The DOI matches its Crossref record, with a small difference in title or year.
Counterproductive: Time Management in the Knowledge Economy
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“being “good” at time management is often a function of income, education, and various types of privilege [42, 43, 46, 109].”
From Does time management work? A meta-analysis (2021) · cites this paper as [43]
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hobart, H. J. K., & Kneese, T. (2020) · Social Text · doi:10.1215/01642472-7971067 · Cited by 615
Ruckenstein, M., & Schüll, N. D. (2017) · Annual Review of Anthropology · doi:10.1146/annurev-anthro-102116-041244 · Cited by 529
Burrell, J., & Fourcade, M. (2021) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-090820-020800 · Cited by 554
Does time management work? A meta-analysis
Aeon, B., Faber, A., & Panaccio, A. (2021) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0245066 · Cited by 172
Counterproductive. Time management in the knowledge economy
Ozimek, A. (2019) · Information Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2019.1696383 · Cited by 161
Metadata
- Authors
- Gregg, M.
- Corresponding author
- Gregg, Melissa
- ORCID
- Gregg, Melissa
- Venue
- Duke University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Duke University Press
- Published
- 2018
- OpenAlex
- W4237361665
- Cited by
- 121
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 2
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Duke University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
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
