Cited by 946Generational Differences and TrendsJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorRetirement, Disability, and Employment

A Review of the Empirical Evidence on Generational Differences in Work Attitudes

Twenge, Jean M.·2010·Journal of Business and Psychology

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10869-010-9165-6

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Twenge, J. M.
Affiliations
San Diego State University (US)
Corresponding author
Twenge, Jean M.
Venue
Journal of Business and Psychology
Published
2010-02-18
Volume
25
Issue
2
Pages
201-210
ISSN
  • 0889-3268 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-353X
OpenAlex
W2082887644
Cited by
946
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 58 · 2025: 64 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 63 · 2022: 65 · 2021: 69 · 2020: 82 · 2019: 75 · 2018: 70 · 2017: 72 · 2016: 65 · 2015: 70 · 2014: 59 · 2013: 37 · 2012: 28
FWCI
53.24
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Business and Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Life-span and Life-course Studies › Generational Differences and Trends
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Retirement, Disability, and Employment
Keywords
generational differences, work values, work attitudes, Generation X, millennials, baby boomers, intrinsic work values, extrinsic work values, altruistic values, individualism, work-life balance, job stability, job hopping, employee retention

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review