Cited by 209Technostress in Professional SettingsWorkaholism, burnout, and well-beingWorkplace Health and Well-being

Workaholism and Technostress During the COVID-19 Emergency: The Crucial Role of the Leaders on Remote Working

Open access
Spagnoli, Paola, Molino, Monica, Molinaro, Danila, Giancaspro, Maria Luisa, Manuti, Amelia, Ghislieri, Chiara·2020·Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract

Although remote working can involve positive outcomes both for employees and organizations, in the case of the sudden and forced remote working situation that came into place during the COVID-19 crisis there have also been reports of negative aspects, one of which is technostress. In this context of crisis, leadership is crucial in sustainably managing and supporting employees, especially employees with workaholic tendencies who are more prone to developing negative work and health outcomes. However, while research on the role of the positive aspects of leadership during crises does exist, the negative aspects of leadership during the COVID-19 crisis have not yet been studied. The present study aimed to explore the role of authoritarian leadership in a sample of 339 administrative university employees who worked either completely from home or from home and the workplace. The study examined the moderating effect of a manager on this relationship and the connections between workaholism and technostress through conditional process analysis. Results pointed out that high authoritarian leadership had an enhancing effect, whereas low authoritarian leadership had a protective effect on the relationship between workaholism and technostress, only in the group of complete remote workers. Thus, authoritarian leadership should be avoided and training leaders to be aware of its effect appears to be essential. Limitations, future directions for the study, and practical implications are also discussed.

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 · 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.620310

Cites

72 of 72 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?

  • Authoritarian leadership has a direct positive impact on technostress.

    “Authoritarian leadership has a direct positive impact on technostress.Authoritarian leadership moderates the impact workaholism has for remote workers”

    From Leadership and technostress: A systematic literature review (2025) · cites this paper as Spagnoli et al. (2020)

    In the Results (Table 2; page unavailable), authoritarian leadership has a positive coefficient for technostress (B = 0.56, confidence interval 0.07–1.04). But the paper describes a relationship in a sample of remote-working university staff, not an established direct causal impact; its Discussion also emphasizes that leadership’s moderating effect was particularly evident among fully remote workers. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Authoritarian leadership moderates the impact workaholism has for remote workers.

    “Authoritarian leadership has a direct positive impact on technostress.Authoritarian leadership moderates the impact workaholism has for remote workers”

    From Leadership and technostress: A systematic literature review (2025) · cites this paper as Spagnoli et al. (2020)

    The Results report that authoritarian leadership moderated the relationship between workaholism and technostress, but the effect was significant only for employees working remotely full time, not those alternating between remote and on-site work. The claim omits that distinction and does not specify technostress as the outcome. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Leadership moderates the impact of individual factors such as workaholism and preference for computer work on technostress and technostress-related outcomes.

    “Moreover, leadership has been shown to moderate the impact of individual factors like workaholism (Spagnoli et al. 2020) or the level of preference for computer work (Harris and Marett 2009) on technostress and technostress-related outcomes.”

    From Leadership and technostress: A systematic literature review (2025) · cites this paper as Spagnoli et al. 2020

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: 2

  1. Schaufeli W. B. Taris T. W. Bakker A. B. (2008). “ It takes two to tango: workaholism is working excessively and working compulsively,” in The Long Work Hours Culture: Causes, Consequences and Choices, eds Burke R. J. Cooper C. L. (Bingley: Emerald Group), 203– 225.
  2. Yukl G. (2011). “ Contingency theories of effective leadership,” in The SAGE Handbook of Leadership, eds Bryman A. Collinson D. Grint K. Jackson B. Uhl-Bien M. (Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications), 286– 298.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Spagnoli, P., Molino, M., Molinaro, D., Giancaspro, M. L., Manuti, A., & Ghislieri, C.
Affiliations
  • University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" (IT)
  • University of Turin (IT)
  • University of Bari Aldo Moro (IT)
Corresponding author
Spagnoli, Paola
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Published
2020-12-23
Volume
11
Pages
620310-620310
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3117614888
Cited by
209
References
72
Citations by year
2026: 32 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 49 · 2022: 49 · 2021: 19
FWCI
32.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Institutional Research Information System University of Turin (University of Turin) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca - Università degli Studi della Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" (submittedVersion)
  • CINECA IRIS Institutional Research Information System (University of Bari Aldo Moro) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Technostress in Professional Settings
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Workaholism, burnout, and well-being
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Workplace Health and Well-being
Keywords
workaholism, technostress, authoritarian leadership, remote work, COVID-19 pandemic, leadership training, employee well-being

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