The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Job burnout.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In other domains seeking to rapidly understand and address severe harms, researchers have used cycles of qualitative methods, descriptive measurement, and field experiments to more rapidly develop actionable knowledge to improve people's circumstances.
“In other domains seeking to rapidly understand and address severe harms, researchers have used cycles of qualitative methods, descriptive measurement, and field experiments to more rapidly develop actionable knowledge to improve people's circumstances [110].”
From Measuring the Mental Health of Content Reviewers, a Systematic Review (2025) · cites this paper as [110]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Measuring the Mental Health of Content Reviewers, a Systematic Review
Gonzalez, A., & Matias, J. N. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2502.00244 · Cited by 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Leiter, M. P., & Maslach, C.
- Venue
- Handbook of occupational health psychology (3rd ed.).
- Publisher
- American Psychological Association
- Published
- 2024
- Pages
- 291-307
- OpenAlex
- W4387874948
- Cited by
- 22
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 2
- FWCI
- 42.27
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Psychological Association eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Occupational Health and Burnout
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Emotional Labor in Professions
- Keywords
- burnout, occupational stress, emotional exhaustion, cynicism, reduced personal accomplishment
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
