Homeworking, Well-Being and the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Diary Study

As a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many governments encouraged or mandated homeworking wherever possible. This study examines the impact of this public health initiative on homeworkers' well-being. It explores if the general factors such as job autonomy, demands, social support and work-no...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of environmental research and public health 2021-07, Vol.18 (14), p.7575, Article 7575
Hauptverfasser: Wood, Stephen James, Michaelides, George, Inceoglu, Ilke, Hurren, Elizabeth T., Daniels, Kevin, Niven, Karen
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 14
container_start_page 7575
container_title International journal of environmental research and public health
container_volume 18
creator Wood, Stephen James
Michaelides, George
Inceoglu, Ilke
Hurren, Elizabeth T.
Daniels, Kevin
Niven, Karen
description As a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many governments encouraged or mandated homeworking wherever possible. This study examines the impact of this public health initiative on homeworkers' well-being. It explores if the general factors such as job autonomy, demands, social support and work-nonwork conflict, which under normal circumstances are crucial for employees' well-being, are outweighed by factors specific to homeworking and the pandemic as predictors of well-being. Using data from four-week diary studies conducted at two time periods in 2020 involving university employees in the UK, we assessed five factors that may be associated with their well-being: job characteristics, the work-home interface, home location, the enforced nature of the homeworking, and the pandemic context. Multi-level analysis confirms the relationship between four of the five factors and variability in within-person well-being, the exception being variables connected to the enforced homeworking. The results are very similar in both waves. A smaller set of variables explained between-person variability: psychological detachment, loneliness and job insecurity in both periods. Well-being was lower in the second than the first wave, as loneliness increased and the ability to detach from work declined. The findings highlight downsides of homeworking, will be relevant for employees' and employers' decisions about working arrangements post-pandemic, and contribute to the debate about the limits of employee well-being models centred on job characteristics.
doi_str_mv 10.3390/ijerph18147575
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_3390_ijerph18147575</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2555114068</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c395t-7bb903d37c875f6c52eef5416f9fc4c9658ecb7ac1e3915da361a588149a1da23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkc1LHTEUxYNU1Fq3XQ90U7Cjyct3F6IdWxUEC63tMmQyd3x5fZO8JjMV__tGnoi6cpVD7u9ezuEg9J7gA0o1PvQLSKs5UYRJLvkG2iFC4JoJTN480dvobc4LjKliQm-hbcooxnjGd9DxeRzgNqY_Ptx8qn7Dcll_gaIrG7pqnEPVXP26OK2Jrr6XHxi8-1ydVKfeprvqxzh1d-_QZm-XGfYe3l10_e3rz-a8vrw6u2hOLmtHNR9r2bYa045KpyTvheMzgJ4zInrdO-a04ApcK60jQDXhnaWCWK5KLm1JZ2d0Fx2t766mdoDOQRiTXZpV8kPxYqL15vkk-Lm5if-MolhSpsuBjw8HUvw7QR7N4LMrgW2AOGUz45wTwrBQBf3wAl3EKYUS755ixXbxW6iDNeVSzDlB_2iGYHNfjnleTlnYXy_cQhv77DwEB49LpRAhJVWcFIVJodXr6caPdvQxNHEKI_0PiQ6gQw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2554541965</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Homeworking, Well-Being and the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Diary Study</title><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central Open Access</source><source>MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute</source><source>Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded - 2021&lt;img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" /&gt;</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Web of Science - Social Sciences Citation Index – 2021&lt;img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" /&gt;</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Wood, Stephen James ; Michaelides, George ; Inceoglu, Ilke ; Hurren, Elizabeth T. ; Daniels, Kevin ; Niven, Karen</creator><creatorcontrib>Wood, Stephen James ; Michaelides, George ; Inceoglu, Ilke ; Hurren, Elizabeth T. ; Daniels, Kevin ; Niven, Karen</creatorcontrib><description>As a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many governments encouraged or mandated homeworking wherever possible. This study examines the impact of this public health initiative on homeworkers' well-being. It explores if the general factors such as job autonomy, demands, social support and work-nonwork conflict, which under normal circumstances are crucial for employees' well-being, are outweighed by factors specific to homeworking and the pandemic as predictors of well-being. Using data from four-week diary studies conducted at two time periods in 2020 involving university employees in the UK, we assessed five factors that may be associated with their well-being: job characteristics, the work-home interface, home location, the enforced nature of the homeworking, and the pandemic context. Multi-level analysis confirms the relationship between four of the five factors and variability in within-person well-being, the exception being variables connected to the enforced homeworking. The results are very similar in both waves. A smaller set of variables explained between-person variability: psychological detachment, loneliness and job insecurity in both periods. Well-being was lower in the second than the first wave, as loneliness increased and the ability to detach from work declined. The findings highlight downsides of homeworking, will be relevant for employees' and employers' decisions about working arrangements post-pandemic, and contribute to the debate about the limits of employee well-being models centred on job characteristics.