Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38956720›Full record

ArticleBMC psychology2024

Pets at work: integrating pet-friendly initiatives into human resources for enhanced workplace harmony.

Ana Junça-Silva, Marisa Galrito

RetractedAbstract readRetracted Publication
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

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

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Ana Junça-SilvaInstituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), Lisboa, Portugal. analjsilva@gmail.com.
Marisa GalritoInstituto Universitário de Lisboa (ISCTE-IUL), Lisboa, Portugal.

Funding

Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia UIDB/00315/2020
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsThe representation of companion animals, or pets, has been changing recently. Research concerning how pets influence employees' work-related well-being has also started to take its first steps. This research aimed to analyze (1) how managers perceive pet-friendly practices and their main effects at work, and (2) the impact of such practices on employees' well-being and work engagement. Relying on the social exchange perspective and the self-determination theory it was hypothesized that pet-friendly practices would positively influence employees' well-being and work engagement by satisfying their three basic needs (autonomy, competence, and relatedness). METHODOLOGY: Two studies with mixed methods were conducted. The first and exploratory study resorted to semi-structured interviews with six managers. The second was a two-wave study conducted with a large sample of workers (N = 379).

resultsThe first study highlighted the primary advantages and disadvantages of pet-friendly practices, along with the various obstacles and limitations, and proposed managerial strategies to overcome them. Managers generally expressed interest and enthusiasm about the topic but also pointed out challenges in implementing a pet-friendly strategy due to the limited number of empirical studies demonstrating its benefits. The second study's findings indicated that pet-friendly practices positively impacted employees' work engagement and well-being by fulfilling their needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness. ORIGINALITY: Overall, Portugal is seen as having a conservative culture, which slows the dissemination and implementation of these measures. To overcome these challenges, several managerial recommendations have been proposed. Raising awareness and fostering discussion on the topic are crucial steps toward integrating pet-friendly policies into human resources management.

Indexed as

PetsWorkplaceAdultAnimalsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedWork EngagementBasic psychological needsPet-friendly practicesPets at workWell-beingWork engagement

Identifiers

PMID38956720
PMCPMC11218162

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.