Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 417

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Receiving instrumental support at work: When help is not welcome.

Deelstra, Janna T., Peeters, Maria C. W., Schaufeli, Wilmar B., Stroebe, Wolfgang, Zijlstra, Fred R. H., van Doornen, Lorenz P.·2003·Journal of Applied Psychology

Abstract

Although the role of social support in promoting employees' health and well-being has been studied extensively, the evidence is inconsistent, sometimes even suggesting that social support might have negative effects. The authors examined some psychological processes that might explain such effects. On the basis of the threat-to-self-esteem model, the authors tested the hypothesis that receiving imposed support elicits negative reactions, which are moderated by someone's need for support. The authors distinguished 3 different reactions: (a) self-related, (b) interaction-related, and (c) physiological. The results of an experiment with 48 temporary administrative workers generally confirmed the hypothesis. Imposed support elicited negative reactions, except when there was an unsolvable problem, but even then the effect of imposed support was not positive but neutral.

Overview

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 · 10.1037/0021-9010.88.2.324

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 417

Metadata

Authors
Deelstra, J. T., Peeters, M. C. W., Schaufeli, W. B., Stroebe, W., Zijlstra, F. R. H., & van Doornen, L. P.
Venue
Journal of Applied Psychology
Published
2003
Volume
88
Issue
2
Pages
324-331
ISSN
  • 0021-9010 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1854
OpenAlex
W2102449133
Cited by
417
References
2
FWCI
9.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.