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1660-4601</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1661-7827</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1660-4601</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18147575</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34300025</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>BASEL: Mdpi</publisher><subject>Autonomy ; Coronaviruses ; COVID-19 ; Detachment ; Employees ; Environmental Sciences ; Environmental Sciences &amp; Ecology ; Hypotheses ; Influence ; Life Sciences &amp; Biomedicine ; Pandemics ; Public health ; Public, Environmental &amp; Occupational Health ; Science &amp; Technology ; Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 ; Social interactions ; Social support ; Variability ; Workloads</subject><ispartof>International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021-07, Vol.18 (14), p.7575, Article 7575</ispartof><rights>2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2021 by the authors. 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>true</woscitedreferencessubscribed><woscitedreferencescount>22</woscitedreferencescount><woscitedreferencesoriginalsourcerecordid>wos000677385100001</woscitedreferencesoriginalsourcerecordid><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c395t-7bb903d37c875f6c52eef5416f9fc4c9658ecb7ac1e3915da361a588149a1da23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c395t-7bb903d37c875f6c52eef5416f9fc4c9658ecb7ac1e3915da361a588149a1da23</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-4224-7728 ; 0000-0002-8620-886X ; 0000-0002-9137-490X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8307349/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8307349/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,728,781,785,886,27929,27930,39262,39263,53796,53798</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wood, Stephen James</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Michaelides, George</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Inceoglu, Ilke</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hurren, Elizabeth T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Daniels, Kevin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Niven, Karen</creatorcontrib><title>Homeworking, Well-Being and the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Diary Study</title><title>International journal of environmental research and public health</title><addtitle>INT J ENV RES PUB HE</addtitle><description>As a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many governments encouraged or mandated homeworking wherever possible. This study examines the impact of this public health initiative on homeworkers' well-being. It explores if the general factors such as job autonomy, demands, social support and work-nonwork conflict, which under normal circumstances are crucial for employees' well-being, are outweighed by factors specific to homeworking and the pandemic as predictors of well-being. Using data from four-week diary studies conducted at two time periods in 2020 involving university employees in the UK, we assessed five factors that may be associated with their well-being: job characteristics, the work-home interface, home location, the enforced nature of the homeworking, and the pandemic context. Multi-level analysis confirms the relationship between four of the five factors and variability in within-person well-being, the exception being variables connected to the enforced homeworking. The results are very similar in both waves. A smaller set of variables explained between-person variability: psychological detachment, loneliness and job insecurity in both periods. Well-being was lower in the second than the first wave, as loneliness increased and the ability to detach from work declined. The findings highlight downsides of homeworking, will be relevant for employees' and employers' decisions about working arrangements post-pandemic, and contribute to the debate about the limits of employee well-being models centred on job characteristics.</description><subject>Autonomy</subject><subject>Coronaviruses</subject><subject>COVID-19</subject><subject>Detachment</subject><subject>Employees</subject><subject>Environmental Sciences</subject><subject>Environmental Sciences &amp; Ecology</subject><subject>Hypotheses</subject><subject>Influence</subject><subject>Life Sciences &amp; Biomedicine</subject><subject>Pandemics</subject><subject>Public health</subject><subject>Public, Environmental &amp; Occupational Health</subject><subject>Science &amp; Technology</subject><subject>Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2</subject><subject>Social interactions</subject><subject>Social support</subject><subject>Variability</subject><subject>Workloads</subject><issn>1660-4601</issn><issn>1661-7827</issn><issn>1660-4601</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>GIZIO</sourceid><sourceid>HGBXW</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkc1LHTEUxYNU1Fq3XQ90U7Cjyct3F6IdWxUEC63tMmQyd3x5fZO8JjMV__tGnoi6cpVD7u9ezuEg9J7gA0o1PvQLSKs5UYRJLvkG2iFC4JoJTN480dvobc4LjKliQm-hbcooxnjGd9DxeRzgNqY_Ptx8qn7Dcll_gaIrG7pqnEPVXP26OK2Jrr6XHxi8-1ydVKfeprvqxzh1d-_QZm-XGfYe3l10_e3rz-a8vrw6u2hOLmtHNR9r2bYa045KpyTvheMzgJ4zInrdO-a04ApcK60jQDXhnaWCWK5KLm1JZ2d0Fx2t766mdoDOQRiTXZpV8kPxYqL15vkk-Lm5if-MolhSpsuBjw8HUvw7QR7N4LMrgW2AOGUz45wTwrBQBf3wAl3EKYUS755ixXbxW6iDNeVSzDlB_2iGYHNfjnleTlnYXy_cQhv77DwEB49LpRAhJVWcFIVJodXr6caPdvQxNHEKI_0PiQ6gQw</recordid><startdate>20210716</startdate><enddate>20210716</enddate><creator>Wood, Stephen James</creator><creator>Michaelides, George</creator><creator>Inceoglu, Ilke</creator><creator>Hurren, Elizabeth T.</creator><creator>Daniels, Kevin</creator><creator>Niven, Karen</creator><general>Mdpi</general><general>MDPI AG</general><general>MDPI</general><scope>17B</scope><scope>BLEPL</scope><scope>DTL</scope><scope>DVR</scope><scope>EGQ</scope><scope>GIZIO</scope><scope>HGBXW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>COVID</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4224-7728</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8620-886X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9137-490X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210716</creationdate><title>Homeworking, Well-Being and the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Diary Study</title><author>Wood, Stephen James ; Michaelides, George ; Inceoglu, Ilke ; Hurren, Elizabeth T. ; Daniels, Kevin ; Niven, Karen</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c395t-7bb903d37c875f6c52eef5416f9fc4c9658ecb7ac1e3915da361a588149a1da23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Autonomy</topic><topic>Coronaviruses</topic><topic>COVID-19</topic><topic>Detachment</topic><topic>Employees</topic><topic>Environmental Sciences</topic><topic>Environmental Sciences &amp; Ecology</topic><topic>Hypotheses</topic><topic>Influence</topic><topic>Life Sciences &amp; Biomedicine</topic><topic>Pandemics</topic><topic>Public health</topic><topic>Public, Environmental &amp; Occupational Health</topic><topic>Science &amp; Technology</topic><topic>Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2</topic><topic>Social interactions</topic><topic>Social support</topic><topic>Variability</topic><topic>Workloads</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wood, Stephen James</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Michaelides, George</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Inceoglu, Ilke</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hurren, Elizabeth T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Daniels, Kevin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Niven, Karen</creatorcontrib><collection>Web of Knowledge</collection><collection>Web of Science Core Collection</collection><collection>Science Citation Index Expanded</collection><collection>Social Sciences Citation Index</collection><collection>Web of Science Primary (SCIE, SSCI &amp; AHCI)</collection><collection>Web of Science - Social Sciences Citation Index – 2021</collection><collection>Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded - 2021</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Coronavirus Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Access via ProQuest (Open Access)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>International journal of environmental research and public health</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wood, Stephen James</au><au>Michaelides, George</au><au>Inceoglu, Ilke</au><au>Hurren, Elizabeth T.</au><au>Daniels, Kevin</au><au>Niven, Karen</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Homeworking, Well-Being and the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Diary Study</atitle><jtitle>International journal of environmental research and public health</jtitle><stitle>INT J ENV RES PUB HE</stitle><date>2021-07-16</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>18</volume><issue>14</issue><spage>7575</spage><pages>7575-</pages><artnum>7575</artnum><issn>1660-4601</issn><issn>1661-7827</issn><eissn>1660-4601</eissn><abstract>As a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many governments encouraged or mandated homeworking wherever possible. This study examines the impact of this public health initiative on homeworkers' well-being. It explores if the general factors such as job autonomy, demands, social support and work-nonwork conflict, which under normal circumstances are crucial for employees' well-being, are outweighed by factors specific to homeworking and the pandemic as predictors of well-being. Using data from four-week diary studies conducted at two time periods in 2020 involving university employees in the UK, we assessed five factors that may be associated with their well-being: job characteristics, the work-home interface, home location, the enforced nature of the homeworking, and the pandemic context. Multi-level analysis confirms the relationship between four of the five factors and variability in within-person well-being, the exception being variables connected to the enforced homeworking. The results are very similar in both waves. A smaller set of variables explained between-person variability: psychological detachment, loneliness and job insecurity in both periods. Well-being was lower in the second than the first wave, as loneliness increased and the ability to detach from work declined. The findings highlight downsides of homeworking, will be relevant for employees' and employers' decisions about working arrangements post-pandemic, and contribute to the debate about the limits of employee well-being models centred on job characteristics.</abstract><cop>BASEL</cop><pub>Mdpi</pub><pmid>34300025</pmid><doi>10.3390/ijerph18147575</doi><tpages>24</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4224-7728</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8620-886X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9137-490X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1660-4601
ispartof International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021-07, Vol.18 (14), p.7575, Article 7575
issn 1660-4601
1661-7827
1660-4601
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_3390_ijerph18147575
source Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central Open Access; MDPI - Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute; Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded - 2021<img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" />; PubMed Central; Web of Science - Social Sciences Citation Index – 2021<img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" />; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry
subjects Autonomy
Coronaviruses
COVID-19
Detachment
Employees
Environmental Sciences
Environmental Sciences & Ecology
Hypotheses
Influence
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
Pandemics
Public health
Public, Environmental & Occupational Health
Science & Technology
Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2
Social interactions
Social support
Variability
Workloads
title Homeworking, Well-Being and the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Diary Study
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-14T17%3A36%3A30IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Homeworking,%20Well-Being%20and%20the%20COVID-19%20Pandemic:%20A%20Diary%20Study&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20environmental%20research%20and%20public%20health&rft.au=Wood,%20Stephen%20James&rft.date=2021-07-16&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=14&rft.spage=7575&rft.pages=7575-&rft.artnum=7575&rft.issn=1660-4601&rft.eissn=1660-4601&rft_id=info:doi/10.3390/ijerph18147575&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2555114068%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2554541965&rft_id=info:pmid/34300025&rfr_iscdi=true