Daily Smartphone Use for Work and Its Effect on Work-Life Conflict among Integrators
Abstract
This daily diary study investigates the effects of daily smartphone use for work during off-work hours on work-life conflict. Drawing on role theory which supports the notion that segmentation is a boundary management strategy, the moderating effect of individual’s segmentation preference is proposed. Results of multilevel regression analyses showed that smartphone use for work was positively related to work-life conflict. The result also shows that the preference to integrate work and personal life rather than separate these domains strengthened the relation between smartphone use for work and work-life conflict. The results of this study may help human resource practitioners to better understand the impact of staying connected to work during off-work hours.
Keywords: Daily smartphone use; Work-life conflict; Segmentation preference; Diary study
References
Allen, T. D., Cho, E., & Meier, L. L. (2014). Work-family boundary dynamics. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology & Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 99-121.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091330
Beal, D. J. (2015). ESM 2.0: State of the art and future potential of experience sampling methods in organizational research. Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav., 2(1), 383-407.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111335
Bolger, N., Davis, A., & Rafaeli, E. (2003). Diary methods: Capturing life as it is lived. Annual Review of Psychology, 54(1), 579-616.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145030
Borges, A. P., & Joia, L. A. (2015). Paradoxes perception and smartphone use by Brazilian executives: Is this genderless?. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 26(2), 205-218.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hitech.2015.09.008
Butts, M. M., Becker, W. J., & Boswell, W. R. (2015). Hot buttons and time sinks: The effects of electronic communication during nonwork time on emotions and work-nonwork conflict. Academy of Management Journal, 58(3), 763-788.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2014.0170
Derks, D., & Bakker, A. B. (2014). Smartphone use, work-home interference, and burnout: A diary study on the role of recovery. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 63(3), 411-440.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2012.00530.x
Derks, D., Bakker, A. B., Peters, P., & van Wingerden, P. (2016). Work-related smartphone use, work-family conflict and family role performance: The role of segmentation preference. Human Relations, 69(5), 1045-1068.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726715601890
Derks, D., Duin, D., Tims, M., & Bakker, A. B. (2015). Smartphone use and work-home interference: The moderating role of social norms and employee work engagement. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 88(1), 155-177.
https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12083
Dettmers, J. (2017). How extended work availability affects well-being: The mediating roles of psychological detachment and work-family-conflict. Work & Stress, 31(1), 24-41.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2017.1298164
Dettmers, J., Bamberg, E., & Seffzek, K. (2016). Characteristics of extended availability for work: The role of demands and resources. International Journal of Stress Management, 23(3), 276-297.
https://doi.org/10.1037/str0000014
Diaz, I., Chiaburu, D. S., Zimmerman, R. D., & Boswell, W. R. (2012). Communication technology: Pros and cons of constant connection to work. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80(2), 500-508.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2011.08.007
Dumas, T. L., & Sanchez-Burks, J. (2015). The professional, the personal, and the ideal worker: Pressures and objectives shaping the boundary between life domains. Academy of Management Annals, 9(1), 803-843.
https://doi.org/10.5465/19416520.2015.1028810
Fujimoto, Y., Ferdous, A. S., Sekiguchi, T., & Sugianto, L. F. (2016). The effect of mobile technology usage on work engagement and emotional exhaustion in Japan. Journal of Business Research, 69(9), 3315-3323.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.02.013
Gazzaley, A. & Rosen, L.D. (2017). Are you a self-interrupter? Distraction in the technology use. http://nautil.us/issue/48/ chaos/are-you-a-self_interrupter
Glavin, P., & Peters, A. (2015). The costs of caring: Caregiver strain and work-family conflict among Canadian workers. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 36(1), 5-20.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-014-9423-2
Greenhaus, J. H., & Beutell, N. J. (1985). Sources of conflict between work and family roles. Academy of Management Review, 10, 76-88.
https://doi.org/10.2307/258214
Harris, K. J., Harris, R. B., Carlson, J. R., & Carlson, D. S. (2015). Resource loss from technology overload and its impact on work-family conflict: Can leaders help?. Computers in Human Behavior, 50, 411-417.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.023
Kinnunen, U., Feldt, T., de Bloom, J., Sianoja, M., Korpela, K., & Geurts, S. (2016). Linking boundary crossing from work to nonwork to work-related rumination across time: A variable-and person-oriented approach. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 22(4), 467-480.
https://doi.org/10.1037/ocp0000037
Kreiner, G. E. (2006). Consequences of work-home segmentation or integration: A person-environment fit perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(4), 485-507.
https://doi.org/10.1002/job.386
https://doi.org/ 10.1002/job.386.
Kühnel, J., Vahle-Hinz, T., de Bloom, J., & Syrek, C. J. (2017). Staying in touch while at work: Relationships between personal social media use at work and work-nonwork balance and creativity. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 1-27.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2017.1396551
Lanaj, K., Kim, P. H., Koopman, J., & Matta, F. K. (2018). Daily mistrust: A resource perspective and its implications for work and home. Personnel Psychology, 1-26.
https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12268
Ma, J. (2017). 25 famous women on guilt. https://www.thecut.com/2017/09/quotes-from-25-famous-women-on-guilt.html. Accessed 5 December 2017.
