CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 334Stress and Burnout ResearchJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorWorkplace Health and Well-being

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 100 of the 100 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

ORGANIZATIONAL STRESS THROUGH THE LENS OF CONSERVATION OF RESOURCES (COR) THEORY

Westman, Mina, Hobfoll, Stevan E., Chen, Shoshi, Davidson, Oranit B., Laski, Shavit·2004·Research in Occupational Stress and Well-being
DOI 10.1016/s1479-3555(04)04005-3
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

We examined how Conservation of Resources (COR) theory has been applied to work and stress in organizational settings. COR theory has drawn increasing interest in the organizational literature. It is both a stress and motivational theory that outlines how individuals and organizations are likely to be impacted by stressful circumstances, what those stressful circumstances are likely to be, and how individuals and organizations act in order to garner and protect their resources. To date, individual studies and meta-analyses have found COR theory to be a major explanatory model for understanding the stress process at work. Applications of COR theory to burnout, respite, and preventive intervention were detailed. Studies have shown that resource loss is a critical component of the stress process in organizations and that limiting resource loss is a key to successful prevention and post-stress intervention. Applications for future work, moving COR theory to the study of the acquisition, maintenance, fostering, and protection of key resources was discussed.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1479-3555(04)04005-3

Cites

100 of 100 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 99 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. D. Etzion, M. Westman, 2001, Man and Work, 11, 106
  2. K.J. Klein, J.S. Sorra, 1996, Academy of Management Review, 21, 1055, 10.5465/amr.1996.9704071863 · DOI · Paper page
  3. C. Korunka, O. Vitouch, 1999, Work and Stress, 34, 341
  4. M.T. Miller, B. Kang, 1997, Journal of Staff, Program and Organization Development, 15, 11
  5. M.A. Shaffer, D.A. Harrison, K.M. Gilley, D.M. Luk, 2001, Journal of Management, 27, 99
  6. E.L. Toomey, J.M. Connor, 1988, Personnel, 65, 81

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–332 of 332

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Westman, M., Hobfoll, S. E., Chen, S., Davidson, O. B., & Laski, S.
ORCID
Venue
Research in Occupational Stress and Well-being
Publisher
Emerald (MCB UP )
Published
2004-10-27
Pages
167-220
ISSN
1479-3555 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s1479-3555(04)04005-3
OpenAlex
W2485049016
Cited by
334
References
99
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 44 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 3
FWCI
2.41
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.emeraldinsight.com/page/tdm (tdm)
Locations
Research in occupational stress and well being (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Workplace Health and Well-being
Keywords
conservation of resources theory, organizational stress, occupational stress, resource loss, burnout, respite, stress prevention, stress interventions, motivation

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