The DOI matches its Crossref record; 77 of the 77 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 8 of the 54 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
The effects of remote work on collaboration among information workers
Open accessAbstract
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused a rapid shift to full-time remote work for many information workers. Viewing this shift as a natural experiment in which some workers were already working remotely before the pandemic enables us to separate the effects of firm-wide remote work from other pandemic-related confounding factors. Here, we use rich data on the emails, calendars, instant messages, video/audio calls and workweek hours of 61,182 US Microsoft employees over the first six months of 2020 to estimate the causal effects of firm-wide remote work on collaboration and communication. Our results show that firm-wide remote work caused the collaboration network of workers to become more static and siloed, with fewer bridges between disparate parts. Furthermore, there was a decrease in synchronous communication and an increase in asynchronous communication. Together, these effects may make it harder for employees to acquire and share new information across the network.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
41 Own result · 39 Own interpretation · 24 Own method · 15 No full text of the sources · 11 No basis given · 7 Sources not found · 7 Not checked yet · 4 Partly supported · 2 Supported so far · 1 Supported · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“by April 2020, as many as 37% of Americans were working from home (WFH) full-time 2,3”
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [2] Brynjolfsson, E. et al. COVID-19 and Remote Work: An Early Look at US Data. Technical Report (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2020). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (p. 4) report that 35.2% of previously employed workers switched to working from home and another 15.0% were already doing so—about half the workforce, not 37% of Americans. The paper identifies 37% as a separate estimate and, in §2.2 (p. 8), cautions that its survey may include people who do only some work at home rather than working from home full-time. It says the shift had largely occurred by early April, but does not support the claimed percentage or full-time qualification. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Partly supportedcites [3] Barrero, J. M., Bloom, N. & Davis, S. 60 million fewer commuting hours per day: how Americans use time saved by working from home. Working Paper (Univ. Chicago Becker Friedman Institute for Economics, 2020); https://bfi.uchicago.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/BFI_WP_2020132.pdf sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The paper reports that 37.1% of its surveyed respondents worked from home, supporting the approximate percentage. But the surveys were conducted in May, July and August 2020—not April—and covered Americans aged 20–64 who earned at least $20,000 in 2019. The passage does not say they worked from home full-time (15 September 2020, p. 2). (LLM, conf=0.90)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Thus, in a matter of weeks, the pandemic caused about one-third of US workers to shift to WFH”
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [4] Dingel, J. I. & Neiman, B. How many jobs can be done at home? J. Public Econ. 189, 104235 (2020). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction estimates that 37% of US jobs can be done at home, which measures feasibility rather than an actual shift. The Related literature and real-time measures section reports a survey finding that 35% of US respondents worked entirely from home in May 2020, but it does not establish that one-third of US workers shifted to doing so because of the pandemic or within weeks. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Overall, the changes that we observed in the temporal dynamics of ego networks may have made it more difficult for workers to capture the benefits associated with forming new connections 23,24 , reconnecting with dormant connections 25 and modulating their network position [20][21][22] .”
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [23] Soda, G. B., Mannucci, P. V. & Burt, R. Networks, creativity, and time: staying creative through brokerage and network rejuvenation. Acad. Manage. J. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2019.1209 (2021). source
The paper’s opening section says that the creative benefits of open network structures are less likely to be realized without new ties. Its Theoretical Contributions section likewise says that the advantages of brokerage depend on whether a network contains old or new ties. This supports the portion of the citing sentence about benefits from modulating network position; the citing authors’ conclusion about the changes they observed is their own. (LLM, conf=0.90)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [24] Zeng, A., Fan, Y., Di, Z., Wang, Y. & Havlin, S. Fresh teams are associated with original and multidisciplinary research. Nat. Hum. Behav. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01084-x (2021). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [25] Levin, D. Z., Walter, J. & Murnighan, J. K. Dormant ties: the value of reconnecting. Organ. Sci. 22, 923–939 (2011). source
- Not matchedcites [20] Kneeland, M. K. Network Churn: A Theoretical and Empirical Consideration of a Dynamic Process on Performance. PhD thesis, New York University (2019).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“We make our results more robust by estimating our DiD model using weights generated using CEM 67 .”
