MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Individual Differences in Teleworking Outcomes

2024· book-chapter· en· W4392022840 on OpenAlexaff
Christine Anderl

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2024
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWork-Family Balance Challenges
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemographicsBig Five personality traitsPsychologyProductivityPersonalityVariance (accounting)WorkforceSocial psychologyApplied psychologyBusinessDemographyPolitical scienceSociologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An increasing share of the workforce, especially knowledge workers, are teleworking at least some of the time. This trend was accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic and is expected to persist. This chapter first briefly introduces and defines telework and then summarizes recent research addressing the questions of how individual differences including worker demographics, motivational traits, and personality traits predict teleworking outcomes. It both reviews findings focusing on performance-related outcomes like productivity and effectiveness and on well-being-related outcomes like job satisfaction and burnout risk. As an example, the chapter also has a closer look at studies investigating how personality traits and worker demographics predict well-being after videoconferences—a key communication channel for many teleworkers. Overall, findings suggest that basic worker demographics, motivational traits, and personality traits explain a considerable amount of variance in teleworker satisfaction and performance. The chapter finishes by discussing how future research may best address open questions including whether the observed effects primarily represent selection effects or moderating effects of individual difference factors on teleworking outcomes.

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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicWork-Family Balance ChallengesFrench-language works237,207