Phubbing (i.e., ignoring someone while using a phone) may occur at work, having an impact on the phubbee, the phubber, and the organization at large. We used a mixed-method experiment to examine the impact of phubbing on different work-related variables such as objective performance, subjective states, and first impression judgments during job interviews. Ninety-three participants took part in a simulated job interview based on the Trier Social Stress Test. In the experimental group, participants were repeatedly phubbed during both the interview and the performance test. At the end of the experiment, phubbed participants were asked to describe their experience, and thematic analysis was used to evaluate their responses. Overall, the results of the quantitative analysis revealed that first impressions, judgments, and subjective states were negatively affected by phubbing. Regarding performance, a within-session analysis revealed that participants performed faster on a performance test (mental arithmetic task) when they were not phubbed compared to when they were. A qualitative analysis of responses revealed considerable differences between interviewees in their use of coping strategies (e.g., rationalization of phubbing). These findings suggest the need to address phubbing in a professional setting.
AbramsL. C.CrossR.LesserE.LevinD. Z. (2003). Nurturing interpersonal trust in knowledge-sharing networks. Academy of Management Perspectives, 17(4), 64–77. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.2003.11851845
2.
BaileyB. P.CarlisJ. V.KonstanJ. A. (2004). The Effects of Interruptions on Task Performance, Annoyance, and Anxiety in the User Interface. Working paper.
3.
BaronR. S. (1986). Distraction-Conflict theory: Progress and problems. In BerkowitzL. (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 1–40). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60211-7
4.
BeukeboomC. J.PollmannM. (2021). Partner phubbing: Why using your phone during interactions with your partner can be detrimental for your relationship. Computers in Human Behavior, 124, 106932. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106932
5.
BradleyM. M.LangP. J. (1994). Measuring emotion: The self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 25(1), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-7916(94)90063-9
BreukelenG. V. van. (2006). ANCOVA versus change from baseline: More power in randomized studies, more bias in nonrandomized studies. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 59(9), 920–925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.02.007
8.
BurgoonJ. K. (1993). Interpersonal expectations, expectancy violations, and emotional communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 12(1–2), 30–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X93121003
ChotpitayasunondhV.DouglasK. M. (2016). How “phubbing” becomes the norm: The antecedents and consequences of snubbing via smartphone. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 9–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.018
11.
ChotpitayasunondhV.DouglasK. M. (2018). The effects of “phubbing” on social interaction. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 48(6), 304–316. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12506
12.
ColquittJ. A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organizational justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 386–400. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.386
13.
CuddyA. J. C.GlickP.BeningerA. (2011). The dynamics of warmth and competence judgments, and their outcomes in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 31, 73–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2011.10.004
14.
DakerR. J.DelageV.MaloneyE. A.LyonsI. M. (2022). Testing the specificity of links between anxiety and performance within mathematics and spatial reasoning. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1512(1), 174–191. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.14761
15.
DavidM. E.RobertsJ. A. (2021). Investigating the impact of partner phubbing on romantic jealousy and relationship satisfaction: The moderating role of attachment anxiety. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 38(12), 3590–3609. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407521996454
16.
FrackowiakM.HilpertP.RussellP. S. (2022). Partner’s perception of phubbing is more relevant than the behavior itself: A daily diary study. Computers in Human Behavior, 134, 107323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107323
17.
FrackowiakM.HilpertP.RussellP. S. (2024). Impact of partner phubbing on negative emotions: A daily diary study of mitigating factors. Current Psychology, 43(2), 1835–1854. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04401-x
18.
FullwoodC.QuinnS.KayeL. K.ReddingC. (2017). My virtual friend: A qualitative analysis of the attitudes and experiences of smartphone users: Implications for smartphone attachment. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 347–355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.05.029
19.
GlushakowJ. M. (2007). The effects of modality of social interruptions on job performance and anxiety[Rutgers University - Graduate School - New Brunswick]. https://doi.org/10.7282/T37M08CQ
20.
GonzalesA. L.WuY. (2016). Public cellphone use does not activate negative responses in others…unless they hate cellphones. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 21(5), 384–398. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12174
21.
