We apply modern theory on multitasking and person-environment fit to holistically explain the relations of polychronicity as well as provide justifications for disparate results found in prior studies, such as undetected differences regarding task-switching and dual-tasking. We then conduct a meta-analysis of polychronicity's relations. We show that the nomological net surrounding polychronicity matches our proposed fit perspective. We likewise demonstrate that differences in task-switching and dual-tasking indeed influence the observed results of polychronicity, and the growing complexity of businesses may have caused the association of polychronicity and job performance to strengthen over time. Our discussion highlights that polychronicity plays an important role in personal well-being and employee performance, which can be understood by our person-environment fit perspective.
Plain Language Summary
We apply modern theory on multitasking and person-environment fit to holistically explain the relations of polychronicity as well as provide justifications for disparate results found in prior studies, such as undetected differences regarding task-switching and dual-tasking. We then conduct a meta-analysis of polychronicity's relations. We show that the nomological net surrounding polychronicity matches our proposed fit perspective. We likewise demonstrate that differences in task-switching and dual-tasking indeed influence the observed results of polychronicity, and the growing complexity of businesses may have caused the association of polychronicity and job performance to strengthen over time. Our discussion highlights that polychronicity plays an important role in personal well-being and employee performance, which can be understood by our person-environment fit perspective.
AckermanP. L.KanferR. (2020). Work in the 21st century: New directions for aging and adult development. American Psychologist, 75(4), 486. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000615
2.
AdlerR. F.Benbunan-FichR. (2013). Self-interruptions in discretionary multitasking. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(4), 1441–1449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.01.040
3.
AlujaA.GarcıaO.GarcıaL. F. (2003). Relationships among extraversion, openness to experience, and sensation seeking. Personality and Individual Differences, 35(3), 671–680. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00244-1
4.
ArndtA.ArnoldT. J.LandryT. D. (2006). The effects of polychronic-orientation upon retail employee satisfaction and turnover. Journal of Retailing, 82(4), 319–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2006.08.005
5.
AsgharM.GullN.TayyabM.ZhijieS.TaoX. (2020). Polychronicity at work: Work engagement as a mediator of the relationships between job outcomes. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 45, 470–478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2020.10.002
6.
AsgharM.TayyabM.GullN.ZhijieS.ShiR.TaoX. (2021). Polychronicity, work engagement, and turnover intention: The moderating role of perceived organizational support in the hotel industry. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 49, 129–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2021.09.004
7.
BluedornA. C.KalliathT. J.StrubeM. J.MartinG. D. (1999). Polychronicity and the Inventory of Polychronic Values (IPV): The development of an instrument to measure a fundamental dimension of organizational culture. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 14(3/4), 205–231. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683949910263747
8.
BorensteinM.HedgesL. V.HigginsJ. P.RothsteinH. R. (2010). A basic introduction to fixed-effect and random-effects models for meta-analysis. Research Synthesis Methods, 1(2), 97–111. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.12
9.
BoscoF. A.AguinisH.SinghK.FieldJ. G.PierceC. A. (2015). Correlational effect size benchmarks. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(2), 431. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038047
10.
BoxerP.GrovesC. L.DochertyM. (2015). Video games do indeed influence children and adolescents’ aggression, prosocial behavior, and academic performance: A clearer reading of Ferguson (2015). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(5), 671–673. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615592239
11.
BrownS. P.JonesE.LeighT. W. (2005). The attenuating effect of role overload on relationships linking self-efficacy and goal level to work performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(5), 972. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.5.972
12.
BüchlerN.ter HoevenC. L.van ZoonenW. (2020). Understanding constant connectivity to work: How and for whom is constant connectivity related to employee well-being?Information and Organization, 30(3), 100302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2020.100302
13.
CableD. M.EdwardsJ. R. (2004). Complementary and supplementary fit: A theoretical and empirical integration. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 822. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.822
14.
CaldwellS. D.HeroldD. M.FedorD. B. (2004). Toward an understanding of the relationships among organizational change, individual differences, and changes in person-environment fit: A cross-level study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(5), 868. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.89.5.868
15.
CaplanR. D. (1987). Person-environment fit theory and organizations: Commensurate dimensions, time perspectives, and mechanisms. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 31(3), 248–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(87)90042-X
16.
