↓ Skip to main content

Ubiquitous Working: Do Work Versus Non-work Environments Affect Decision-Making and Concentration?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
Ubiquitous Working: Do Work Versus Non-work Environments Affect Decision-Making and Concentration?
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00310
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carolin P. Burmeister, Johannes Moskaliuk, Ulrike Cress

Abstract

New communication technologies and mobile devices have enabled knowledge workers to work independently of location and in more than one fixed environment (ubiquitous working). Previous research shows that physical environments can influence cognition and work performance. We manipulated environment (i.e., a virtual office as a typical work environment compared to a virtual garden as a non-work environment) and time pressure (i.e., inducing time pressure vs. no time pressure) in order to investigate whether the environment influences decision-making and concentration. N = 109 students participated in this laboratory experiment. We posited (a) that a work environment would activate a work-related schema which in turn would enhance concentration performance and make decisions more risky compared to non-work environments and (b) that the environmental effect is more pronounced if time pressure is present compared to conditions where no time pressure is present. We found modest hypothesis-confirming main effects of environment on decision-making and concentration but no interaction effect with time pressure. As we used an innovative methodology that entails several limitations, future research is needed to give insights into the process and to investigate whether results hold true for all types of work settings, work demands, or work activities.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 18%
Student > Bachelor 7 14%
Researcher 7 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 10%
Student > Postgraduate 4 8%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 10 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 13 27%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 12%
Social Sciences 5 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Environmental Science 2 4%
Other 9 18%
Unknown 12 24%
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 16 April 2018.
All research outputs
#7,035,350
of 23,025,074 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#10,193
of 30,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#124,487
of 333,590 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#283
of 577 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,025,074 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 30,283 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 333,590 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 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 577 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 50% of its contemporaries.