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [67] Iacus, S. M., King, G. & Porro, G. Causal inference without balance checking: coarsened exact matching. Polit. Anal. 20, 1–24 (2012). source
Section 3 (page unavailable) explicitly defines weights assigned by CEM to matched units. The Introduction describes CEM as reducing bias and model dependence, supporting its use as a robustness measure. The DiD model and the robustness of the citing authors’ particular results are their own application, not findings attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.89)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“shifting to firm-wide remote work caused an overall decrease in observed synchronous communication such as scheduled meetings and audio/video calls.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Firm-wide remote work also decreased the cross-group connections of workers by 0.04 FV (P = 0.008, 95% CI = 0.01-0.07)”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Before the onset of the pandemic, 18% of US Microsoft employees were working remote from their collaborators.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we found that the shift to remote work reduced the share of time that workers spent collaborating with weak ties by 0.32 FV (P < 0.001, 95% CI = 0.29-0.35).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we found that people did not simply replace in-person interactions with video and/or voice calls.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“firm-wide remote work caused a 0.06 FV (P = 0.005, 95% CI = 0.02-0.10)increase in the individual clustering coefficient”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 44
- It may state two separate claims as one. 43
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“nearly every American that was able to work from home did so 4”
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [4] Dingel, J. I. & Neiman, B. How many jobs can be done at home? J. Public Econ. 189, 104235 (2020). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction estimates that 37% of US jobs can be done entirely at home, and Related literature and real-time measures reports a survey finding that 35% of US respondents worked entirely from home in May 2020. Those similar aggregate figures do not establish that nearly every American whose job was feasible from home actually worked from home; the paper does not track that overlap. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Recent analyses of telemetry and survey data show that the pandemic has affected both the who and the how of collaboration in information firms-while working remotely during the pandemic, workers are spending less time in meetings 35 , communicating more by email 35 , collaborating more with their strong ties as opposed to their weak ties 36 , and exhibiting patterns of communication that are more”
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [35] DeFilippis, E., Impink, S., Singell, M., Polzer, J. T. & Sadun, R. Collaborating During Coronavirus: The Impact of COVID-19 on the Nature of Work. Working Paper 21-006 (Harvard Business School Organizational Behavior Unit, 2020). source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
- Not checked yetcites [36] Bernstein, E., Blunden, H., Brodsky, A., Sohn, W. & Waber, B. The implications of working without an office. Harvard Business Review (15 July 2020); https://hbr.org/2020/07/the-implications-of-working-without-an-office
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [37] Larson, J. et al. Dynamic silos: modularity in intra-organizational communication networks before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/2104.00641 (2021). source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“and reduce the quality of workers' output 11,23 .”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [11] Uzzi, B. & Spiro, J. Collaboration and creativity: the small world problem. Am. J. Sociol. 111, 447–504 (2005). source
- Partly supportedcites [23] Soda, G. B., Mannucci, P. V. & Burt, R. Networks, creativity, and time: staying creative through brokerage and network rejuvenation. Acad. Manage. J. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2019.1209 (2021). sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Theoretical Contributions section acknowledges that adding new collaborators can disrupt coordination and routines, and says new ties benefit creativity only when paired with suitable network structures and content. It does not establish that changes in collaboration patterns reduce workers’ output quality generally; its findings concern creative outcomes in a specific collaborative setting. (LLM, conf=0.82)
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For the remaining 82% of US Microsoft employees, the shift to firm-wide remote work induced variation in both their own remote work status and in the remote work status of their coworkers.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we did observe large changes in the average shares of monthly collaboration hours spent with cross-group ties, bridging ties, weak ties and added ties, which all decreased precipitously between February and June.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“there was a decrease in synchronous communication and an increase in asynchronous communication.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For this subset of employees, the shift to firm-wide remote work did not cause a change in their own remote work status, but did induce variation in the share of their colleagues who were working remotely.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“remote work caused employees to communicate more through media that are more asynchronous-sending more emails and many more IMs.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, the network became more static, with fewer ties added and deleted per month.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For unscheduled call hours, meeting hours, total video/audio hours and IMs sent, we observed considerable increases around the time of the switch to firm-wide remote work; these increases are sustained through our data timespan.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of the added ties we observed in June 2020, 40% existed in at least one month between January 2020 and May 2020, whereas the remaining 60% did not.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The change in email volume is much smaller and shorter-lived.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our results suggest that shifting to firm-wide remote work caused the collaboration network to become more heavily siloed-with fewer ties that cut across formal business units or bridge structural holes in Microsoft's informal collaboration network”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The time series for treated and untreated workers would have evolved in parallel absent the treatment for both treatment variables.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The timing of the switch to remote work is independent of employees' outcomes (strict exogeneity).
- The authors state this as an assumption: Workers' remote work status before the pandemic and the percentage of workers' colleagues that work remotely before the pandemic are independent of how they are affected by the pandemic.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Conditional on the CEM procedure, employees' pre-pandemic remote work status and the percentage of colleagues working remotely were independent of the effects of ego remote work and collaborator remote work on their work outcomes.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Ego remote work effects, collaborator remote work effects and non-remote-work-related COVID-19 effects are additively separable.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Most employees transitioned to WFH during the week of 1 March 2020, although our analysis omits the month of March as a transition period.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Many technology companies, such as Twitter, Facebook, Square, Box, Slack and Quora, have taken this shift one step further by announcing longer term and, in some cases permanent, remote work policies that will enable at least some employees to work remotely, even after the pandemic 5,6”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [5] Benveniste, A. These companies’ workers may never go back to the office. CNN (18 October 2020); https://cnn.it/3jIobzJ
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [6] McLean, R. These companies plan to make working from home the new normal. As in forever. CNN (25 June 2020); https://cnn.it/3ebJU27
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“also suggest that firm-wide remote work caused the collaboration network to become more siloed, both in a formal sense and in an informal sense.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
In the paper
