The DOI matches its OpenAlex record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
4 The Physical Environment in Organizations
Open accessAbstract
We review empirical research on the physical environment in professional, organizational work settings (i.e., offices, meeting rooms, and design work spaces) from the past several decades. This research reveals no common elements of the physical environment (e.g., enclosures and barriers in work spaces, adjustable work arrangements, personalized work spaces, and ambient surroundings) that are consistently and exclusively associated with desired outcomes in these work settings. Instead, these elements are routinely associated with both desired and undesired outcomes. Based on these findings, we suggest that understanding the role of physical environments in organizations requires an understanding of common trade-offs in organizational life. Further, we suggest that the prevalence of such trade-offs is grounded in tensions that are inherent to the functions that physical environments serve (i.e., aesthetic, instrumental, and symbolic functions). We provide an outline of these tensions and trade-offs in relation to common elements of the physical environment, and suggest that researchers consider these tensions and trade-offs in their future research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Job Demands, Job Decision Latitude, and Mental Strain: Implications for Job Redesign
Karasek, R. A. (1979) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392498 · Cited by 12,597
Possessions and the Extended Self
Belk, R. W. (1988) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209154 · Cited by 9,064
Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components
Devine, P. G. (1989) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.56.1.5 · Cited by 5,673
A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality.
Kahneman, D. (2003) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.58.9.697 · Cited by 5,540
In-Group Identification as a Function of Depersonalization, Distinctiveness, and Status
Brewer, M. B., Manzi, J. M., & Shaw, J. S. (1993) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1993.tb00466.x · Cited by 237
Mark, G. (2002) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/508448.508453 · Cited by 177
Cited by
Paradox research in management science: Looking back to move forward
Schad, J., Lewis, M. W., Raisch, S., & Smith, W. K. (2016) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2016.1162422 · Cited by 1,385
1 Constitutional Amendments: “Materializing” Organizational Communication
Ashcraft, K. L., Kuhn, T. R., & Cooren, F. (2009) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520903047186 · Cited by 731
Examining workplace mindfulness and its relations to job performance and turnover intention
Dane, E., & Brummel, B. J. (2014) · Human Relations · doi:10.1177/0018726713487753 · Cited by 568
Wohlers, C., & Hertel, G. (2017) · Ergonomics · doi:10.1080/00140139.2016.1188220 · Cited by 223
The Physical Environment of the Office: Contemporary and Emerging Issues
Davis, M. C., Leach, D. J., & Clegg, C. W. (2011) · International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2011 · doi:10.1002/9781119992592.ch6 · Cited by 185
Baer, M. D., van der Werff, L., Colquitt, J. A., Rodell, J. B., Zipay, K. P., & Buckley, F. (2018) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2016.0248 · Cited by 69
The psychological effects of the physical healthcare environment on healthcare personnel
Tanja-Dijkstra, K., & Pieterse, M. E. (2011) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd006210.pub3 · Cited by 35
Metadata
- Authors
- Elsbach, K. D., & Pratt, M. G.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Annals
- Publisher
- Routledge
- Published
- 2007-12-01
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 181-224
- ISSN
- 1941-6067 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4206428055
- Cited by
- 341
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 5.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
