Cited by 160Organizational Change and LeadershipOrganizational Management and ChangeJob Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior

Familiarity breeds content: The impact of exposure to change on employee openness and well‐being

Axtell, Carolyn, Wall, Toby, Stride, Chris, Pepper, Kathryn, Clegg, Chris, Gardner, Peter, Bolden, Richard·2002·Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology

Abstract

This article describes a longitudinal study of how openness to change, job satisfaction, anxiety and depression are affected by exposure to a change situation ‐ in this case, the implementation of new technology and work practices. Measures were taken before the change was fully implemented and again several months later. Employees fell into two groups: those with high exposure to the change and those with low exposure. Longitudinal analysis revealed that greater exposure was directly related to subsequent improvements in openness to change for operational employees, but not for managers and engineers. Exposure was associated with improvements in job satisfaction and depression, irrespective of job type. The effect on job satisfaction, however, could be accounted for by the increased job complexity experienced on the new technology rather than exposure to change per se . Although the impact of exposure on depression became non‐significant after controlling for job complexity, the result was marginal. Implications of the role of exposure in the management of change are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1348/09631790260098596

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Axtell, C., Wall, T., Stride, C., Pepper, K., Clegg, C., Gardner, P., & Bolden, R.
Affiliations
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
  • University of Leeds (GB)
  • University of Exeter (GB)
Corresponding author
Axtell, Carolyn
Venue
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-06
Volume
75
Issue
2
Pages
217-231
ISSN
  • 0963-1798 (ISSN-L)
  • 2044-8325
OpenAlex
W2112988267
Cited by
160
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 10
FWCI
4.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Organizational Change and Leadership
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Organizational Management and Change
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
Keywords
openness to change, organizational change, job satisfaction, anxiety, depression, employee well-being, job complexity, technology implementation, change management

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