CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 227Work-Family Balance ChallengesWorkplace Health and Well-beingTechnostress in Professional Settings

Construction and initial validation of the E-Work Life Scale to measure remote e-working

Open access
Grant, Christine Anne, Wallace, Louise M., Spurgeon, Peter C., Tramontano, Carlo, Charalampous, Maria·2019·Employee Relations
DOI 10.1108/er-09-2017-0229
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to develop and provide initial validation for the new E-Work Life (EWL) Scale. This measure assesses a range of theoretically relevant aspects of the e-working experience related to four main areas: job effectiveness, relationship with the organisation, well-being and work-life balance. Design/methodology/approach: This study presents structured item development. Internal validity and reliability were tested on a sample of 260 e-workers (65 per cent female, age range 25–74). Correlations of the EWL scale with a measure of general health were tested on a subsample of 119 workers to provide initial evidence of construct validity. Findings: Exploratory factor analysis supported a 17-item scale assessing four factors: work-life interference, productivity, organisational trust and flexibility. Individual well-being was measured and a pattern of significant correlations against four factors as indicators of general health were found, including mental health and vitality. Research limitations/implications: A new sample would confirm the strength of the EWL scale alongside further tests of validity. Coping strategies related to the scale would aid mapping of individual competencies for remote e-working to promote e-workers’ self-management, management style and organisational policy. Practical implications: The EWL scale helps organisations to evaluate and support the well-being of remote e-workers. It provides measurement on three levels: individual, supervisory and organisational, whereby practical strategies for improvement can be linked to the scale. Originality/value: The EWL scale completes a gap in the research by providing a measure aiding organisations to evaluate and support remote e-worker well-being.

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/er-09-2017-0229

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Flexibility provided by supervisors had a positive impact on mental health.

    “Flexibility provided by supervisors had a positive impact on mental health”

    From Leadership and technostress: A systematic literature review (2025) · cites this paper as Grant et al. (2019)

    The results report that flexibility was positively correlated with mental health among remote e-workers (r=.22, p=.024). The scale includes an item about a line manager allowing flexible hours, but the paper does not establish that supervisor-provided flexibility caused better mental health; “positive impact” overstates the correlational finding. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Grant, C. A., Wallace, M. L., and Spurgeon, P. C. (2011), The development of an 'actionable' E-Work life scale with reference to self reported well-being and job effectiveness (unpublished doctoral thesis). Coventry University, Coventry.
  2. Muthén, L. K., and Muthén, B. O. (1998-2012). Mplus user's guide (7th Ed.), CA: Muthén and Muthén: Los Angeles.
  3. Nilles, J. M. (2007), "The future of e-Work", The Journal of E-Working, Vol. 1, pp. 1-12. Office for National Statistics (2014), "Record proportion of people in employment are home workers", available at: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160105160709/http:/www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lm ac/characteristics-of-home-workers/2014/sty-home-workers.html (accessed 16 May 2017)
  4. Roloff, M. E., and Fonner, K. L (2010), "Why Teleworkers are More Satisfied with Their Jobs than are Office-Based Workers: When Less Contact is Beneficial", Journal of Applied Communication Research, Vol. 38 No. 4, pp. 336-361. doi: 10.1080/00909882.2010.513998 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Ruiz, Y., and Walling, A. (2005), "Home-based working using communication technologies" Labour market trends, Vol. 113 No. 10, pp. 417-426.
  6. Stephenson, W. (1953). The study of behaviour: Q-technique and its Methodology. University of Chicago Press:Chicago.
  7. Vernon, M. (2005), "The Changing Face of the Workplace", Management Today, September, pp. 62-67.
  8. Ware, J. E., Kosinski, M., Bjorner, J. B., Turner-Bowker, D. M., Gandek, B., and Maruish M. E (2008), User's Manual for the SF-36v2 Health Survey (2 nd Ed.), RI: Quality Metric Incorporated: Lincoln WorldatWork (2013), Survey on workplace flexibility 2013, available at: https://www.worldatwork.org/adimLink?id=73898 (accessed on 24 September 2017)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Grant, C. A., Wallace, L. M., Spurgeon, P. C., Tramontano, C., & Charalampous, M.
Affiliations
  • Coventry University (GB)
  • The Open University (GB)
  • University of Warwick (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Employee Relations
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2019-01-07
Volume
41
Issue
1
Pages
16-33
ISSN
0142-5455 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1108/er-09-2017-0229
OpenAlex
W2899143419
Cited by
227
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 56 · 2022: 50 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 5
FWCI
16.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Employee Relations (publishedVersion)
  • Pure (Coventry University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Open Research Online - ORO (The Open University) (submittedVersion)
  • Warwick Research Archive Portal (University of Warwick) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Work-Family Balance Challenges
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Technostress in Professional Settings
Keywords
work-life balance, work-life interference, work effectiveness, organizational trust, work flexibility, employee well-being, mental health, scale development, construct validity

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