Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38410397›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024

The new normal of remote work: exploring individual and organizational factors affecting work-related outcomes and well-being in academia.

Vincenza Capone, Giovanni Schettino, Leda Marino, Carla Camerlingo, Alessandro Smith, Marco Depolo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. 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

6 authors.

Vincenza CaponeDepartment of Humanities, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Giovanni SchettinoDepartment of Humanities, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Leda MarinoDepartment of Humanities, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Carla CamerlingoArea Organizzazione e Sviluppo, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Alessandro SmithUfficio Organizzazione e Performance, University of Naples Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Marco DepoloAlma Mater Studiorum - University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Flexible work arrangements have become increasingly popular, driven by the widespread adoption of digital technologies in the workplace because of the pandemic. However, there is a scarcity of studies concerning remote work, especially related to technical-administrative staff (TAS) in academia. Therefore, the current study, adopting the Job Demands-Resources model, aimed to investigate the relationships between remote working self-efficacy, organizational support, techno-complexity, mental well-being, and job performance among TAS during remote working. Methods: A total of 373 individuals from TAS of a large Italian university participated in this study by completing a self-report questionnaire. Results: The findings showed positive and significant relationships between remote self-efficacy and job satisfaction as well as between such a perceived efficacy and mental well-being. Perceived support from supervisors acted as a protective factor against techno-complexity. In contrast, perceived support from colleagues emerged as able to promote well-being and job satisfaction. In addition, the latter was positively associated with well-being. Finally, individual job performance was positively affected by job satisfaction and negatively by techno-complexity. Conclusion: This study highlights the need for interventions to support TAS in remote working environments by leveraging employees' self-efficacy as a key factor in reducing stress related to new technologies as well as enhancing well-being, job satisfaction, and, in turn, their performance.

Indexed as

emerging psychosocial riskspost-pandemicpsychosocial resourcesremote workinguniversity staffwell-being

Identifiers

PMID38410397
PMCPMC10894936

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.