Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 316

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The relationship of schedule flexibility and outcomes via the work‐family interface

Carlson, Dawn S., Grzywacz, Joseph G., Michele Kacmar, K.·2010·Journal of Managerial Psychology

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship of schedule flexibility with performance and satisfaction in the work and family domains, and whether these associations are mediated by the work‐family interface. Possible gender differences in the putative benefits of schedule flexibility are also to be explored. Design/methodology/approach: Using a sample of 607 full‐time employees in either schedule flexibility or traditional working arrangements the authors tested a moderated‐mediation model. Regression was used to test the mediation of work‐family and the moderation of gender to the schedule flexibility to work‐family path. Findings: Both work‐to‐family conflict and work‐to‐family enrichment are mediating mechanisms in the relationship of schedule flexibility with outcomes. More specifically, full mediation was found for job satisfaction and family performance for both enrichment and conflict while partial mediation was found for family satisfaction with enrichment only and mediation was not supported for job performance. Finally, gender moderated the schedule flexibility to work‐family conflict relationship such that women benefited more from flexible working arrangements than men. Originality/value: The paper adds value by examining a mediation mechanism in the schedule flexibility with the outcome relationship of the work‐family interface. It also adds value by including work‐family enrichment which is a key variable but has little research. Finally, it adds value by demonstrating that schedule flexibility plays a stronger role for women than men regarding the work‐family interface.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/02683941011035278

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 11 references

Cited by

See all 316

Metadata

Authors
Carlson, D. S., Grzywacz, J. G., & Michele Kacmar, K.
Venue
Journal of Managerial Psychology
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2010-05-04
Volume
25
Issue
4
Pages
330-355
ISSN
0268-3946 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1988195643
Cited by
316
References
11
FWCI
50.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The relationship of schedule flexibility and outcomes via the work‐family interface. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/02683941011035278
The paper
Carlson, D. S., Grzywacz, J. G., & Michele Kacmar, K. (2010). The relationship of schedule flexibility and outcomes via the work‐family interface. Journal of Managerial Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683941011035278

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.