Matthews, R. A., Kath, L. M., & Barnes-Farrell, J. L. (2010). A Short, valid, predictive measure of work-family conflict: Item selection and scale validation. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 15(1), 75-90.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017443
Noor, N. M., & Mahudin, N. D. M. (2016). Work, family and women's well-being in Malaysia. In Handbook on well-being of working women (pp. 717-734). Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9897-6_40
Olson-Buchanan, J. B., Boswell, W. R., & Morgan, T. J. (2016). The role of technology in managing the work and nonwork interface. The Oxford handbook of work and family, (pp. 333-348). New York, NY: Oxford Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199337538.013.26
Park, Y., Fritz, C., & Jex, S. M. (2011). Relationships between work-home segmentation and psychological detachment from work: The role of communication technology use at home. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 16(4), 457.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023594
Park, Y., & Jex, S. M. (2011). Work-home boundary management using communication and information technology. International Journal of Stress Management, 18(2), 133-152.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022759
Perry-Jenkins, M., & Wadsworth, S. M. (2017). Work and family research and theory: Review and analysis from an ecological perspective. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 9(2), 219-237.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12188
Piszczek, M. M. (2017). Boundary control and controlled boundaries: Organizational expectations for technology use at the work-family interface. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38(4), 592-611.
https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2153
Pluut, H., Ilies, R., Curşeu, P. L., & Liu, Y. (2018). Social support at work and at home: Dual-buffering effects in the work-family conflict process. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 146, 1-13..
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.02.001
Rexroth, M., Michel, A., & Bosch, C. (2017). Promoting well-being by teaching employees how to segment their life domains. Zeitschrift fürArbeits-und Organisationspsychologie A&O.
https://doi.org/10.1026/0932-4089/a000253
Rothbard, N. P., & Ollier-Malaterre, A. (2016). Boundary management. The Oxford handbook of work and family, (pp. 109-122). New York: Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199337538.013.5
Sonnentag, S., Reinecke, L., Mata, J., & Vorderer, P. (2018). Feeling interrupted-Being responsive: How online messages relate to affect at work. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 39(3), 369-383.
https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2239
Syrek, C. J., Kühnel, J., Vahle-Hinz, T., & De Bloom, J. (2017). Share, like, twitter, and connect: Ecological momentary assessment to examine the relationship between non-work social media use at work and work engagement. Work & Stress, 1-19.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2017.1367736
Wajcman, J., Bittman, M., & Brown, J. E. (2008). Families without borders: Mobile phones, connectedness and work-home divisions. Sociology, 42(4), 635-652.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038508091620
Wilkinson, K., Tomlinson, J., & Gardiner, J. (2017). Exploring the work-life challenges and dilemmas faced by managers and professionals who live alone. Work, Employment and Society, 31(4), 640-656.
Copyright Transfer Statement for Journal
1) In signing this statement, the author(s) grant UNIMAS Publisher an exclusive license to publish their original research papers. The author(s) also grant UNIMAS Publisher permission to reproduce, recreate, translate, extract or summarize, and to distribute and display in any forms, formats, and media. The author(s) can reuse their papers in their future printed work without first requiring permission from UNIMAS Publisher, provided that the author(s) acknowledge and reference publication in the Journal.
2) For open access articles, the author(s) agree that their articles published under UNIMAS Publisher are distributed under the terms of the CC-BY-NC-SA (Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, for non-commercial purposes, provided the original work of the author(s) is properly cited.
3) The author(s) is/are responsible to ensure his or her or their submitted work is original and does not infringe any existing copyright, trademark, patent, statutory right, or propriety right of others. Corresponding author(s) has (have) obtained permission from all co-authors prior to submission to the journal. Upon submission of the manuscript, the author(s) agree that no similar work has been or will be submitted or published elsewhere in any language. If submitted manuscript includes materials from others, the authors have obtained the permission from the copyright owners.
4) In signing this statement, the author(s) declare(s) that the researches in which they have conducted are in compliance with the current laws of the respective country and UNIMAS Journal Publication Ethics Policy. Any experimentation or research involving human or the use of animal samples must obtain approval from Human or Animal Ethics Committee in their respective institutions. The author(s) agree and understand that UNIMAS Publisher is not responsible for any compensational claims or failure caused by the author(s) in fulfilling the above-mentioned requirements. The author(s) must accept the responsibility for releasing their materials upon request by Chief Editor or UNIMAS Publisher.
5) The author(s) should have participated sufficiently in the work and ensured the appropriateness of the content of the article. The author(s) should also agree that he or she has no commercial attachments (e.g. patent or license arrangement, equity interest, consultancies, etc.) that might pose any conflict of interest with the submitted manuscript. The author(s) also agree to make any relevant materials and data available upon request by the editor or UNIMAS Publisher.