CarpenterN. C.SonJ.HarrisT. B.AlexanderA. L.HornerM. T. (2016). Don’t forget the items: Item-level meta-analytic and substantive validity techniques for reexamining scale validation. Organizational Research Methods, 19(4), 616–650. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428116639132
CheungM. W. L. (2015). Meta-analysis: A structural equation modeling approach. John Wiley & Sons.
19.
ChisholmC. D.CollisonE. K.NelsonD. R.CordellW. H. (2000). Emergency department workplace interruptions are emergency physicians “interrupt-driven” and “multitasking”?Academic Emergency Medicine, 7(11), 1239–1243. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1553-2712.2000.tb00469.x
20.
Cochrum-NguyenF. L. (2013). Predicting job performance and job satisfaction: An examination of the Five-Factor Model of personality, polychronicity, and role overload. Unpublished Master’s thesis). San Diego State University, San Diego, CA.
21.
ConteJ. M.AasenB.JacobsonC.O’LoughlinC.TorosluL. (2019). Investigating relationships among polychronicity, work-family conflict, job satisfaction, and work engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 34(7), 459–473. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-01-2018-0046
22.
ConteJ. M.JacobsR. R. (2003). Validity evidence linking polychronicity and big five personality dimensions to absence, lateness, and supervisory performance ratings. Human Performance, 16(2), 107–129. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327043HUP1602_1
23.
CooperH.HedgesL. V.ValentineJ. C.2019). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis. Russell Sage Foundation.
24.
CotteJ.RatneshwarS. (1999). Juggling and hopping: What does it mean to work polychronically?Journal of Managerial Psychology, 14(3/4), 184–204. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683949910263738
25.
DalenogareL. S.BenitezG. B.AyalaN. F.FrankA. G. (2018). The expected contribution of Industry 4.0 technologies for industrial performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 204, 383–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.08.019
26.
DawisR. V.LofquistL. H. (1984). A psychological theory of work adjustment: An individualdifferences model and its applications. University of Minnesota press.
De BruinR.BarberL. K. (2019). Social judgments of electronic multitasking in the workplace: The role of contextual and individual factors. Computers in Human Behavior, 94, 110–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.014
29.
De CoomanR.MolS. T.BillsberryJ.BoonC.Den HartogD. N. (2019). Epilogue: Frontiers in person–environment fit research. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 28(5), 646–652. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2019.1630480
30.
DeSimoneJ. A.KöhlerT.SchoenJ. L. (2019). If it were only that easy: The use of meta-analytic research by organizational scholars. Organizational Research Methods, 22(4), 867–891. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428118756743
31.
DeYoungC. G.PetersonJ. B.HigginsD. M. (2005). Sources of openness/intellect: Cognitive and neuropsychological correlates of the fifth factor of personality. Journal of Personality, 73(4), 825–858. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2005.00330.x
32.
DienerE.LucasR (2000). Subjective emotional well–being. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland–Jones (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (2nd ed., pp. 325––337). New York: Guilford.
33.
DuxP. E.TombuM. N.HarrisonS.RogersB. P.TongF.MaroisR. (2009). Training improves multitasking performance by increasing the speed of information processing in human prefrontal cortex. Neuron, 63(1), 127–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2009.06.005
34.
EdwardsJ. R.CaplanR. D.Van HarrisonR. (1998). Person-environment fit theory. In C. Cooper (Ed.), Theories of Organizational Stress (pp. 28–67). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
35.
EdwardsJ. R.ShippA. J. (2007). he relationship between person-environment fit and outcomes: An integrative theoretical framework. In C. Ostroff & T. A. Judge (Eds.), Perspectives on organizational fit (pp. 209–258). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
36.
EdwardsJ. R.Van HarrisonR. (1993). Job demands and worker health: three-dimensional reexamination of the relationship between person-environment fit and strain. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(4), 628.
37.
ElsbachK. D.KramerR. M. (2003). Assessing creativity in Hollywood pitch meetings: Evidence for a dual-process model of creativity judgments. Academy of Management Journal, 46(3), 283–301. https://doi.org/10.2307/30040623
38.
