagged panel design. Study 2 was a randomized experiment where agent-recipient perspectives were manipulated to predict JC intentions in the week to follow.

resultsSupporting our predictions, while agents sought structural job resources and increased challenging demands, recipients resorted to reducing hindering demands (Study 1). Study 2 revealed that activating an agent perspective led to stronger intentions to increase structural job resources and challenging demands.

conclusionsWe conclude that agent and recipient perspectives are linked with differential patterns of JC behaviors. Strengthening agency is a vital step in forming job redesign goals during JC interventions.

Indexed as

IntentionSocial EnvironmentHumansSurveys and QuestionnairesAgentDual Perspective ModelJob craftingProactivityRecipient

Identifiers

PMID37016443
PMCPMC10074650

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.