ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Developmental or evaluative? Understanding the impact of algorithmic evaluation on gig workers' thriving at work.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Algorithmic evaluation plays a pivotal role in regulating gig workers' job performance; however, extant studies have reported inconsistent findings regarding its effects. Although prior research has examined the consequences of algorithmic evaluation, limited attention has been paid to how it influences gig workers' proactive behaviors such as job crafting, and subsequent thriving at work. To address this gap, this study identifies two types of algorithmic evaluation, namely developmental and evaluative algorithmic evaluation, and draws on approach-avoidance motivation theory to investigate their differential effects on thriving at work. Using survey data from 435 valid responses and employing an SEM-ANN-NCA approach, we find that evaluative algorithmic evaluation induces avoidance job crafting, which subsequently undermines thriving at work. In contrast, developmental algorithmic evaluation fosters approach job crafting, thereby enhancing thriving at work. Furthermore, time pressure strengthens the positive relationship between evaluative algorithmic evaluation and avoidance job crafting. This study contributes to the algorithmic management literature by revealing the dual nature of algorithmic evaluation and demonstrating how different evaluation approaches trigger distinct proactive behavioral responses and influence gig workers' thriving at work.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.