FergusonC. J. (2015). Do angry birds make for angry children? A meta-analysis of video game influences on children’s and adolescents’ aggression, mental health, prosocial behavior, and academic performance. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(5), 646–666. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615592234
39.
Furuya-KanamoriL.DoiS. A. (2016). Angry birds, angry children, and angry meta-analysts: A reanalysis. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(3), 408–414. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616635599
40.
GeversJ.MohammedS.BaytalskayaN. (2015). The conceptualisation and measurement of pacing styles. Applied Psychology, 64(3), 499–540. https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12016
41.
GrawitchM. J.BarberL. K. (2013). In search of the relationship between polychronicity and multitasking performance. Journal of Individual Differences, 34(4), 222–229. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000118
42.
GuanY.DengH.FanL.ZhouX. (2021). Theorizing person-environment fit in a changing career world: Interdisciplinary integration and future directions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 126, 103557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2021.103557
43.
GuanY.DengH.RisavyS. D.BondM. H.LiF. (2011). Supplementary fit, complementary fit, and work-related outcomes: The role of self-construal. Applied Psychology, 60(2), 286–310. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2010.00436.x
44.
HallS. M.BrannickM. T. (2002). Comparison of two random-effects methods of meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 377. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.2.377
45.
HechtT. D.AllenN. J. (2005). Exploring links between polychronicity and well-being from the perspective of person–job fit: Does it matter if you prefer to do only one thing at a time?Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 98(2), 155–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.07.004
46.
HellerD.WatsonD. (2005). The dynamic spillover of satisfaction between work and marriage: The role of time and mood. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1273. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1273
HollandJ. L. (1971). A theory-ridden, computerless, impersonal vocational guidance system. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 1(2), 167–176.
49.
HowardM. C.CogswellJ. E. (2018). The “other” relationships of self-assessed intelligence: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 77, 31–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2018.09.006
50.
HowardM. C.HoffmanM. E. (2018). Variable-centered, person-centered, and person-specific approaches: Where theory meets the method. Organizational Research Methods, 21(4), 846–876. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428117744021
51.
HowardM. C.Van ZandtE. C. (2020). The Discriminant Validity of Honesty-Humility: A Meta-Analysis of the HEXACO, Big Five, and Dark Triad. Journal of Research in Personality, 87, 103982. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2020.103982
52.
HunterJ. E. (1986). Cognitive ability, cognitive aptitudes, job knowledge, and job performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 29(3), 340–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791(86)90013-8
53.
HunterJ. E.SchmidtF. L. (2004). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Sage.
54.
HuxholdO.LiS. C.SchmiedekF.LindenbergerU. (2006). Dual-tasking postural control: Aging and the effects of cognitive demand in conjunction with focus of attention. Brain Research Bulletin, 69(3), 294–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresbull.2006.01.002
55.
IliesR.WilsonK. S.WagnerD. T. (2009). The spillover of daily job satisfaction onto employees' family lives: The facilitating role of work-family integration. Academy of Management Journal, 52(1), 87–102.
56.
JacobyJ. (1984). Perspectives on information overload. Journal of Consumer Research, 10(4), 432–435. https://doi.org/10.1086/208981
JakS.LiH.KolbeL.CheungM. (2020). Meta-analytic structural equation modeling made easy: A tutorial and web application for one-stage MASEM. Preprint.
59.
JohnsonR. E.TaingM. U.ChangC.-H.KawamotoC. K. (2013). A self-regulation approach to person-environment fit. In Kristof-BrownA. L.BillsberryJ. (Eds.), Organizational fit: Key issues and new directions (pp. 74–98). Wiley Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118320853.ch4
60.
JudgeT. A.WatanabeS. (1993). Another look at the job satisfaction-life satisfaction relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(6), 939. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.6.939
61.
KantrowitzT. M.GrelleD. M.BeatyJ. C.WolfM. B. (2012). Time is money: Polychronicity as a predictor of performance across job levels. Human Performance, 25(2), 114–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2012.658926
62.
KaratepeO. M. (2013). The effects of work overload and work-family conflict on job embeddedness and job performance: The mediation of emotional exhaustion.International Journal of contemporary Hospitality management.
63.
KassS. J.VodanovichS. J. (1990). Boredom proneness: Its relationship to Type A behavior pattern and sensation seeking. Psychology: A Journal of Human Behavior, 27(3), 7–16. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1991.69.3f.113
64.
