The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Meetings and More Meetings: The Relationship Between Meeting Load and the Daily Well-Being of Employees.
Abstract
Meetings are an integral part of organizational life; however, few empirical studies have systematically examined the phenomenon and its effects on employees. By likening work meetings to interruptions and daily hassles, the authors proposed that meeting load (i.e., frequency and time spent) can affect employee well-being. For a period of 1 week, participants maintained daily work diaries of their meetings as well as daily self-reports of their well-being. Using hierarchical linear modeling analyses, the authors found a significant positive relationship between number of meetings attended and daily fatigue as well as subjective workload (i.e., more meetings were associated with increased feelings of fatigue and workload). Meetings are an integral and pervasive experience of organizational life. As a forum in which employees communicate and coordinate the organization’s goals and objectives, the meeting is a vehicle for many activities, from problem solving to interdepartmental interactions. Given their utility, it is not surprising that meeting load (i.e., the frequency and length of meetings) has steadily surged in the last few decades (Mosvick & Nelson, 1987). Since a 1973 study by Mintzberg, which found that the majority of a manager’s typical workday (69%) was spent in meetings, more recent surveys have suggested that meeting loads are increasing. Mosvick and Nelson (1987), for example, reported that relative to the 1960s, the average executive participated in twice as many meetings in the 1980s. Tobia and Becker (1990), in a survey of 1,900 business leaders, found that almost 72 % of individuals currently spend more
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Using SAS PROC MIXED to Fit Multilevel Models, Hierarchical Models, and Individual Growth Models
Singer, J. D. (1998) · Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics · doi:10.2307/1165280 · Cited by 1,092
College students' time management: Correlations with academic performance and stress.
Macan, T. H., Shahani, C., Dipboye, R. L., & Phillips, A. P. (1990) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-0663.82.4.760 · Cited by 933
Cited by
Fonner, K. L., & Roloff, M. E. (2010) · Journal of Applied Communication Research · doi:10.1080/00909882.2010.513998 · Cited by 514
How rude! Emotional labor as a mediator between customer incivility and employee outcomes.
Sliter, M., Jex, S., Wolford, K., & McInnerney, J. (2010) · Journal of Occupational Health Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0020723 · Cited by 503
Virtual Work Meetings during the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Good, Bad, and Ugly
Karl, K. A., Peluchette, J. V., & Aghakhani, N. (2022) · Small Group Research · doi:10.1177/10464964211015286 · Cited by 375
Understanding “Zoom fatigue”: A mixed‐method approach
Nesher Shoshan, H., & Wehrt, W. (2022) · Applied Psychology · doi:10.1111/apps.12360 · Cited by 304
Getting away from them all: Managing exhaustion from social interaction with telework
Windeler, J. B., Chudoba, K. M., & Sundrup, R. Z. (2017) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.2176 · Cited by 163
Metadata
- Authors
- Luong, A., & Rogelberg, S. G.
- Venue
- Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice
- Published
- 2005-03
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 58-67
- ISSN
- 1089-2699 (ISSN-L)
- 1930-7802
- OpenAlex
- W2098256405
- Cited by
- 164
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 5.70
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Meetings and More Meetings: The Relationship Between Meeting Load and the Daily Well-Being of Employees. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/1089-2699.9.1.58
- The paper
- Luong, A., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2005). Meetings and More Meetings: The Relationship Between Meeting Load and the Daily Well-Being of Employees. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2699.9.1.58
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.