Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 909

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Assessing the growth of remote working and its consequences for effort, well‐being and work‐life balance

Open access
Felstead, Alan, Henseke, Golo·2017·New Technology, Work and Employment
DOI 10.1111/ntwe.12097
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This article critically assesses the assumption that more and more work is being detached from place and that this is a ‘win‐win’ for both employers and employees. Based on an analysis of official labour market data, it finds that only one‐third of the increase in remote working can be explained by compositional factors such as movement to the knowledge economy, the growth in flexible employment and organisational responses to the changing demographic make‐up of the employed labour force. This suggests that the detachment of work from place is a growing trend. This article also shows that while remote working is associated with higher organisational commitment, job satisfaction and job‐related well‐being, these benefits come at the cost of work intensification and a greater inability to switch off.

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 · 10.1111/ntwe.12097

Cites

5 of 5 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

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?

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 5 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Felstead, A., & Henseke, G.
Venue
New Technology, Work and Employment
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-10-04
Volume
32
Issue
3
Pages
195-212
ISSN
  • 0268-1072 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-005X
DOI
10.1111/ntwe.12097
OpenAlex
W2752832772
Cited by
909
References
5
FWCI
56.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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.