HarmsP. C.BioccaP. F. (2004). In AlcanizM.ReyB. (Eds.), Internal Consistency and Reliability of the Networked Minds Measure of Social Presence. http://cogprints.org/7026/
22.
HaroldC. M.HoltzB. C.GriepentrogB. K.BrewerL. M.MarshS. M. (2016). Investigating the effects of applicant justice perceptions on job offer acceptance. Personnel Psychology, 69(1), 199–227. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12101
23.
HeathertonT. F.PolivyJ. (1991). Development and validation of a scale for measuring state self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(6), 895–910. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.60.6.895
24.
HuntT. E.BhardwaJ.SheffieldD. (2017). Mental arithmetic performance, physiological reactivity and mathematics anxiety amongst U.K. Primary school children. Learning and Individual Differences, 57, 129–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2017.03.016
25.
KadylakT.MakkiT. W.FrancisJ.CottenS. R.RikardR. V.SahY. J. (2018). Disrupted copresence: Older adults’ views on mobile phone use during face-to-face interactions. Mobile Media & Communication, 6(3), 331–349. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050157918758129
26.
KellyL.Miller-OttA. E.DuranR. L. (2019). Phubbing friends: Understanding face threats from, and responses to, friends’ cell phone usage through the lens of politeness theory. Communication Quarterly, 67(5), 540–559. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2019.1668443
KhanA.RaynerG. D. (2003). Robustness to non-normality of common tests for the many-sample location problem. Journal of Applied Mathematics & Decision Sciences, 7(4), 187–206. https://doi.org/10.1155/S1173912603000178
29.
KhanM. N.ShahzadK.BartelsJ. (2021). Examining boss phubbing and employee outcomes through the lens of affective events theory. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 74(5), 877–900. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-07-2021-0198
30.
KirschbaumC.PirkeK. M.HellhammerD. H. (1993). The ‘trier social stress test’—A tool for investigating psychobiological stress responses in a laboratory setting. Neuropsychobiology, 28(1–2), 76–81. https://doi.org/10.1159/000119004
31.
KoçakÖ. E. (2021). Being phubbed in the workplace: A new scale and implications for daily work engagement. Current Psychology, 40(12), 6212–6226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01635-5
32.
KrishnanA.KurtzbergT. R.NaquinC. E. (2014). The curse of the smartphone: Electronic multitasking in negotiations. Negotiation Journal, 30(2), 191–208. https://doi.org/10.1111/nejo.12055
33.
LeuppertR.GeberS. (2020). Commonly done but not socially accepted? Phubbing and social norms in dyadic and small group settings. Communication Research Reports, 37(3), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2020.1756767
34.
MarlowJ.van EverdingenE.AvrahamiD. (2016). Taking Notes or Playing Games? Understanding Multitasking in Video Communication. Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, 1726–1737. https://doi.org/10.1145/2818048.2819975
McDanielB. T.CoyneS. M. (2016). Technoference”: The interference of technology in couple relationships and implications for women’s personal and relational well-being. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 5(1), 85–98. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000065
37.
NowellL. S.NorrisJ. M.WhiteD. E.MoulesN. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1609406917733847. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
38.
NuñezT. R.RadtkeT.EimlerS. C. (2020). A third-person perspective on phubbing: Observing smartphone-induced social exclusion generates negative affect, stress, and derogatory attitudes. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 14(3), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2020-3-3
39.
ObremskiD.SchäferA. L.LangeB. P.LugrinB.GanalE.WittL.NuñezT. R.SchwarzS.SchwabF. (2021). Put that Away and Talk to Me—The Effects of Smartphone induced Ostracism while Interacting with an Intelligent Virtual Agent. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Human-Agent Interaction, 428–432. https://doi.org/10.1145/3472307.3484669
40.
OchsC.SondereggerA. (2021). What students do while you are teaching – computer and smartphone use in class and its implication on learning. In ArditoC.LanzilottiR.MaliziaA.PetrieH.PiccinnoA.DesoldaG.InkpenK. (Eds.), Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2021 (pp. 501–520). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85616-8_29
41.