“these analyses, like much of the previous research on remote work, virtual teams and telecommuting, are non-causal 31 and are therefore unable to separate the effects of remote work from the effects of pandemic-related confounding factors”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [31] Allen, T. D., Golden, T. D. & Shockley, K. M. How effective is telecommuting? Assessing the status of our scientific findings. Psychol. Sci. Publ. Int. 16, 40–68 (2015). source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For firms, certain network configurations are associated with the production of high-quality creative output 11”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [11] Uzzi, B. & Spiro, J. Collaboration and creativity: the small world problem. Am. J. Sociol. 111, 447–504 (2005). source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Conditional on a given network position or configuration, the efficacy with which a given tie can transfer or provide access to novel information depends on its strength.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“firm-wide remote work caused the collaboration network of workers to become more static and siloed, with fewer bridges between disparate parts.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
In the paper
“media synchronicity theory 28 proposes that asynchronous communication channels (such as email) are better suited for conveying information and synchronous channels (such as video calls) are better suited for converging on the meaning of information.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [28] Dennis, A. R., Fuller, R. M. & Valacich, J. S. Media, tasks, and communication processes: a theory of media synchronicity. MIS Q. 32, 575–600 (2008). source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In other words, firm-wide remote work caused an overall decrease in the number of cross-group interactions and the fraction of attention paid to groups other than one's own.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
In the paper
“there is a competitive advantage to successfully engaging in the practice of 'knowledge transfer, ' in which experiences from one set of people within an organization are transferred to and used by another set of people within that same organization 12”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [12] Argote, L. & Ingram, P. Knowledge transfer: a basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organ. Behav. Hum. Dec. Process. 82, 150–169 (2000). source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Previous research has also shown that the performance of workers is affected not only by the structure of the network and the strength of their ties, but also by the temporal dynamics of the network.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Two people connected by a strong tie can often transfer information more easily (as they are more likely to share a common perspective), to trust one another, to cooperate with one another, and to expend effort to ensure that recently transferred knowledge is well understood and can be utilized 10,[13][14][15]”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [10] Reagans, R. & McEvily, B. Network structure and knowledge transfer: the effects of cohesion and range. Admin. Sci. Q. 48, 240–267 (2003). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [13] Hansen, M. T. The search-transfer problem: the role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Admin. Sci. Q. 44, 82–111 (1999). source
- Not matchedcites [14] Krackhardt, D. The strength of strong ties. in Networks in the Knowledge Economy (Oxford Univ. Press, 2003).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Remote work obviously eliminates in-person communication”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“as our model specification decomposes the overall effects of firm-wide remote work into ego remote work and collaborator remote work effects, our results also provide some insight into the possible impacts of remote work policies such as mixed-mode work and hybrid work.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“media richness theory 26,27 posits that richer communication channels, such as in-person interaction, are best suited to communicating complex information and ideas.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [26] Lengel, R. H. & Daft, R. L. An Exploratory Analysis of the Relationship Between Media Richness and Managerial Information Processing. Technical Report (Texas A&M Univ. Department of Management, 1984).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [27] Daft, R. L. & Lengel, R. H. Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Manage. Sci. 32, 554–571 (1986). source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“being a conduit through which such information flows by bridging 'structural holes' 9 in the organization can have additional benefits for individuals 10”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [9] Burt, R. S. Structural holes and good ideas. Am. J. Sociol. 110, 349–399 (2004). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [10] Reagans, R. & McEvily, B. Network structure and knowledge transfer: the effects of cohesion and range. Admin. Sci. Q. 48, 240–267 (2003). source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“people also benefit from changing their network position [20][21][22] , adding new ties 23,24 and reconnecting with dormant ties 25”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [20] Kneeland, M. K. Network Churn: A Theoretical and Empirical Consideration of a Dynamic Process on Performance. PhD thesis, New York University (2019).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [21] Kumar, P. & Zaheer, A. Ego-network stability and innovation in alliances. Acad. Manage. J. 62, 691–716 (2019). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [22] Burt, R. S. & Merluzzi, J. Network oscillation. Acad. Manage. Discov. 2, 368–391 (2016). source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“the benefits of different types of ties vary with their age 19”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [19] Baum, J. A., McEvily, B. & Rowley, T. J. Better with age? Tie longevity and the performance implications of bridging and closure. Organ. Sci. 23, 529–546 (2012). source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“this result suggests that, on average, firm-wide remote work caused workers to substitute ties that were not connected to one another for those that were.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
In the paper
“in-person and phone/video communication are more strongly associated with positive team performance than email and instant message (IM) communication 30”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [30] Pentland, A. The new science of building great teams. Harvard Bus. Rev. 90, 60–69 (2012).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Media richness theory, media synchronicity theory and previous empirical studies all suggest that these communication media choices may make it more difficult for workers to convey and/or converge on the meaning of complex information.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“individuals added and deleted fewer ties from month-to-month and spent less time with newly added ties.”
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
In the paper
“previous research has shown that establishing a rapport, which is an important precursor to knowledge transfer, is impeded by email use 29”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [29] Morris, M., Nadler, J., Kurtzberg, T. & Thompson, L. Schmooze or lose: social friction and lubrication in e-mail negotiations. Group Dyn. Theor. Res. Pract. 6, 89–100 (2002). source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“weak ties require less time and energy to maintain 8,16 and are more likely to provide access to new, non-redundant information 8,17,18”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [8] Granovetter, M. The strength of weak ties. Am. J. Sociol. 78, 1360–1380 (1973). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [16] McFadyen, M. A. & Cannella Jr, A. A. Social capital and knowledge creation: diminishing returns of the number and strength of exchange relationships. Acad. Manage. J. 47, 735–746 (2004). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [17] Granovetter, M. The strength of weak ties: a network theory revisited. in Social Structure and Network Analysis 105–130 (Sage, 1982). source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As remote work was mandatory during the pandemic, we are able to quantify the effects of firm-wide remote work, which are most relevant for firms considering a transition to an all-remote workforce.