Cited by 132Work-Family Balance ChallengesWorkaholism, burnout, and well-beingCyberloafing and Workplace Behavior

Switching on and off…: Does smartphone use obstruct the possibility to engage in recovery activities?

Derks, Daantje, ten Brummelhuis, Lieke L., Zecic, Dino, Bakker, Arnold B.·2014·European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology

Abstract

This study examines the impact of work-related smartphone use on daily recovery from work-related efforts. The literature shows that work–home interference (WHI) is an important inhibitor of the recovery process. We propose that the extensive use of smartphones with its implicit request of 24/7 availability inhibits the process of engaging in activities that are required for daily recovery. A total of 80 employees (40 smartphone users, 40 controls) completed a 6-day diary questionnaire over a time period of 2 weeks. Contrary to our hypothesis, smartphone users did not experience more overall WHI than nonusers. Furthermore, four activities aimed at recovery were examined. We predicted that daily WHI would increase employees’ engagement in recovery activities, but only if they did not use a smartphone. Results showed that, for the control group, WHI was positively related to psychological detachment, relaxation, mastery, and control activities, whereas smartphone users facing high WHI did not succeed in engaging in these recovery activities. This implies that being connected to work in the evening hours through smartphones has consequences for the extent to which employees succeed in undertaking recovery activities.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/1359432x.2012.711013

Cites

72 of 72 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?

  • Employees issued by their employers with smartphones for professional use did not differ in terms of work-home interference from a group of non-users.

    “In a study on smartphone use and technology-assisted supplemental work (TASW), Derks and colleagues [32] found that employees issued by their employers with smartphones for professional use did not differ in terms of work–home interference (e.g., spillover of strain from work to home) from a group of non-users.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Derks, D., ten Brummelhuis, L. L., Zecic, D., & Bakker, A. B.
Affiliations
  • Erasmus University Rotterdam (NL)
  • Institute of Psychology, Erasmus University Rotterdam
Corresponding author
Derks, Daantje
Venue
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology
Published
2012-08-28
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
80-90
ISSN
  • 1359-432X (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-0643
OpenAlex
W2131346373
Cited by
132
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
13.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Work-Family Balance Challenges
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Workaholism, burnout, and well-being
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Cyberloafing and Workplace Behavior
Keywords
smartphone use, recovery activities, work-home interference, psychological detachment, relaxation, mastery, control, employee well-being, work-life boundaries

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