A Review of Methodological Choices Relating to Work-Life Boundary Research

S. Alwis, P. Hernwall
{"title":"A Review of Methodological Choices Relating to Work-Life Boundary Research","authors":"S. Alwis, P. Hernwall","doi":"10.26493/1854-6935.19.73-101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A methodological review was performed on work-life boundary-related studies published from the year 2010 to 2018. This review systematically selected 59 journal articles on the work boundary phenomenon. The selection criteria for this review closely followed three previous systematic methodological reviews performed on work-life research. Where possible, comparisons were made to integrate the findings of the current study with these previous systematic reviews. Articles were reviewed based on methodological choices such as research design, sampling strategy, data collection, data analysis, reliability, and validity measures. Findings of the review revealed that researchers had utilised a variety of methodological stances to conduct their studies. The majority of the studies in the field followed a quantitative approach, and most studies relating to work boundary management were field studies with a cross-sectional design. Qualitative studies in the area were primarily based on grounded theory. Significant methodological gaps were identified that could be bridged by future studies. Further, notable suggestions were proposed relating to reliability and validity measures taken by the researchers.","PeriodicalId":30026,"journal":{"name":"Managing Global Transitions","volume":"256 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Managing Global Transitions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26493/1854-6935.19.73-101","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

A methodological review was performed on work-life boundary-related studies published from the year 2010 to 2018. This review systematically selected 59 journal articles on the work boundary phenomenon. The selection criteria for this review closely followed three previous systematic methodological reviews performed on work-life research. Where possible, comparisons were made to integrate the findings of the current study with these previous systematic reviews. Articles were reviewed based on methodological choices such as research design, sampling strategy, data collection, data analysis, reliability, and validity measures. Findings of the review revealed that researchers had utilised a variety of methodological stances to conduct their studies. The majority of the studies in the field followed a quantitative approach, and most studies relating to work boundary management were field studies with a cross-sectional design. Qualitative studies in the area were primarily based on grounded theory. Significant methodological gaps were identified that could be bridged by future studies. Further, notable suggestions were proposed relating to reliability and validity measures taken by the researchers.
工作-生活边界研究方法选择综述
对2010年至2018年发表的工作与生活边界相关研究进行了方法学综述。本综述系统地选取了59篇关于工作边界现象的期刊文章。本综述的选择标准严格遵循了之前对工作与生活研究进行的三次系统方法论综述。在可能的情况下,进行比较,将当前研究的结果与之前的系统综述相结合。根据研究设计、抽样策略、数据收集、数据分析、可靠性和有效性测量等方法选择对文章进行了审查。审查结果显示,研究人员采用了各种方法论立场进行研究。该领域的大多数研究采用了定量方法,与工作边界管理有关的大多数研究都是采用横断面设计的实地研究。该领域的定性研究主要基于有根据的理论。发现了可以通过未来研究弥补的重大方法差距。此外,还就研究人员所采取的信度和有效性措施提出了值得注意的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书