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fact that firm-wide remote work caused workers to have fewer bridging ties, and to spend less time with their remaining bridging ties”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our modified DiD model extends the standard DiD model by estimating the causal effects of changes in two different treatment variables (one's own remote work status and the remote work status of one's colleagues) and by introducing additional identifying assumptions such that it is possible to draw causal inferences in the presence of an additional shock (in our case, the non-WFH-related aspects”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The non-WFH-related aspects of COVID-19 affect both treated and untreated units in a way that the modified difference-in-differences model can account for.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Previous research has shown that network topology, including the strength of ties, has an important role in the success of both individuals and organizations.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“For individuals, it is beneficial to have access to new, non-redundant information through connections to different parts of an organization's formal organizational chart and through connections to different parts of an organization's informal communication network 8”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [8] Granovetter, M. The strength of weak ties. Am. J. Sociol. 78, 1360–1380 (1973). source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In other words, different portions of the network, which became less interconnected, also became more intraconnected.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Not only were the communication media that workers used less synchronous, but they were also less 'rich' (for example, email and IM).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“There are multiple high-profile cases of firms such as IBM and Yahoo! enacting, but ultimately rescinding, flexible remote work policies before COVID-19, presumably due to the impacts of these policies on communication and collaboration 61,62 .”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [61] Swisher, K. Physically together: here’s the internal Yahoo no-work-from-home memo for remote workers and maybe more. All Things (22 February 2013).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [62] Simons, J. IBM, a pioneer of remote work, calls workers back to the office. Wall Street Journal (18 May 2017).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Second, the period of time over which we measured the causal effects of remote work are quite short (three months), and it is possible that the long-term effects of firm-wide remote work are different.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Finally, our ability to make causal claims is predicated on the validity of our modified DiD framework's identifying assumptions: parallel trends, conditional exogeneity after matching and additively separable effects.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Previous research suggests that these changes in collaboration patterns may impede the transfer of knowledge 10,12,13”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [10] Reagans, R. & McEvily, B. Network structure and knowledge transfer: the effects of cohesion and range. Admin. Sci. Q. 48, 240–267 (2003). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [12] Argote, L. & Ingram, P. Knowledge transfer: a basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organ. Behav. Hum. Dec. Process. 82, 150–169 (2000). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [13] Hansen, M. T. The search-transfer problem: the role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Admin. Sci. Q. 44, 82–111 (1999). source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Third, our analysis treats the effects of firm-wide remote work on peoples' collaboration networks and communication media usage as separate, whereas these two types of effects may interact and exacerbate one another.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Even if we were able to measure productivity and innovation, the impacts of network structure and communication media choice on performance are likely contingent on a number of factors, including the type of task a given team/organization is trying to complete [56][57][58][59] .”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [56][57][58]
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“our results suggest that firm-wide remote work ossified workers' ego networks, made the network more fragmented and made each fragment more clustered.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“although we believe that changes to workers' communication networks and media will affect productivity and innovation”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We expect that the effects we observe on workers' collaboration and communication patterns will impact productivity and, in the long-term, innovation.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the basis of these examples, one might conclude that the current enthusiasm for remote work may not ultimately translate into a long-lasting shift to remote work for the majority of firms.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Although we have taken steps to verify the plausibility of these assumptions and tested the robustness of our results to an alternative matching procedure 60 (details of which are provided in the Methods), they are assumptions nonetheless.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [60] Athey, S., Mobius, M. M. & Pál, J. The impact of aggregators on Internet news consumption. Preprint at SSRN https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2897960 (2017).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, in June 2020, both employees who were and were not working remotely before the COVID-19 pandemic were in the same potential outcome state (firm-wide remote work), and therefore matching on time-varying behavioural outcomes improves the credibility of our identifying assumptions.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This research was reviewed and classified as exempt by the Massachusetts institute of Technology (MIT) Committee on the Use of Humans as Experimental Subjects (that is, MIT's Institutional Review Board), because the research was secondary use research involving the use of de-identified data.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The use of the data is compliant with US employee privacy laws.
- Rests on an assumption: Microsoft provides employees with appropriate notice of its use of Workplace Analytics, and sets strict controls over the collection and use of such data.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Since we study all U.S. employees whose behavior is recorded by Workplace Analytics, our sample is by definition representative.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Workplace Analytics is widely adopted within Microsoft.
In the paper
“To test the robustness of our analysis, we re-estimate our main DiD specification on an alternate matched sample of employees who worked remotely before the COVID-19 pandemic, which is constructed using a more extensive matching procedure introduced in ref. 60 .”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [60] Athey, S., Mobius, M. M. & Pál, J. The impact of aggregators on Internet news consumption. Preprint at SSRN https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2897960 (2017).
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To make this identifying assumption more plausible, we use the CEM procedure described below.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Viewing this shift as a natural experiment in which some workers were already working remotely before the pandemic enables us to separate the effects of firm-wide remote work from other pandemic-related confounding factors.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Rests on an assumption: The COVID-19 pandemic caused a rapid shift to full-time remote work for many information workers.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Participants were not allocated into experimental groups since our study was observational.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our ability to causally identify both ATTs is predicated on a number of identifying assumptions, some of which are standard in DiD analyses and some of which are specific to our research setting.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In a standard matched DiD analysis, control and treatment units would be matched on the basis of pretreatment behaviour.This type of matching is not appropriate in our context, given that employees who did and did not work remotely before the COVID-19 pandemic are by definition in different potential outcome states in February.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Here, we use rich data on the emails, calendars, instant messages, video/audio calls and workweek hours of 61,182 US Microsoft employees over the first six months of 2020 to estimate the causal effects of firm-wide remote work on collaboration and communication.”
