The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Work–life boundary management and the personal digital assistant
Abstract
New mobile information and communication technologies are of special interest to researchers seeking to understand the problematic of boundaries between work and personal-life. This study examines how workers used and interpreted the personal digital assistant (PDA) as a boundary management resource. Using a protocol that combined structured, closed-ended questions with open-ended questions, 42 users were interviewed. The data were analyzed to examine individuals' practices in using this technology, the interpretive resources they drew upon, and the ways in which the spirit of the device's design intersected with their practices and interpretations. Results suggest that the spirit of the device is control, and that users interpreted their technological practices as expressions of personal agency, using the PDA to control the work—life boundary through both integration and segmentation of work and personal-life.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
The Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations
Orlikowski, W. J. (1992) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.3.3.398 · Cited by 4,957
Orlikowski, W. J. (2000) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.11.4.404.14600 · Cited by 4,760
Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method
Jørgensen, M., & Phillips, L. (2002) · doi:10.4135/9781849208871 · Cited by 4,118
Tightening the Iron Cage: Concertive Control in Self-Managing Teams
Barker, J. R. (1993) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393374 · Cited by 2,305
Cited by
The Autonomy Paradox: The Implications of Mobile Email Devices for Knowledge Professionals
Mazmanian, M., Orlikowski, W. J., & Yates, J. (2013) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1120.0806 · Cited by 1,364
Vrontis, D., Christofi, M., Pereira, V., Tarba, S., Makrides, A., & Trichina, E. (2022) · The International Journal of Human Resource Management · doi:10.1080/09585192.2020.1871398 · Cited by 1,134
“In addition, people can use AI, often in the form of personal digital assistants, to facilitate work activities regardless of temporal and spatial location (Golden & Geisler, 2007).”
BackgroundE-mail as a source and symbol of stress
Barley, S. R., Meyerson, D. E., & Grodal, S. (2011) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1100.0573 · Cited by 637
Hislop, D., Axtell, C., Collins, A., Daniels, K., Glover, J., & Niven, K. (2015) · Information and Organization · doi:10.1016/j.infoandorg.2015.10.001 · Cited by 83
A trend toward Work–Life Fusion: A multi-generational shift in technology use at work
Haeger, D. L., & Lingham, T. (2014) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2014.08.009 · Cited by 70
Metadata
- Authors
- Golden, A. G., & Geisler, C.
- Venue
- Human Relations
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2007-03
- Volume
- 60
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 519-551
- ISSN
- 0018-7267 (ISSN-L)
- 1741-282X
- OpenAlex
- W2124922036
- Cited by
- 223
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 19.19
- 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: Work–life boundary management and the personal digital assistant. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0018726707076698
- The paper
- Golden, A. G., & Geisler, C. (2007). Work–life boundary management and the personal digital assistant. Human Relations. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726707076698
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.
