CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 436Technostress in Professional SettingsStress and Burnout ResearchWorkplace Health and Well-being

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 96 of the 97 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Perceived information and communication technology (ICT) demands on employee outcomes: The moderating effect of organizational ICT support

Day, Arla, Paquet, Stephanie, Scott, Natasha, Hambley, Laura·2012·Journal of Occupational Health Psychology
DOI 10.1037/a0029837
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Although many employees are using more information communication technology (ICT) as part of their jobs, few studies have examined the impact of ICT on their well-being, and there is a lack of validated measures designed to assess the ICT factors that may impact employee well-being. Therefore, we developed and validated a measure of ICT demands and supports. Using Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling, we found support for 8 ICT demands (i.e., availability, communication, ICT control, ICT hassles, employee monitoring, learning, response expectations, and workload) and two facets of ICT support (personal assistance and resources/upgrades support). Jointly, the ICT demands were associated with increased strain, stress, and burnout and were still associated with stress and strain after controlling for demographics, job variables, and job demands. The two types of ICT support were associated with lower stress, strain, and burnout. Resources/upgrades support moderated the relationship between learning expectations and most strain outcomes and between ICT hassles and strain. Personal assistance support moderated the relationship between ICT hassles and strain.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0029837

Cites

96 of 96 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

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 97 references

1 of the 97 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 401–435 of 435

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Day, A., Paquet, S., Scott, N., & Hambley, L.
Affiliations
  • Saint Mary's University (CA)
  • City of Calgary (CA)
ORCID
Day, Arla
Venue
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2012-10
Volume
17
Issue
4
Pages
473-491
ISSN
  • 1076-8998 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1307
DOI
10.1037/a0029837
OpenAlex
W1984718746
Cited by
436
References
97
Citations by year
2026: 69 · 2025: 49 · 2024: 53 · 2023: 56 · 2022: 62 · 2021: 56 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 6
FWCI
5.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Occupational Health Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Technostress in Professional Settings
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Workplace Health and Well-being
Keywords
information and communication technologies, ICT demand, employee well-being, burnout, occupational stress, strain, employee monitoring, ICT learning, workload, moderating effect, scale development
MeSH terms
Adult, Burnout, Professional, Canada, Female, Humans, Job Satisfaction, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Male, Models, Theoretical, Stress, Psychological, Technology, Telecommunications, Workplace, Access to Information

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