- Also stated in: § Study description · plain
“This study uses quantitative quasi-experimental data to measure the effects of remote work on information workers' collaboration and communication practices.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Also stated in: § Study description · plain
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“However, during the COVID-19 pandemic, workers and firms have invested in the physical and human capital required to support remote work 63 and innovation has shifted toward new technologies that support remote work 64 .”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [63] Barrero, J. M., Bloom, N. & Davis, S. J. Why working from home will stick. Working Paper (Univ. Chicago, Becker Friedman Institute for Economics, 2020). source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [64] Bloom, N., Davis, S. J. & Zhestkova, Y. COVID-19 shifted patent applications toward technologies that support working from home. Working Paper (Univ. Chicago, Becker Friedman Institute for Economics, 2020). source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In other words, provided that any differences in how the two groups would have evolved in the absence of the pandemic or how they are affected by the pandemic are entirely explained by the employee characteristics we match on, then the CEM-based results are valid.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For our analyses that use coarsened exact matching, employees for whom there are no matches (i.e., they are 'treatment' employees in a bucket with no 'control' employees or vice-versa) are excluded from our analysis.This results in 105 Microsoft employees being excluded from these analyses.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“s.e.values are clustered at the team level.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Observations are weighted using coarsened exact matching (CEM) weights, and standard errors are clustered at the level of an employee's manager.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In all cases, the time series appear to move in parallel both before the transition to remote work, and once the transition to remote work concluded, suggesting that this identifying assumption is reasonable.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For privacy reasons, we do not have access to demographic variables such as age and gender.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The authors state this as an assumption.
The identifying assumptions of the modified difference-in-differences model are satisfied or plausible.
“subject to the validity of our identifying assumptions”
“Provided that the identifying assumptions of the DiD model are satisfied”
“The time series trends shown in Fig. 1 suggest that the identifying assumptions of our modified DiD model are plausible”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The non-WFH-related aspects of COVID-19 affect both treated and untreated units in a way that the modified difference-in-differences model can account for.
“introducing additional identifying assumptions such that it is possible to draw causal inferences in the presence of an additional shock (in our case, the non-WFH-related aspects of COVID-19) that affects both treated and untreated units, and is concurrent with the exogenous shock(s) to our treatment variables.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The time series for treated and untreated workers would have evolved in parallel absent the treatment for both treatment variables.
“First, we assume that, for both of our 'treatment' variables, the time series for 'treated' and 'untreated' workers would have evolved in parallel absent the treatment.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The timing of the switch to remote work is independent of employees' outcomes (strict exogeneity).
“Second, we assume strict exogeneity, that is, that the timing of the switch to remote work must be independent of employees' outcomes.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Workers' remote work status before the pandemic and the percentage of workers' colleagues that work remotely before the pandemic are independent of how they are affected by the pandemic.
“However, we do need to assume that workers' remote work status before the pandemic and the percentage of workers' colleagues that work remotely before the pandemic are independent of how they are affected by the pandemic.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Conditional on the CEM procedure, employees' pre-pandemic remote work status and the percentage of colleagues working remotely were independent of the effects of ego remote work and collaborator remote work on their work outcomes.
“If we wanted to interpret the ATTs that we estimate from those employees that started WFH due to the pandemic as average treatment effects, we would also need to assume that, conditional on the CEM procedure described below, employees' pre-pandemic remote work status and the percentage of colleagues working remotely were independent of the effects of ego remote work and collaborator remote work on”
The authors state this as an assumption.
Ego remote work effects, collaborator remote work effects and non-remote-work-related COVID-19 effects are additively separable.
“Finally, we assume that ego remote work effects, collaborator remote work effects and non-remote-work-related COVID-19 effects are additively separable.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The use of the data is compliant with US employee privacy laws.
“The use of the data is compliant with US employee privacy laws.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Microsoft provides employees with appropriate notice of its use of Workplace Analytics, and sets strict controls over the collection and use of such data.
“Microsoft provides employees with appropriate notice of its use of Workplace Analytics, and sets strict controls over the collection and use of such data.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Workplace Analytics is widely adopted within Microsoft.
“Workplace analytics is widely adopted within Microsoft.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The COVID-19 pandemic caused a rapid shift to full-time remote work for many information workers.
“The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused a rapid shift to full-time remote work for many information workers.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The parallel trends assumption required by the modified DiD model holds.
“the 'parallel trends' assumption that is required by our modified DiD model”
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?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Collaboration is a critical twenty-first century skill, and the workforces of the future will be increasingly driven by people who can work in teams to solve complex problems (Yang et al., 2022).”
From A Feasibility and Implementation Integrity Study of the Community Builder (CoBi): An AI-based Collaboration Support System in K-12 Classrooms (2025) · cites this paper as Yang et al., 2022
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This can make it harder for employees to acquire and share information53.”
From Understanding and shaping the future of work with self-determination theory (2022) · cites this paper as [53]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ CEM.
“The 97 (<0.2%) employees in strata without both non-remote and remote employees before the COVID-19 pandemic were discarded from our sample.”
§ Data exclusions
“For our analyses that use coarsened exact matching, employees for whom there are no matches (i.e., they are 'treatment' employees in a bucket with no 'control' employees or vice-versa) are excluded from our analysis.This results in 105 Microsoft employees being excluded from these analyses.”
Citations
Cites
A Mathematical Theory of Communication
Shannon, C. E. (1948) · Bell System Technical Journal · doi:10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb01338.x · Cited by 88,486
A Mathematical Theory of Communication
Shannon, C. E. (1948) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb00917.x · Cited by 50,387
Granovetter, M. S. (1973) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/225469 · Cited by 40,491
Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods
Granger, C. W. J. (1969) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1912791 · Cited by 22,989
Organizational Information Requirements, Media Richness and Structural Design
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554 · Cited by 9,868
The Strength of Weak Ties: A Network Theory Revisited
Granovetter, M. (1983) · Sociological Theory · doi:10.2307/202051 · Cited by 8,263
The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge across Organization Subunits
Hansen, M. T. (1999) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2667032 · Cited by 5,809
Structural Holes and Good Ideas
Burt, R. S. (2004) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/421787 · Cited by 5,642
Knowledge Transfer: A Basis for Competitive Advantage in Firms
Argote, L., & Ingram, P. (2000) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1006/obhd.2000.2893 · Cited by 4,164
Network Structure and Knowledge Transfer: The Effects of Cohesion and Range
Reagans, R., & McEvily, B. (2003) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3556658 · Cited by 3,592
Causal Inference without Balance Checking: Coarsened Exact Matching
Iacus, S. M., King, G., & Porro, G. (2012) · Political Analysis · doi:10.1093/pan/mpr013 · Cited by 3,563
The Strength of Weak Ties You Can Trust: The Mediating Role of Trust in Effective Knowledge Transfer
Levin, D. Z., & Cross, R. (2004) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1030.0136 · Cited by 2,824
Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist's Companion
Kmenta, J. (2010) · Business Economics · doi:10.1057/be.2009.37 · Cited by 2,622
How many jobs can be done at home?