OduorE.NeustaedterC.OdomW.TangA.MoallemN.ToryM.IraniP. (2016). The Frustrations and Benefits of Mobile Device Usage in the Home when Co-Present with Family Members. Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Designing Interactive Systems, 1315–1327. https://doi.org/10.1145/2901790.2901809
42.
PaskewitzE. A.BeckS. J. (2019). Exploring perceptions of multicommunicator texting during meetings. Computers in Human Behavior, 101, 238–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.07.032
43.
PiercyC. W.UnderhillG. R. (2021). 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
44.
PrickettT.Gada-JainN.BernieriF. J. (2000, May). The importance of first impressions in a job interview. Annual Meeing of the Midwesterstern Psychological Association, Chicago, IL.
RobertsJ. A.DavidM. E. (2017). Put down your phone and listen to me: How boss phubbing undermines the psychological conditions necessary for employee engagement. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 206–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.05.021
47.
RobertsJ. A.DavidM. E. (2020). Boss phubbing, trust, job satisfaction and employee performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 155, 109702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.109702
48.
SauerJ.SchmutzS.SondereggerA.MesserliN. (2019). Social stress and performance in human-machine interaction: A neglected research field. Ergonomics, 62(11), 1377–1391. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2019.1652353
49.
ScottB. A.ColquittJ.PaddockE. (2009). An actor-focused model of justice rule adherence and violation: The role of managerial motives and discretion. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(3), 756–769. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015712
SwiderB. W.HarrisT. B.GongQ. (2022). First impression effects in organizational psychology. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(3), 346–369. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000921
52.
TandonA.DhirA.TalwarS.KaurP.MäntymäkiM. (2022). Social media induced fear of missing out (FoMO) and phubbing: Behavioural, relational and psychological outcomes. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 174, 121149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121149
53.
Vanden AbeeleM. (2020). The social consequences of phubbing: A framework and a research agenda. In The Oxford Handbook of mobile Communication and Society (pp. 158–174). Oxford University Press. http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-8697723
54.
Vanden AbeeleM.AntheunisM. L.SchoutenA. P. (2016). The effect of mobile messaging during a conversation on impression formation and interaction quality. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 562–569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.04.005
55.
Vanden AbeeleM.HendricksonA. T.PollmannM. M. H.LingR. (2019). Phubbing behavior in conversations and its relation to perceived conversation intimacy and distraction: An exploratory observation study. Computers in Human Behavior, 100, 35–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.06.004
56.
WilliamsK. D. (2001). Ostracism: The Power of Silence. Guilford Press.
57.
WilliamsK. D. (2009). Chapter 6 ostracism: A temporal need-threat model. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 41, pp. 275–314). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)00406-1
58.
WolfersL. N.KitzmannS.SauerS.SommerN. (2020). Phone use while parenting: An observational study to assess the association of maternal sensitivity and smartphone use in a playground setting. Computers in Human Behavior, 102, 31–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.013
59.
XieX.TangX.WuS.ShenX. (2023). Mechanisms of maternal and paternal phubbing on adolescents’ self-control: The attenuating effect of having a sibling. Mobile Media & Communication, 12(1)3–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/20501579231158225
60.
XuT.WangT.DuanJ. (2022). Leader phubbing and employee job performance: The effect of need for social approval. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 15, 2303–2314. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S370409
61.
YasinR. M.BashirS.AbeeleM. V.BartelsJ. (2020). Supervisor phubbing phenomenon in organizations: Determinants and impacts. International Journal of Business Communication, 61(1), 150–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488420907120
62.
YousafS.Imran RasheedM.KaurP.IslamN.DhirA. (2022). The dark side of phubbing in the workplace: Investigating the role of intrinsic motivation and the use of enterprise social media (ESM) in a cross-cultural setting. Journal of Business Research, 143, 81–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.01.043
ZimmermanM. E. (2011). Speed–accuracy tradeoff. In KreutzerJ. S.DeLucaJ.CaplanB. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology (pp. 2344–2344). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-79948-3_1247
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.
