CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 398Technostress in Professional SettingsPersonal Information Management and User BehaviorWork-Family Balance Challenges

The digital workplace and its dark side: An integrative review

Open access
Marsh, Elizabeth, Vallejos, Elvira Perez, Spence, Alexa·2022·Computers in Human Behavior
DOI 10.1016/j.chb.2021.107118
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

An intensification of digital working driven by Covid-19 has brought into sharp focus both the beneficial nature of digital workplace technologies and their potential dark side. Research has burgeoned in this area in recent years, but an integrated view across fields, technologies, dark side effects and outcomes is lacking. There are potential insights to be gained from compiling and comparing results and theoretical approaches. Following integrative review procedures, 194 studies were analysed to understand unintended negative consequences of a range of workplace technologies across disciplines and methodologies. The results demonstrate that considerable insight has been uncovered regarding certain dark side effects, stress in particular, in relation to e-mail and smartphones. However, a broader view of how they might manifest in relation to employees' holistic digital experience of work beyond certain information and communication technologies (ICTs) is lacking, including a clear picture of objective demands of the technology with which these effects are associated. Much remains to be understood across the full range of dark side effects in relation to the digital workplace including the associations between them and how they relate to cognitive and affective outcomes. The importance of both theoretical rigour and diversity is highlighted.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chb.2021.107118

Cites

232 of 232 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Some previous technostress reviews deal with leadership only in passing.

    “or deal with it only in passing (Berg-Beckhoff et al. 2017;Gualano et al. 2023;Marsh et al. 2022;Pflügner 2022;Rohwer et al. 2022;Shirmohammadi et al. 2022)”

    From Leadership and technostress: A systematic literature review (2025) · cites this paper as Marsh et al. 2022

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 236 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 18

  1. Ament, C., & Haag, S. (2016). How information security requirements stress employees [completed research paper]. In Thirty seventh international conference on information systems. Dublin.
  2. Chin, W., & Lee, M. (2000). In A proposed model and measurement instrument for the formation of IS satisfaction: The case of end-user computing satisfaction [conference paper]. Brisbane, Australia: ICIS 2000 Proceedings.
  3. Fischer, T., Pehböck, A., & Riedl, R. (2019). Is the technostress creators inventory still an up- to-date measurement instrument? Results of a large-scale interview study [conference paper]. In 14th international conference on wirtschaftsinformatik. Germany: Siegen.
  4. Grevet, C., Choi, D., Kumar, D., & Gilbert, E. (2014). Overload is overloaded: Email in the age of gmail [conference paper]. In Proceedings of the CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 793-802). Toronto: Canada.
  5. Harrison, R. V. (1978). In C. L. Cooper, & R. Payne (Eds.), Person-environment fit and job stressStress at work (pp. 175-205). Wiley.
  6. Ioannou, A., & Papazafeiropoulou, A. (2017). Using IT mindfulness to mitigate the negative consequences of technostress [Conference paper]. In Twenty-third americas conference on information systems (pp. 1-10). Boston.
  7. Karimikia, H., & Singh, H. (2019). A meta-analysis of the negative outcomes of ICT use at work, incorporating the role of job autonomy [Conference paper]. In Proceedings of the 27th European conference on information systems (ECIS) (pp. 1-17). Sweden: Stockholm & Uppsala.
  8. Kluge, J., Hildebrandt, J., & Ziefle, M. (2019). The golden Age of silver workers? [Conference paper]. In International conference on human-computer interaction (pp. 520-532). California, United States.
  9. Mark, G., Iqbal, S. T., Czerwinski, M., Johns, P., Sano, A., & Lutchyn, Y. (2016). Email duration, batching and self-interruption: Patterns of email use on productivity and stress [conference paper]. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1717-1728). United States: California.
  10. Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 397-422.
  11. Moore, P. V. (2019). OSH and the Future of work: Benefits and Risks of artificial intelligence Tools in workplaces [conference paper]. In International conference on human-computer interaction (pp. 292-315). California, United States.
  12. Papić, A., Hefer, A., & Krstanović, T. (2012). Information anxiety: Research among students about impact of different media on them [conference paper]. In 2012 proceedings of the 35th international convention MIPRO (pp. 1244-1248). IEEE.
  13. Patel, J., Ryoo, S., & Kettinger, W. (2012). In Theorizing the dual role of information technology in technostress research [Conference paper]. AMCIS 2012 Proceedings. Seattle: United States https://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2012/proceedings/EndUse rIS/12.
  14. Salo, M., Pirkkalainen, H., Makkonen, M., & Hekkala, R. (2018). Distress, eustress, or No stress?: Explaining smartphone users' different technostress responses [conference paper]. In ICIS 2018 proceedings of the 39th international conference on information systems. [online] nysa. Poland https://aisel.aisnet.org/icis2018/behavior/Presentati ons/13.
  15. Sarabandi, J., Carter, M., & Compeau, D. (2018). 10 Years of research on technostress creators and inhibitors: Synthesis and critique [conference paper]. In Twenty-fourth americas conference on information systems. New orleans. United States https://resea rchr.org/publication/amcis-2018.
  16. Schellhammer, S., Haines, R., & Klein, S. (2013). January). In Investigating technostress in situ: Understanding the day and the life of a knowledge worker using heart rate variability [conference paper]2013 46th Hawaii international conference on system sciences (pp. 430-439). Hawaii.
  17. Waldhauser, B. (2019). ICT-related interruptions and work-related stress: A systematic literature review. Cryptocurrencies, Technostress, HR Management, Didactics and Group Reflection, 27, 67-78.
  18. Wang, W., & Zhang, Y. (2015). From IT satisfaction to job satisfaction: Understanding the role of user-technology fit [conference paper]. In PACIS 2015 proceedings. Association for Information Systems. https://aisel.aisnet.org/pacis2015/154.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Marsh, E., Vallejos, E. P., & Spence, A.
Affiliations
University of Nottingham (GB)
Corresponding author
Marsh, Elizabeth
ORCID
Venue
Computers in Human Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-03
Volume
128
Pages
107118
ISSN
0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.chb.2021.107118
OpenAlex
W3171279158
Cited by
348
References
236
Citations by year
2026: 84 · 2025: 113 · 2024: 91 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 1
FWCI
36.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
Economic and Social Research Council
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Technostress in Professional Settings
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Personal Information Management and User Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Work-Family Balance Challenges
Keywords
digital workplace, dark side of technology, workplace technology, COVID-19 remote work, email, smartphones, occupational stress, information and communication technologies, employee well-being, cognitive and affective outcomes

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