KaufmanC. F.LaneP. M.LindquistJ. D. (1991). Exploring more than 24 hours a day: A preliminary investigation of polychronic time use. Journal of Consumer Research, 18(3), 392–401. https://doi.org/10.1086/209268
65.
KayaalpA. (2014). The octopus approach in time management: Polychronicity and creativity. Military Psychology, 26(2), 67–76. https://doi.org/10.1037/mil0000032
66.
KepesS.McDanielM. A.BrannickM. T.BanksG. C. (2013). Meta-analytic reviews in the organizational sciences: Two meta-analytic schools on the way to MARS (the Meta-Analytic Reporting Standards). Journal of Business and Psychology, 28(2), 123–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-013-9300-2
67.
KieselA.SteinhauserM.WendtM.FalkensteinM.JostK.PhilippA. M.KochI. (2010). Control and interference in task switching—A review. Psychological Bulletin, 136(5), 849. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019842
68.
KirchbergD. M.RoeR. A.Van EerdeW. (2015). Polychronicity and multitasking: A diary study at work. Human Performance, 28(2), 112–136. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2014.976706
69.
KochI.GadeM.SchuchS.PhilippA. M. (2010). The role of inhibition in task switching: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3758/PBR.17.1.1
70.
KochI.PoljacE.MüllerH.KieselA. (2018). Cognitive structure, flexibility, and plasticity in human multitasking—an integrative review of dual-task and task-switching research. Psychological Bulletin, 144(6), 557. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000144
71.
KönigC. J.BuhnerM.MurlingG. (2005). Working memory, fluid intelligence, and attention are predictors of multitasking performance, but polychronicity and extraversion are not. Human Performance, 18(3), 243–266. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1803_3
72.
KönigC. J.WallerM. J. (2010). Time for reflection: A critical examination of polychronicity. Human Performance, 23(2), 173–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959281003621703
73.
KooijD. T.KanferR.BettsM.RudolphC. W. (2018). Future time perspective: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(8), 867. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000306
74.
KorabikK.RhijnT. V.AymanR.LeroD. S.HammerL. B. (2017). Gender, polychronicity, and the work–family interface: Is a preference for multitasking beneficial?Community, Work & Family, 20(3), 307–326. https://doi.org/10.1080/13668803.2016.1178103
75.
KristofA. L. (1996). Person-organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications. Personnel Psychology, 49(1), 1–49.
76.
Kristof-BrownA.GuayR. P. (2011). Person–environment fit. In APA Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology: Maintaining, expanding, and contracting the organization (Vol. 3, pp. 3–50). American Psychological Association.
77.
Kristof-BrownA. L.ZimmermanR. D.JohnsonE. C. (2005). Consequences of individuals’ fit at work: A meta-analysis of person–job, person–organization, person–group, and person–supervisor fit. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 281–342. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2005.00672.x
78.
KubicekB.PaškvanM.BunnerJ. (2017). The bright and dark sides of job autonomy. In Job demands in a changing world of work (pp. 45–63). Springer.
79.
LeeK.AshtonM. C. (2005). Psychopathy, machiavellianism, and narcissism in the five-factor model and the HEXACO model of personality structure. Personality and Individual Differences, 38(7), 1571–1582. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2004.09.016
80.
LennardA. C.MattaF. K.LinS. H.KoopmanJ.JohnsonR. E. (2021). The Dynamism of Daily Justice: A Person-Environment Fit Perspective on the Situated Value of Justice. Organization Science, 33(4), 1523–1553. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2021.1496
81.
LiW. D.LiS.FengJ. J.WangM. O.ZhangH.FreseM.WuC. H. (2021). Can becoming a leader change your personality? An investigation with two longitudinal studies from a role-based perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 106(6), 882. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000808
82.
LindquistJ. D.Kaufman-ScarboroughC. (2007). The polychronic—monochronic tendency model: PMTS scale development and validation. Time & Society, 16(2-3), 253–285. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961463X07080270
83.
LyngsU.LukoffK.SlovakP.BinnsR.SlackA.InzlichtM.ShadboltN. (2019). Self-Control in Cyberspace: Applying Dual Systems Theory to a Review of Digital Self-Control Tools. Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.
84.
MadjarN.OldhamG. R. (2006). Task rotation and polychronicity: Effects on individuals’ creativity. Human Performance, 19(2), 117–131. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327043hup1902_2
85.
MagenH. (2017). The relations between executive functions, media multitasking and polychronicity. Computers in Human Behavior, 67, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.10.011
86.
MathieuJ. E.ChenG. (2011). The etiology of the multilevel paradigm in management research. Journal of Management, 37(2), 610–641. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310364663
87.
McKayA. S.GutworthM. B. (2021). Temporal individual differences and creativity: An exploratory investigation. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 15(2), 295–312. https://doi.org/10.1037/aca0000292
88.
MeyerJ. P.HechtT. D.GillH.ToplonytskyL. (2010). Person-organization (culture) fit and employee commitment under conditions of organizational change: A longitudinal study. Journal of vocational behavior, 76(3), 458–473.
89.
MilesD.BormanW.SpectorP.FoxS. (2002). Building an integrative model of extra role work behaviors: A comparison of counterproductive work behavior with organizational citizenship behavior. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 10(1-2), 51–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2389.00193
90.
MohammedS.NadkarniS. (2014). Are we all on the same temporal page? The moderating effects of temporal team cognition on the polychronicity diversity–team performance relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(3), 404. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035640
91.
MoherD.LiberatiA.TetzlaffJ.AltmanD. G., & Prisma Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
MorrisonE. W. (1994). Role definitions and organizational citizenship behavior: The importance of the employee's perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 37(6), 1543–1567. https://doi.org/10.2307/256798
94.
MuchinskyP. M.MonahanC. J. (1987). What is person-environment congruence? Supplementary versus complementary models of fit. Journal of vocational behavior, 31(3), 268–277.
95.
MumfordM. D.McIntoshT. (2017). Creative thinking processes: The past and the future. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 51(4), 317–322. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.197
96.
MurdockK. W.OddiK. B.BridgettD. J. (2013). Cognitive correlates of personality: Links between executive functioning and the big five personality traits. Journal of Individual Differences, 34(2), 97. https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-0001/a000104
97.
NolanK. P.HaroldC. M. (2010). Fit with what? The influence of multiple self-concept images on organizational attraction. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83(3), 645–662. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317909X465452
98.
OberlanderE. M. (2008). Understanding and predicting multitasking performance using non-cognitive variables: Addressing issues in past research and developing a new measure of individual polychronicity. Michigan State University. Department of Psychology.
99.
PalekarA. A. (2011). Polytasking and job stress across cultures. San Jose State University.
100.
ParryD. A.le RouxD. B.BantjesJ. R. (2020). Testing the feasibility of a media multitasking self-regulation intervention for students: Behaviour change, attention, and self-perception. Computers in Human Behavior, 104, 106182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.106182
101.
PazosP.ChungJ. M.MicariM. (2013). Instant messaging as a task-support tool in information technology organizations. The Journal of Business Communication, 50(1), 68–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943612465181
102.
PiercyC. W.UnderhillG. R. (2020). Expectations of technology use during meetings: An experimental test of manager policy, device use, and task-acknowledgment. Mobile Media & Communication, 9(1), 78–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050157920927049
103.
PoposkiE. M.OswaldF. L. (2010). The multitasking preference inventory: Toward an improved measure of individual differences in polychronicity. Human Performance, 23(3), 247–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959285.2010.487843
104.
PuranikH.KoopmanJ.VoughH. C. (2020). Pardon the interruption: An integrative review and future research agenda for research on work interruptions. Journal of Management, 46(6), 806–842. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206319887428
105.
RiceR. W.NearJ. P.HuntR. G. (1980). The job-satisfaction/life-satisfaction relationship: A review of empirical research. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 1(1), 37–64. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp0101_4
106.
RothsteinH. R.BushmanB. J. (2015). Methodological and reporting errors in meta-analytic reviews make other meta-analysts angry: A commentary on Ferguson (2015). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(5), 677–679. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615592235
107.
RothsteinH. R.SuttonA. J.BorensteinM. (2005). Publication bias in meta-analysis: Prevention, assessment and adjustments. Wiley.
108.