Dingel, J. I., & Neiman, B. (2020) · Journal of Public Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104235 · Cited by 2,055 · cited 1×
“It is estimated that 37% of jobs in United States can be done remotely [7], and many technology companies have decided to embrace much more remote work moving”
BackgroundDoes Working from Home Work? Evidence from a Chinese Experiment *
Bloom, N., Liang, J., Roberts, J., & Ying, Z. J. (2015) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1093/qje/qju032 · Cited by 1,991
Structure and tie strengths in mobile communication networks
Onnela, J.-P. “., Saramäki, J., Hyvönen, J., Szabó, G., Lazer, D., Kaski, K. K., Kertész, J., & Barabási, A.-Ĺ. (2007) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0610245104 · Cited by 1,945
Collaboration and Creativity: The Small World Problem
Uzzi, B., & Spiro, J. (2005) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/432782 · Cited by 1,885
How Effective Is Telecommuting? Assessing the Status of Our Scientific Findings
Allen, T. D., Golden, T. D., & Shockley, K. M. (2015) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100615593273 · Cited by 1,788 · cited 2×
“observation to address potential autocorrelation. We also cluster standard errors at the level of employee manager, i.e., workers who report to the same manager are in the same “cluster”. Prior work [2] has shown that the extent to which people were exposed to remote work may affect WFH experience. Therefore, we also…”
BackgroundMedia, Tasks, and Communication Processes: A Theory of Media Synchronicity1
Dennis, A. R., Fuller, R. M., & Valacich, J. S. (2008) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/25148857 · Cited by 1,511
Identification and Inference in Nonlinear Difference-in-Differences Models
Athey, S., & Imbens, G. W. (2006) · Econometrica · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0262.2006.00668.x · Cited by 1,084
McFadyen, M. A., & Cannella, A. A. (2004) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/20159615 · Cited by 1,039
An empirical study of speed and communication in globally distributed software development
Herbsleb, J. D., & Mockus, A. (2003) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2003.1205177 · Cited by 997
COVID-19 and Remote Work: An Early Look at US Data
Brynjolfsson, E., Horton, J., Ozimek, A., Rock, D., Sharma, G., & TuYe, H.-Y. (2020) · doi:10.3386/w27344 · Cited by 932 · cited 1×
“During COVID-19, 34.1% of Americans switched to work from home [5] .”
BackgroundInfluentialDourish, P., & Bly, S. A. (1992) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/142750.142982 · Cited by 906 · cited 1×
“ation workers, making our results potentially more generalizable than evidence from a single very specific profession. Our findings can also inform better design of productivity tools for remote work [8,11,13,17,19], which is an important topic of research for HumanComputer Interaction (HCI) and Computer Supported Coo…”
BackgroundWhy Working from Home Will Stick
Barrero, J. M., Bloom, N., & Davis, S. J. (2021) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w28731 · Cited by 900
Work‐from‐anywhere : The productivity effects of geographic flexibility
Choudhury, P., Foroughi, C., & Larson, B. Z. (2020) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.3251 · Cited by 760
The Diversity-Bandwidth Trade-off
Aral, S., & Alstyne, M. V. (2010) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/661238 · Cited by 661
Understanding Fit and Appropriation Effects in Group Support Systems via Meta-Analysis1
Dennis, A. R., Wixom, B. H., & Vandenberg, R. J. (2001) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/3250928 · Cited by 567
Network Structure in Virtual Organizations
Ahuja, M. K., & Carley, K. M. (1999) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.10.6.741 · Cited by 517
Individual Centrality and Performance in Virtual R&D Groups: An Empirical Study
Ahuja, M. K., Galletta, D. F., & Carley, K. M. (2003) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.49.1.21.12756 · Cited by 495
How Many Jobs Can be Done at Home?
Dingel, J. I., & Neiman, B. (2020) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w26948 · Cited by 423
(1950) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 396
O’Conaill, B., Whittaker, S., & Wilbur, S. (1993) · Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1207/s15327051hci0804_4 · Cited by 349 · cited 1×
“er set of measures for both work practices and productivity. 2 Related Work The majority of prior studies related to telecommuting and remote work are based on cross-sectional data (see survey papers [2,16] for details), which cannot be directly used to draw causal conclusions regarding the impact of WFH. There have b…”
BackgroundMcEvily, B., Soda, G., & Tortoriello, M. (2014) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2014.885252 · Cited by 342
(2012) · Harvard business review · Cited by 340
Dormant Ties: The Value Of Reconnecting
Levin, D. Z., Walter, J., & Murnighan, J. K. (2011) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1100.0576 · Cited by 326
McEvily, B., Soda, G., & Tortoriello, M. (2014) · doi:10.1080/19416520.2014.885252 · Cited by 285
Collaborating During Coronavirus: The Impact of COVID-19 on the Nature of Work
DeFilippis, E., Impink, S. M., Singell, M., Polzer, J., & Sadun, R. (2020) · doi:10.3386/w27612 · Cited by 273
Lechner, C. F., Frankenberger, K., & Floyd, S. W. (2010) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2010.52814620 · Cited by 265
Growing closer on facebook: changes in tie strength through social network site use
Burke, M., & Kraut, R. E. (2014) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/2556288.2557094 · Cited by 250
Fuller, R. M., & Dennis, A. R. (2008) · Information Systems Research · doi:10.1287/isre.1070.0167 · Cited by 228
Schmooze or lose: Social friction and lubrication in e-mail negotiations.
