Dataset Information

Can welfare states buffer technostress? Income and technostress in the context of various OECD countries.

ABSTRACT: Many workers are experiencing the downsides of being exposed to an overload of information and communication technology (ICT), highlighting the need for resources to cope with the resulting technostress. This article offers a novel cross-level perspective on technostress by examining how the context of the welfare state influences the relationship between income and technostress. Showing that individuals with higher income experience less technostress, this study argues that the welfare state represents an additional coping resource, in particular in the form of unemployment benefits. Since unemployment benefits insure income earners in the case of job loss, the negative effect of income on technostress should increase with higher levels of unemployment generosity. In line with these expectations, empirical results based on original survey data collected in collaboration with the OECD show that the impact of income on technostress varies across welfare state contexts. Implications for public health and policymakers are being discussed.

SUBMITTER: Lauterbach AS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10697519 | biostudies-literature | 2023

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Can welfare states buffer technostress? Income and technostress in the context of various OECD countries.

Lauterbach Ann S AS Tober Tobias T Kunze Florian F Busemeyer Marius R MR

PloS one 20231205 12

Many workers are experiencing the downsides of being exposed to an overload of information and communication technology (ICT), highlighting the need for resources to cope with the resulting technostress. This article offers a novel cross-level perspective on technostress by examining how the context of the welfare state influences the relationship between income and technostress. Showing that individuals with higher income experience less technostress, this study argues that the welfare state re ...[more]

PMID: 38051751

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDespite significant investments to support primary care internationally, income-based inequities in access to quality health care are present in many high-income countries. This study aims to determine whether low- and middle-income groups are more likely to report poor quality of primary care (PC) than high-income groups cross-nationally.MethodsThe 2011 Commonwealth Fund Telephone Survey of Sicker Adults is a cross-sectional study across eleven countries. Respondents were recruited from randomly selected households. We used data from surveys conducted in Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. We identified all questions relating to primary care performance, and categorized these into five dimensions: 1) access to care, 2) coordination 3) patient-centered care, and 4) technical quality of care. We used logistic regression with low and middle-income as the comparison groups and high-income as the referent.ResultsFourteen thousand two hundred sixty-two respondents provided income data. Countries varied considerably in their extent of income disparity. Overall, 24.7% were categorized as low- and 13.9% as high-income. The odds of reporting poor access to care were higher for low- and middle-income than high-income respondents in Canada, New Zealand and the US. Similar results were found for Sweden and Norway on coordination; the opposite trend favoring the low- and middle-income groups was found in New Zealand, United Kingdom, and the United States. The odds of reporting poor patient-centered care were higher for low-income than high-income respondents in the Netherlands, Norway, and the US; in Australia, this was true for low- and middle-income respondents. On technical quality of care, the odds of reporting poor care were higher for the low- and middle-income comparisons in Canada and Norway; in Germany, the odds were higher for low-income respondents only. The odds of reporting poor technical quality of care were higher for high-income than low-income respondents in the Netherlands.ConclusionInequities in quality PC for low and middle income groups exist on at least one dimension in all countries, including some that in theory provide universal access. More research is needed to fully understand equity in the PC sector.

Project description:BackgroundCOVID-19 pandemic is tremendously impacted by socioeconomic and health determinants worldwide. This study aimed to determine factors associated with COVID-19 fatality among member states and partner countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).MethodsAn ecological study was conducted using COVID-19 data of 48 countries for the period between 31 December 2019-31 December 2021. The outcome variables were COVID-19 case fatality rate (CFR) and years of life lost to COVID-19 (YLLs). Countries' sociodemographics and COVID-19-related data were extracted from OECD website, Our World in Data, John Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center, Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) and WHO.ResultsIn the first year of the pandemic (December 2019-January 2021), highest CFR was observed in Mexico, 8.51%, followed by China, 5.17% and Bulgaria, 4.12%), and highest YLLs was observed in Mexico, 2,055 per 100,000. At regional level, highest CFR was observed in North & central America, 4.25 (3.71) %, followed by South America (2.5 (0.1) %); whereas highest YLLs was observed in South America region 1457.5 (274.8) per 100,000, followed by North & central America, 1207.3 (908.1) per 100,000. As of 31 December 2021, Mexico (7.52%) and Bulgaria (4.78%) had highest CFR; on the other hand, highest YLLs was observed in England, 26.5 per 1,000, followed by the United States, 25.9 per 1,000. At regional level, highest CFR (3.37(3.19) %) and YLLs (16.7 (13) per 1,000) were both observed in North & central America. Globally, the analysis of the 2-year cumulative data showed inverse correlation between CFR and nurse per 10,000 (R = -0.48; p < 0.05) and GDP per capita (R = -0.54; p < 0.001), whereas positive correlation was observed between YLLs and elderly population rate (R = 0.66; p < 0.05) and overweight/obese population rates (R = 0.55; p < 0.05).ConclusionThis study provides insights on COVID-19 burden among OECD states and partner countries. GDP per capita, overweight/obesity and the rate of elderly population emerged as major social and health determinants of COVID-19 related burden and fatality. Findings suggest that a robust economy and interventions designed to promote healthy longevity and prevent weight gain in at-risk individuals might reduce COVID-19 burden and fatality among OECD states and partner countries.

Project description:ObjectivesRecent studies have demonstrated worsened mental health in relatively highly developed countries impacted by social inequalities and unemployment. Here, we investigate (1) whether mental health issues are differently or similarly affected by these social factors and (2) whether their effects on mental health are related or unrelated to each other.SettingAnalysis at the country level among Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries (n=36). Data on social indicators were collected from OECD and the United Nations Development Programme databases. Data on the prevalence of mental issues were obtained from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation's Global Burden of Disease study 2017.ParticipantsNo involvement of participants.Primary and secondary outcome measuresUsing linear regression models, we investigated the relative contribution played by human development (as measured by the Human Development Index (HDI)), social inequalities (Gini index) and unemployment (unemployment rate) on the prevalence of 10 mental health issues. We then measured the relationship between the socioeconomic factors' effects on mental issues using 2×2 Pearson's correlation test and principal component analysis.ResultsFirst, the overall effect of each socioeconomic factor on a combination of mental health disorders was large (r range: 0.51 to 0.76; p<0.002). However, the influence of social factors on mental health was relative to each mental issue (r range: -0.34 to 0.74). Second, the socioeconomic factors' effects on mental health showed strong interdependence (rHDI-Gini=0.93, rHDI-unemploy=0.81, runemploy-Gini=0.84; p<0.001. Principal component analysis demonstrated that the first principal component of the three variables (rHDI, rGini, runemploy) explained 91.5% of the variance.ConclusionThese results implore a reanalysis of the socioeconomic determinants of mental health where (1) the heterogeneity of mental health issues would be taken into account and (2) each socioeconomic indicator's effect would be analysed and interpreted in conjunction with the others.

Dataset Information

Can welfare states buffer technostress? Income and technostress in the context of various OECD countries.

Publications

Can welfare states buffer technostress? Income and technostress in the context of various OECD countries.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets