2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2021.100822
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Work disengagement: A review of the literature

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
68
0
1

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(70 citation statements)
references
References 93 publications
1
68
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In this way, indicators of disengagement have included a lack of behavioral effort or persistence, disaffected thoughts (mental withdrawal and lack of attention), and disaffected emotions such as anxiety, sadness, and boredom (Skinner, Kindermann, & Furrer, 2009). Only more recently has disengagement been defined as a distinct construct from engagement, reflecting the presence of maladaptive processes and states that are not evident in the absence of engagement (Afrahi, Blenkinsopp, Fernandez de Arroyabe, & Karim, 2021;Kahn, 1990;Moreira, Ramalho, & Inman, 2020;Wang, Fredricks, Ye, Hofkens, & Linn, 2019). This aligns with a current consensus that accurate models of human behavior need to acknowledge the complex interactions between psychological mechanisms underlying positive and negative functioning Moreira, Inman, & Cloninger, 2021b).…”
Section: Disengagementmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In this way, indicators of disengagement have included a lack of behavioral effort or persistence, disaffected thoughts (mental withdrawal and lack of attention), and disaffected emotions such as anxiety, sadness, and boredom (Skinner, Kindermann, & Furrer, 2009). Only more recently has disengagement been defined as a distinct construct from engagement, reflecting the presence of maladaptive processes and states that are not evident in the absence of engagement (Afrahi, Blenkinsopp, Fernandez de Arroyabe, & Karim, 2021;Kahn, 1990;Moreira, Ramalho, & Inman, 2020;Wang, Fredricks, Ye, Hofkens, & Linn, 2019). This aligns with a current consensus that accurate models of human behavior need to acknowledge the complex interactions between psychological mechanisms underlying positive and negative functioning Moreira, Inman, & Cloninger, 2021b).…”
Section: Disengagementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Contributions of psychology to limiting climate change. American Psychologist, 66 (4), 303-314. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023235 Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnano, G. A., & Kalof, L. (1999) (12), 1494-1508. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167203256921 Zaff, J., Boyd, M., Li, Y., Lerner, J. V., & Lerner, R. M. (2010). Active and engaged citizenship: Multi-group and longitudinal factorial analysis of an integrated construct of civic engagement.…”
Section: Appendixmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The theory also holds that those who possess resources are more capable of gaining more, and, in addition, that initial resource gain begets future such gain, thus generating “gain spirals” [ 15 ], meaning that individuals with high life satisfaction are more likely to accumulate resources at work. According to previous studies, individuals with rich working resources tend to have higher work engagement [ 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ], and highly engaged employees are more willing to do work beyond their duties [ 24 , 25 ]. In other words, life satisfaction can positively predict organizational citizenship behavior.…”
Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In accordance with the work–family enrichment model, we posit that higher life satisfaction leads to more organizational citizenship behavior [ 17 ] through increasing employee job satisfaction [ 16 , 18 , 19 ]. Moreover, according to the COR theory, individuals possessing rich job resources are more likely to be highly engaged in work [ 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ] and thus demonstrate more organizational citizenship behavior [ 24 , 25 ]. In addition, service-oriented OCB is vital for customer service quality [ 26 , 27 , 28 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Compared with explicit negative behaviors, negative working statuses are more harmful and far-reaching because they are difficult to be detected and controlled. Work disengagement (WD) is such a kind of negative working status and is originally conceptualized in relation to work engagement ( Kahn, 1990 ), indicating that employees disengage themselves from their work role and show a mismatch or incompatibility between their ego and their job role ( Afrahi et al, 2021 ). According to SOS theory, illegitimate tasks goes against employees’ perceptions and expectations of their job role ( Semmer et al, 2010 , 2015 ), which can lower employees’ self-esteem and evoke negative emotions, inducing resistance to illegitimate tasks and causing employees to exhibit physical, cognitive and emotional withdrawal and self-defense during work role-playing.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%