Cited by 238Personal Information Management and User BehaviorTechnostress in Professional SettingsImpact of Technology on Adolescents

Checking email less frequently reduces stress

Kushlev, Kostadin, Dunn, Elizabeth W.·2015·Computers in Human Behavior

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.005

Cites

66 of 66 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?

  • Kushlev and Dunn (2015) demonstrated that the number of times a day people could check email increased stress levels.

    “Kushlev and Dunn (2015) demonstrated that the number of times a day people could check email increased stress levels”

    From Designing for Motivation, Engagement and Wellbeing in Digital Experience (2018) · cites this paper as Kushlev and Dunn (2015)

  • Checking behavior has been found to predict stress.

    “Speci fi cally, behavior patterns like checking behavior (Kushlev & Dunn, 2015) and media multitasking, but also the cognitive salience of the online sphere, have been found to predict stress (Freytag et al., 2021; Gilbert et al., 2023).”
  • This study corroborates findings that email handling strategies are more strongly related to negative, rather than positive, indicators of well-being.

    “This study corroborates findings that email handling strategies are more strongly related to negative, rather than positive, indicators of well-being”

    From For whom and under what circumstances does email message batching work? (2022) · cites this paper as Kushlev and Dunn, 2015

  • The effectiveness of online message batching depends on individual and contextual factors.

    “This research design allows us to empirically verify the recent theoretical proposition that the effectiveness of online message batching depends on individual and contextual factors (Fitz et al., 2019; Kushlev and Dunn, 2015) and examine whether email batching is also effective in a real-world setting.”

    From For whom and under what circumstances does email message batching work? (2022) · cites this paper as Kushlev and Dunn, 2015

  • The effectiveness of online message batching may depend on individual and contextual factors.

    “empirically verifies the theoretical proposition that the effectiveness of online message batching may depend on individual and contextual factors”

    From For whom and under what circumstances does email message batching work? (2022) · cites this paper as Kushlev and Dunn, 2015

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kushlev, K., & Dunn, E. W.
Affiliations
University of British Columbia (CA)
Corresponding author
Kushlev, Kostadin
Venue
Computers in Human Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-02
Volume
43
Pages
220-228
ISSN
0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2091035463
Cited by
238
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 37 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 7
FWCI
22.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Personal Information Management and User Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Technostress in Professional Settings
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
Keywords
email use, psychological stress, well-being, digital technology use, daily stress

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