MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385199503 · doi:10.1080/0144929x.2023.2235026

Remote working and work performance during the COVID-19 pandemic: the role of remote work satisfaction, digital literacy, and cyberslacking

2023· article· en· W4385199503 on OpenAlexaff
Alireza Khorakian, Mostafa Jahangir, Somayeh Rahi, Ghasem Eslami, Jonathan Muterera

Bibliographic record

VenueBehaviour and Information Technology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCyberloafing and Workplace Behavior
Canadian institutionsNipissing University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWork (physics)Job satisfactionPandemicIsolation (microbiology)MediationPsychologySocial distanceCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)BusinessSocial psychologyEngineeringPolitical scienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social distancing policies ushered in by the COVID-19 pandemic have altered working conditions and created new job demands. This study adopted the Job Demands−Resources (JD−R) model to investigate the relationship between demands and strains (i.e. social isolation, remote work stress, and fear of COVID-19) and remote work satisfaction and remote work performance. Additionally, the study sought to identify the moderating roles of employees’ digital literacy and cyberslacking in the relationship between remote work satisfaction and remote work performance. After analysing data collected from a sample of 340 Iranian remote workers, results showed social isolation, remote work stress, and fear of COVID-19 related to remote work satisfaction negatively and decrease remote work performance through the mediation of remote work satisfaction. Moreover, digital literacy and cyberslacking moderated the relationship between remote work satisfaction and remote work performance during the COVID-19 pandemic. By linking job demands and strains, psychological states, and employee output, this research notably contributes to the literature on remote working during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehaviour and Information TechnologySame topicCyberloafing and Workplace BehaviorFrench-language works237,207