Morris, M., Nadler, J., Kurtzberg, T., & Thompson, L. (2002) · Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice · doi:10.1037/1089-2699.6.1.89 · Cited by 207
Graph cluster randomization: network exposure to multiple universes
Ugander, J., Karrer, B., Backstrom, L., & Kleinberg, J. (2013) · Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining · doi:10.1145/2487575.2487695 · Cited by 183
Networks, Creativity, and Time: Staying Creative through Brokerage and Network Rejuvenation
Soda, G., Mannucci, P. V., & Burt, R. S. (2021) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2019.1209 · Cited by 182
The hard truth about telecommuting
Noonan, M. C., & Glass, J. (2012) · Monthly labor review · Cited by 178
Burt, R. S., & Merluzzi, J. (2016) · Academy of Management Discoveries · doi:10.5465/amd.2015.0108 · Cited by 177
Ego-Network Stability and Innovation in Alliances
Kumar, P., & Zaheer, A. (2019) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2016.0819 · Cited by 171
Does Working from Home Work? Evidence from a Chinese Experiment
Bloom, N., Liang, J., Roberts, J. C. Q., & Ying, Z. J. (2013) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w18871 · Cited by 155
Brashears, M. E., & Quintane, E. (2018) · Social Networks · doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2018.05.010 · Cited by 138
Better with Age? Tie Longevity and the Performance Implications of Bridging and Closure
Baum, J. A. C., McEvily, B., & Rowley, T. J. (2012) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1100.0566 · Cited by 133
Work-from-Anywhere: The Productivity Effects of Geographic Flexibility
Choudhury, P., Foroughi, C., & Larson, B. Z. (2020) · Academy of Management Proceedings · doi:10.5465/ambpp.2020.225 · Cited by 132
COVID-19 Shifted Patent Applications toward Technologies That Support Working from Home
Bloom, N., Davis, S. J., & Zhestkova, Y. (2021) · AEA Papers and Proceedings · doi:10.1257/pandp.20211057 · Cited by 126
The Internal and External Networks of Knowledge-Intensive Teams
Chung, Y., & Jackson, S. E. (2011) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206310394186 · Cited by 113
Fresh teams are associated with original and multidisciplinary research
Zeng, A., Fan, Y., Di, Z., Wang, Y., & Havlin, S. (2021) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-021-01084-x · Cited by 106
Communication networks in geographically distributed software development
Cataldo, M., & Herbsleb, J. D. (2008) · Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work · doi:10.1145/1460563.1460654 · Cited by 98
The Influence of Virtuality on Social Networks Within and Across Work Groups: A Multilevel Approach
Suh, A., Shin, K.-S., Ahuja, M. K., & Kim, M. S. (2011) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.2753/mis0742-1222280111 · Cited by 82
60 Million Fewer Commuting Hours Per Day: How Americans Use Time Saved by Working from Home
Barrero, J. M., Bloom, N., & Davis, S. J. (2020) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3695188 · Cited by 77 · cited 1×
“For each employee, we observe (1) their remote work status before the COVID-19 pandemic, and what share of their colleagues were remote workers before the COVID-19 pandemic; (2) their managerial status, the business group they belong to, their role and the length of their tenure at Microsoft as of February 2020; (3) a…”
MethodWork-From-Anywhere: The Productivity Effects of Geographic FlexibilityPreprint
Choudhury, P., Foroughi, C., & Larson, B. Z. (2019) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3494473 · Cited by 73 · cited 1×
“Choudhury et al. [6] analyzed a policy change for employees of the US Patent Office.”
BackgroundWhy Working From Home Will Stick
Barrero, J. M., Bloom, N., & Davis, S. J. (2020) · doi:10.31235/osf.io/wfdbe · Cited by 68
Communication (and Coordination?) in a Modern, Complex OrganizationPreprint
Kleinbaum, A. M., Stuart, T. E., & Tushman, M. L. (2008) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1162171 · Cited by 65
Ehrlich, K., & Cataldo, M. (2012) · Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work · doi:10.1145/2145204.2145345 · Cited by 62
(1984) · Cited by 52
Design and Analysis of Experiments in Networks: Reducing Bias from Interference
Eckles, D., Karrer, B., & Ugander, J. (2017) · Journal of Causal Inference · doi:10.1515/jci-2015-0021 · Cited by 49
Unpacking Burt’s constraint measure
Everett, M. G., & Borgatti, S. P. (2020) · Social Networks · doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2020.02.001 · Cited by 48
(2020) · Cited by 47
VROOM: Virtual Robot Overlay for Online Meetings
Jones, B., Zhang, Y., Wong, P. N. Y., et al. (2020) · doi:10.1145/3334480.3382820 · Cited by 38 · cited 2×
“ought and frequent exchange of ideas. More broadly, since the overwhelming majority of information workers are currently WFH, and post-COVID-19 we expect a new equilibrium with more WFH than the past [1,12,14,18], can companies continue to innovate and create while their workforce is WFH? This is an important longer-t…”
BackgroundCOVID-19 Shifted Patent Applications Toward Technologies that Support Working from Home
Bloom, N., Davis, S. J., & Zhestkova, Y. (2020) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3695191 · Cited by 35
The Impact of Aggregators on Internet News ConsumptionPreprint
Athey, S. C., Möbius, M., & Pál, J. (2021) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3838513 · Cited by 27
Schmooze or lose: Social friction and lubrication in e-mail negotiations.
