TAP reading note: Leaving Work at Work: A Meta-Analysis on Employee Recovery From Work

What the study found

This meta-analysis separates recovery activities, experiences and states. Their relationships with work demands, resources, well-being and performance differed, showing why one definition cannot simply stand in for the others.

Scope & limitations

Meta-analysis using 198 empirical samples across employee-recovery research.

The constructs overlap only partly. Pooled associations do not show that a particular activity causes every recovery outcome, and the samples should not be added to overlapping reviews as independent evidence.

Population & sample

Meta-analysis using 198 empirical samples across employee-recovery research.

Exposure or intervention

Recovery conceptualized as activities, experiences or states, and its relationship with demands and resources.

Outcomes

Well-being and performance; associations differed by the recovery construct measured.

Time frame

Studies use different observation windows. Journal volume published in 2021; first online in 2019.

Research funding

Not yet checked against the full publication.

Research conflicts of interest

Not yet checked against the full publication.

Reading scope

Based on the original publication’s abstract and bibliographic record. This is a selected reading note, not a systematic appraisal.

References

1. Laurens Bujold Steed, Brian W. Swider, Sejin Keem, Joseph T. Liu (2021). Leaving Work at Work: A Meta-Analysis on Employee Recovery From Work. Journal of Management. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206319864153

Publication record

TAP-RDN-0022 · v0.1 · English

Scientific review has not been completed for this edition.

The Allostasis Project is founded and supported by Resilio.

© The Allostasis Project. All rights reserved. Reproduction or adaptation requires separate permission, subject to applicable legal exceptions.

Download complete edition record (JSON) ↧