Cited by 167Job Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorPsychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionStress and Burnout Research

Intraindividual models of employee well-being: What have we learned and where do we go from here?

Ilies, Remus, Aw, Sherry S. Y., Pluut, Helen·2015·European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology

Abstract

As societal concern shifts from financial survival towards quality of life issues, both in and outside of the workplace, scholarly interest in employee well-being too has risen greatly in recent years. This greater attention to the antecedents and outcomes of employee well-being, such as job satisfaction, work engagement, and job burnout amongst others, is reflected in the proliferation of theories, constructs, and studies seeking to describe and explain why employees flourish or become exhausted at work, and the effect of employee well-being on individual behaviours and the organization at large. In this article, we provide a selective review of the current state of research in employee well-being, as well as key theories that have been employed in its study, with the aim of providing a critical assessment of the current state of employee well-being research as well as suggest future directions for the field. In particular, we discuss how research adopting intraindividual perspectives in the study of employee well-being can not only add value to our understanding of well-being but also complement the findings from between-individual studies, and offer suggestions for the development of a comprehensive theoretical model that integrates the two perspectives.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/1359432x.2015.1071422

Cites

108 of 108 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ilies, R., Aw, S. S. Y., & Pluut, H.
Affiliations
  • National University of Singapore (SG)
  • Tilburg University (NL)
Venue
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology
Published
2015-08-06
Volume
24
Issue
6
Pages
827-838
ISSN
  • 1359-432X (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-0643
OpenAlex
W1850808137
Cited by
167
References
108
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 2
FWCI
30.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • Research portal (Tilburg University) (publishedVersion)
  • ResearchOnline - JCU (James Cook University) (submittedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Archivio istituzionale della Ricerca - Bocconi (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Stress and Burnout Research
Keywords
employee well-being, job satisfaction, work engagement, burnout, quality of work life

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