↓ Skip to main content

Toward a Model of Work-Related Self: A Narrative Review

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
95 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Toward a Model of Work-Related Self: A Narrative Review
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, March 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00331
Pubmed ID
Authors

Igor Knez

Abstract

Occupational work as personal and social identification can be conceptualized as one of the life goals that we strive for and find meaning in. A basic categorization of the phenomenon of work-related identity is suggested, based on psychological theories of identity, memory and relational schema. It distinguishes between organizational, workgroup and professional identity. The two former relate to the concepts of social identity and collective self and the latter to the concepts of personal identity and individual self. These are assumed to form functionally independent cognitive structures, leading to separate motivations and influences on work-related satisfaction. Given this, empirical research on the impact of work-related identity on employee satisfaction, in general terms, is reviewed. The article concludes with some prospective directions for future research by sketching a general model of work-related self. It is hypothesized to evolve by a causal progression from employment across time via emotional and cognitive components.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 95 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 17%
Student > Bachelor 9 9%
Researcher 6 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 5%
Other 11 12%
Unknown 29 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 19%
Social Sciences 15 16%
Business, Management and Accounting 10 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 5%
Arts and Humanities 3 3%
Other 12 13%
Unknown 32 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 February 2022.
All research outputs
#7,062,183
of 23,103,436 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#10,249
of 30,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,094
of 300,166 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#200
of 469 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,436 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,511 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 300,166 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 469 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.