...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Applied Psychology >The Jingle-Jangle of Work-Nonwork Balance: A Comprehensive and Meta-Analytic Review of Its Meaning and Measurement
【24h】

The Jingle-Jangle of Work-Nonwork Balance: A Comprehensive and Meta-Analytic Review of Its Meaning and Measurement

机译：Jingle-Jangle的工作 - 非工作余额：对其含义和测量的全面和荟萃分析审查

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

We review research on work-nonwork balance to examine the presence of the jingle fallacy-attributing different meanings to a single construct label-and the jangle fallacy-using different labels for a single construct. In 290 papers, we found 233 conceptual definitions that clustered into 5 distinct, interpretable types, suggesting evidence of the jingle fallacy. We calculated Euclidean distances to quantify the extent of the jingle fallacy and found high divergence in definitions across time and publication outlet. One exception was more agreement recently in better journals to conceptualize balance as unidimensional, psychological, and distinct from conflict and enrichment. Yet, over time many authors have committed the jangle fallacy by labeling measures of conflict and/or enrichment as balance, and disagreement persists even in better journals about the meanings attributed to balance (e.g., effectiveness, satisfaction). To examine the empirical implications of the jingle and jangle fallacies, we conducted meta-analyses of distinct operational definitions of balance with job, life, and family satisfaction. Effect sizes for conflict and enrichment measures were typically smaller than effects for balance measures, providing evidence of a unique balance construct that is not interchangeable with conflict and enrichment. To begin to remedy concerns raised by our review, we propose a definition of work-nonwork balance drawing from theory, empirical evidence from our review, and normative information about how balance should be defined. We conclude with a theory-based agenda for future research.
机译：我们审查了工作 - 非工作余额的研究，以检查JINGE谬误归属于单个构建标签的不同意义 - 以及使用不同标签的单个构建体。在290篇论文中，我们发现233种概念定义，聚集成5种不同的可解释类型，表明叮当声谬误的证据。我们计算了欧几里德的距离来量化叮当声谬误的程度，并在时间和出版物出口的定义中发现了高分歧。最近一个例外更加一致，更好的期刊，以将余额概念化为单向，心理，不同的冲突和丰富。然而，随着时间的推移，许多作者已经通过将冲突和/或富集作为余额标记措施来致力于jangle谬误，即使在更好的期刊上仍然存在于归因于平衡（例如，有效性，满意度）的含义。为了审查叮当声和贾格尔贫困的经验意义，我们对工作，生活和家庭满意度的平衡截然不同的运营定义进行了荟萃分析。冲突和富集措施的影响通常小于平衡措施的效果，提供了一种独特的平衡构建体，这是不可互换的冲突和富集。要开始通过审核提出的疑虑，我们提出了从理论，从我们审查中的经验证据的工作的定义，以及应如何定义平衡的规范信息。我们与未来研究的理论议程结束。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号