ScherbaumC. A.FerreterJ. M. (2009). Estimating statistical power and required sample sizes for organizational research using multilevel modeling. Organizational Research Methods, 12(2), 347–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428107308906
109.
SchneiderB. (1987). E= f(P,B): The road to a radical approach to person-environment fit. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 31(3), 353–361.
110.
ShamseerL.MoherD.ClarkeM.GhersiD.LiberatiA.PetticrewM.StewartL. A. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: Elaboration and explanation. BMJ, 349, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g7647
111.
SheerV. C.RiceR. E. (2017). Mobile instant messaging use and social capital: Direct and indirect associations with employee outcomes. Information & Management, 54(1), 90–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2016.04.001
SouitarisV.MaestroB. M. (2010). Polychronicity in top management teams: The impact on strategic decision processes and performance of new technology ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 31(6), 652–678. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.831
114.
StrobachT.SalminenT.KarbachJ.SchubertT. (2014). Practice-related optimization and transfer of executive functions: A general review and a specific realization of their mechanisms in dual tasks. Psychological Research, 78(6), 836–851. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-014-0563-7
115.
StrobachT.WendtM.JanczykM. (2018). Multitasking: Executive functioning in dual-task and task switching situations. Frontiers in Psychology, 9(108), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00108
TakJ. (2011). Relationships between various person–environment fit types and employee withdrawal behavior: A longitudinal study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 78(2), 315–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2010.11.006
118.
TakeuchiH.TakiY.NouchiR.HashizumeH.SekiguchiA.KotozakiY.KawashimaR. (2014). Effects of multitasking-training on gray matter structure and resting state neural mechanisms. Human Brain Mapping, 35(8), 3646–3660. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.22427
119.
ThorntonA.LeeP. (2000). Publication bias in meta-analysis: Its causes and consequences. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 53(2), 207–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00161-4
120.
TwymanN. W.ProudfootJ. G.CameronA. F.CaseE.BurgoonJ. K.TwitchellD. P. (2020). Too busy to be manipulated: How multitasking with technology improves deception detection in collaborative teamwork. Journal of Management Information Systems, 37(2), 377–395. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2020.1759938
121.
Van DyneL.LePineJ. A. (1998). Helping and voice extra-role behaviors: Evidence of construct and predictive validity. Academy of Management Journal, 41(1), 108–119. https://doi.org/10.2307/256902
VogelR. M.RodellJ. B.LynchJ. W. (2016). Engaged and productive misfits: How job crafting and leisure activity mitigate the negative effects of value incongruence. Academy of Management Journal, 59(5), 1561–1584. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2014.0850
WernerJ. M. (1994). Dimensions that make a difference: Examining the impact of in-role and extrarole behaviors on supervisory ratings. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(1), 98. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.79.1.98
126.
WiernikB. M.DahlkeJ. A. (2020). Obtaining unbiased results in meta-analysis: The importance of correcting for statistical artifacts. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 3(1), 94–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/2515245919885611
127.
WilliamsM. S.MyersA. K.FinufK. D.PatelV. H.MarrastL. M.PekmezarisR.MartinezJ. (2022). Black physicians’ experiences with anti-black racism in healthcare systems explored through an attraction-selection-attrition Lens. Journal of Business and Psychology, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-022-09825-z
128.
WoodJ. A. (2008). Methodology for dealing with duplicate study effects in a meta-analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 11(1), 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106296638
129.
WuC. H.WangY.ParkerS. K.GriffinM. A. (2020). Effects of chronic job insecurity on Big Five personality change. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(11), 1308. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000488
130.
YuK. Y. T. (2009). Affective influences in person–environment fit theory: Exploring the role of affect as both cause and outcome of PE fit. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(5), 1210. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016403
131.
ZettlerI.ThielmannI.HilbigB. E.MoshagenM. (2020). The nomological net of the HEXACO model of personality: A large-scale meta-analytic investigation. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(3), 723–760. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619895036
132.
ZhangW.JexS. M.PengY.WangD. (2017). Exploring the effects of job autonomy on engagement and creativity: The moderating role of performance pressure and learning goal orientation. Journal of Business and Psychology, 32(3), 235–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-016-9453-x
133.
ZuckermanM. (1971). Dimensions of sensation seeking. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 36(1), 45. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030478
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