Morris, M. W., Nadler, J., Kurtzberg, T. R., et al. (2002) · Group Dynamics Theory Research and Practice · doi:10.1037//1089-2699.6.1.89 · Cited by 25
Tang, J. C., Venolia, G. D., Inkpen, K. M., et al. (2017) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3134733 · Cited by 24 · cited 1×
“More broadly, since the overwhelming majority of information workers are currently WFH, and post-COVID-19 we expect a new equilibrium with more WFH than the past [1,12,14,18], can companies continue to innovate and create while their workforce is WFH? This is an important longer-term question that the informationwork…”
BackgroundExploring spatialized audio & video for distributed conversations
Inkpen, K. M., Hegde, R. M., Czerwinski, M. P., et al. (2010) · doi:10.1145/1718918.1718936 · Cited by 22 · cited 1×
“he same for those who were previously working from home and those who were previously working in an office. In order to make our identifying assumptions more credible, we use coarsened exact matching [10] to reweight control group observations, so that the control and treatment groups are balanced with respect to thre…”
MethodDesign and Analysis of Switchback ExperimentsPreprint
Bojinov, I., Simchi‐Levi, D., & Zhao, J. (2020) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3684168 · Cited by 14
Zuzul, T., Pahnke, E. C., Larson, J., Bourke, P., Caurvina, N., Shah, N. P., Amini, F., Weston, J., Park, Y., Vogelstein, J., et al. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2104.00641 · Cited by 7
Self-citationCOVID-19 Shifted Patent Applications Toward Technologies that Support Working from HomePreprint
Bloom, N., Davis, S. J., & Zhestkova, Y. (2020) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 2
Larson, J., Žužul, T., Pahnke, E. C., Shah, N. P., Bourke, P., Caurvina, N., Amini, F., Park, Y., Vogelstein, J. T., Weston, J., et al. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · Cited by 2
Self-citationA note on (matricial and fast) ways to compute Burt's structural holesPreprint
Muscillo, A. (2021) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2102.05114 · Cited by 1
Replication data for: Causal Inference Without Balance Checking: Coarsened Exact Matching
Iacus, S. M., King, G., & Porro, G. (2011) · Harvard Dataverse · doi:10.7910/dvn/nmmyyw
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Krackhardt, D. The strength of strong ties. in Networks in the Knowledge Economy (Oxford Univ. Press, 2003).
- Burt, R. S. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition (Harvard Univ. Press, 2009)
- Kneeland, M. K. Network Churn: A Theoretical and Empirical Consideration of a Dynamic Process on Performance. PhD thesis, New York University (2019).
- Simons, J. IBM, a pioneer of remote work, calls workers back to the office. Wall Street Journal (18 May 2017).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Understanding and shaping the future of work with self-determination theory
Gagné, M., Parker, S. K., Griffin, M. A., Dunlop, P. D., Knight, C., Klonek, F. E., & Parent-Rocheleau, X. (2022) · Nature Reviews Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44159-022-00056-w · Cited by 434
Post-Pandemic Office Work: Perceived Challenges and Opportunities for a Sustainable Work Environment
Chafi, M. B., Hultberg, A., & Yams, N. B. (2021) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su14010294 · Cited by 323
Hybrid working from home improves retention without damaging performance
Bloom, N., Han, R., & Liang, J. (2024) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-024-07500-2 · Cited by 315
“This is an important result given the evidence that fully remote working can damage employee development and promotions 14,17,18 .”
Collaborating During Coronavirus: The Impact of COVID-19 on the Nature of Work
DeFilippis, E., Impink, S. M., Singell, M., Polzer, J., & Sadun, R. (2020) · doi:10.3386/w27612 · Cited by 273
Work-from-home is here to stay: Call for flexibility in post-pandemic work policies
Šmite, D., Moe, N. B., Hildrum, J., González‐Huerta, J., & Méndez, D. (2022) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2022.111552 · Cited by 277
Metadata
- Authors
- Yang, L., Holtz, D., Jaffe, S., Suri, S., Sinha, S., Weston, J., Joyce, C., Shah, N., Sherman, K., Hecht, B., & Teevan, J.
- Affiliations
- Microsoft (United States) (US)
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
- Corresponding author
- Yang, Longqi
- ORCID
- Venue
- Nature Human Behaviour
- Published
- 2021-09-09
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 43-54
- ISSN
- 2397-3374 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3045635324
- Cited by
- 789
- References
- 74
- Citations by year
- 2026: 129 · 2025: 168 · 2024: 169 · 2023: 173 · 2022: 123 · 2021: 20
- FWCI
- 167.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- correction (2021-10-05)
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Nature Human Behaviour (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Leonard N. Stern School of Business, New York University
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Work-Family Balance Challenges
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Knowledge Management and Sharing
- Keywords
- remote work, collaboration networks, information professionals, COVID-19 pandemic, synchronous communication, asynchronous communication, communication media, workplace communication
- MeSH terms
- Information Technology, Teleworking, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Communicable Disease Control, Communication, Cooperative Behavior, Employment, Humans, Organizational Policy
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-11, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-11 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
