IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/sscijp/v27y2024i2p241-259..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The power of preferences: productivity and stress in new teleworkers during COVID-19

Author

Listed:
  • Georg D Blind
  • Stefania Lottanti von Mandach
  • Masahiro Kotosaka
  • David Chiavacci

Abstract

This study of teleworking during the COVID-19 pandemic avoids a common self-selection bias by controlling for preferences and whether the introduction of teleworking was voluntary or mandatory. In a survey (n = 1,500) conducted in December 2020, we inquired about working arrangements and agent preferences in January, April, and December 2020. Productivity levels initially did not significantly differ for newly teleworking individuals after correcting for age, gender, marital status, breadwinner and management roles, childcare gap, area, job type, and general awareness, but were negatively affected by a preference mismatch (PM; around −3pp) and cognitive dissonance (not going with one’s preference in spite of having a chance to do so, adding another −5pp). By December 2020, individuals with a PM lost as much as 9pp of their productivity levels, but the net effect for those in partially remote work was only about −2pp. Similarly, stress levels initially did not differ for newly teleworking individuals using largely the same controls as before. By December 2020, stress levels for individuals newly undertaking fully remote telework were significantly lower than for the control group of individuals with unchanged working arrangements, but the PM contributed significantly to higher stress levels.

Suggested Citation

  • Georg D Blind & Stefania Lottanti von Mandach & Masahiro Kotosaka & David Chiavacci, 2024. "The power of preferences: productivity and stress in new teleworkers during COVID-19," Social Science Japan Journal, University of Tokyo and Oxford University Press, vol. 27(2), pages 241-259.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:sscijp:v:27:y:2024:i:2:p:241-259.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ssjj/jyae017
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:sscijp:v:27:y:2024:i:2:p:241-259.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/ssjj .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.