Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41646920›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026

Looking at both sides of algorithmic control and employee well-being: a job demands-resources model.

Lu Zhang, Xuehang Ling, Chen Yang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. 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

3 authors.

Lu ZhangDepartment of Business Administration, Guizhou University of Finance and Economics, Guiyang, China.
Xuehang LingSchool of Management, Chongqing University of Technology, Chongqing, China.
Chen YangSchool of Management, Chongqing University of Technology, Chongqing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Drawing on the job demands-resources (JD-R) theory, this study aims to analyze the impact of algorithmic control on the well-being of delivery drivers by focusing on the mediating role of job demands (work overload and time pressure) and job resources (feedback quality and role clarity). Methods: This study obtained three-wave data from 435 delivery drivers and examined the hypotheses using structural equation modelling. Results: The results indicated that algorithmic control reduced delivery drivers' well-being by increasing the job demands (time pressure and work overload). In addition, algorithmic control enhanced delivery drivers' well-being by increasing their level of job resources (feedback quality and role clarity). Conclusion: Integrating job demands-resources (JD-R) theory, this study provides a more balanced view of how algorithmic control influences well-being by demonstrating the opposing mediating roles of job demands (work overload and time pressure) and job resources (feedback quality and role clarity).

Indexed as

algorithmic controlfeedback qualityrole claritytime pressurewell-beingwork overload

Identifiers

PMID41646920
PMCPMC12867877

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.