ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Working conditions and occupational well-being of academics in the post-COVID-19 era: a qualitative follow-up study.
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
The COVID-19 pandemic led to substantial changes in working conditions in academia. This study aimed to explore how academics' perceptions of job demands, resources and occupational well-being have changed since the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as their expectations and concerns regarding future working practices. To achieve this aim, we conducted a qualitative follow-up study with 16 academics who participated in our previous study during the COVID-19 pandemic (interviews conducted in 2020-2021) and were re-interviewed in 2025. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews and analyzed using qualitative content analysis. The findings indicated that academics continued to experience job demands related to reduced face-to-face communication, hybrid-remote working practices and work overload. In addition, institutional pressure to return to pre-pandemic working conditions was reported as a new job demand. Digital communication options, organizational support and individual digital skills continued to be perceived as resources that supported occupational well-being. Regarding future academic work, some expectations reported during the pandemic period continued into the post-COVID era, particularly flexibility in the choice of workspace, followed by increased use of digital technologies. Some participants also mentioned improved research opportunities and enhanced knowledge production. Concerns regarding reduced face-to-face interaction, management actions and their implications and fully digital education continued over time; however, management-related concerns became broader in the post-COVID era, encompassing issues such as resource constraints, pressure to return to pre-pandemic working conditions and employment insecurity. Some participants also raised new concerns regarding the increasing role of AI in academic work. This study contributes to understanding how academics' perceptions of working conditions and occupational well-being have evolved since the pandemic. The findings highlight the diverse and sometimes competing perspectives among academics that universities need to consider when organizing and managing future academic 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.