Cited by 102Work-Family Balance ChallengesWorkaholism, burnout, and well-beingWorkplace Health and Well-being

Work–home interference: How does it manifest itself from day to day?

Van Hooff, Madelon L. M., Geurts, Sabine A. E., Kompier, Michiel A. J., Taris, Toon W.·2006·Work & Stress

Abstract

Although work–home interference (WHI) refers to a process of negative interaction between the work and home domains, little attention has been paid to the actual processes involved in the within-person, day-to-day management of work and home. Therefore, this study investigated if, and how, a global report for the individual, of WHI (i.e., a general indicator of experienced WHI) is reflected in daily reports of WHI, in employees’ daily activity patterns in the work and home domain, and in their daily health and well-being. Effort-Recovery theory (Meijman & Mulder, 1998 Meijman, T. F. and Mulder, G. 1998. “Psychological aspects of workload”. In Handbook of Work and Organizational Psychology, 2nd ed., Edited by: Drenth, P. J. D., Thierry, H. and de Wolff, C. J. 5–33. Hove: Psychology Press. [Google Scholar]) provided the theoretical basis for this study. Data were collected among 120 academic staff members (62% male) who completed a general questionnaire, addressing global WHI as well as demographical information, and who also participated in a 5-day daily diary study. WHI was measured using the 8-item WHI subscale of the Survey Work–home Interaction Nijmegen (SWING), with an adapted version being used for the diary studies. Results showed that global WHI: (1) was positively related to daily WHI; (2) was positively related to the time spent daily on overtime work in the evening; (3) was negatively related to the time spent daily on low-effort activities; and (4) was positively related to daily fatigue and sleep complaints. We conclude that Effort-Recovery theory seems promising for the study of WHI, and that diary studies are valuable, as these provide detailed insight into what global reports of WHI actually signify from day to day.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/02678370600915940

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

13 of the 50 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Van Hooff, M. L. M., Geurts, S. A. E., Kompier, M. A. J., & Taris, T. W.
Affiliations
Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
Venue
Work & Stress
Published
2006-04
Volume
20
Issue
2
Pages
145-162
ISSN
  • 0267-8373 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-5335
OpenAlex
W2077588812
Cited by
102
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 8
FWCI
9.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Work & Stress (publishedVersion)
  • TNO Repository (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • Repository hosted by TU Delft Library (TU Delft) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Work-Family Balance Challenges
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Workaholism, burnout, and well-being
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
Keywords
work-home interference, daily activity patterns, overtime, fatigue, sleep complaints, health and well-being, university faculty, daily diary

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review