MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Systematic Review of Factors Impacting Older Workers’ Experiences with Technology in the Workplace

2024· review· en· W4400440215 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCyberloafing and Workplace Behavior
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkplace safetySystematic reviewPsychologySociologyMedicineOccupational safety and healthMEDLINEPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The impact of technology on the work experiences of older workers is a topic of growing interest. As the global population ages, leading to an increased representation of older employees in the workforce, understanding the dynamics of their careers in the evolving technological landscape becomes crucial. Despite this demographic shift, there is a noticeable gap in research addressing the factors influencing older workers' experiences within the changing technological work environment. To bridge this gap, we conducted a comprehensive systematic literature review, encompassing 121 papers from peer-reviewed journal articles to grey literature. This review not only synthesizes and evaluates existing research but also provides significant implications for both scholars and practitioners. It provides valuable insights into individual career development, career management strategies, and the relationship between technology and careers, offering directions for future research and strategies to ensure a technologically adaptive work environment for older workers.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.196
Threshold uncertainty score0.901

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.340 · 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