Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40601637›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2025

The growth and collapse of autonomy at work.

Redzo Mujcic, Andrew J Oswald

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2025. 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. The growth and collapse of autonomy at work.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    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.

Redzo MujcicWarwick Business School, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7796-732X
Andrew J OswaldDepartment of Economics, University of Warwick and CAGE Centre, Coventry CV4 7AL, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0628-3294

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Humans hate being monitored. Autonomy is prized-including by research scientists. Yet little is known about a fundamental issue in the modern world: What is happening to job autonomy in today's workplaces as people move from youth on to middle age and then on to older ages? It would be natural to believe that individuals in the second half of their careers would be the senior ones with high autonomy. We provide evidence that such a belief is wrong. This study uses longitudinal data on hundreds of thousands of randomly sampled individuals, in three rich countries, who are followed through their working lives (n > 400,000). Workers'

Indexed as

EmploymentPersonal AutonomyProfessional AutonomyWorkplaceAdultFemaleHumansJob SatisfactionLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle Agedautonomyintrinsic motivationlabor marketwellbeingwork

Identifiers

PMID40601637
PMCPMC12260575

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.