The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A meta-analysis of sleep and work performance
Abstract
The present study utilizes meta-analytic techniques to examine the extent literature on sleep and work performance in field research. In line with previous meta-analytic research, results indicate that sleep and work performance have a positive relationship. However, more importantly, results from moderator analyses reveal valuable insight into the nuances of the sleep-work performance relationship. Specifically, results indicate that the type of sleep measurement (sleep quantity, sleep quality, and sleepiness), work performance measurement (task performance, organizational citizenship behavior, and counterproductive work behavior), study design (between-person and within-person), source of sleep measurement (self-report and non self-report), and sleep recall window (daily, weekly/monthly, and more than monthly) differentially influence the strength of the sleep-work performance relationship. In general, results confirm that sleep is an important construct to consider when studying, or attempting to improve, performance in the organizational context. Furthermore, results highlight the importance of measurement and study design considerations when conducting sleep-work performance research in field settings. Research implications, practical implications, potential limitations, and future directions are also discussed.
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
“Henderson and Horan [42] showed that sleep quality is more related to work performance than sleep quantity through the meta-analysis.”
From Millennials’ Sleep and Unethical Behavior: Testing the Relationship between Sleep and Academic Dishonesty of Millennials in a Korean University (2020) · cites this paper as [42]
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Ha, S. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12093902 · Cited by 4
Metadata
- Authors
- Henderson, A., & Horan, K.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Proceedings
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 2019-08-01
- Volume
- 2019
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 18914
- ISSN
- 0065-0668
- 2151-6561
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
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