IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ilrrev/v72y2019i1p75-100.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Autonomy Paradox: How Night Work Undermines Subjective Well-Being of Internet-Based Freelancers

Author

Listed:
  • Andrey Shevchuk
  • Denis Strebkov
  • Shannon N. Davis

Abstract

Nonstandard work schedules have important consequences for workers in the new economy. Using unique data on the work times of Internet-based freelancers, specifically, self-employed professionals participating in a Russian-language online labor market ( N = 4,280), the authors find that working at night has adverse effects on workers’ subjective well-being as measured by satisfaction with work–life balance, life satisfaction, and emotional exhaustion. Night work has differential effects on freelancers’ well-being based on gender, partnership status, and caregiving responsibilities. Highlighting the autonomy paradox, the authors’ findings document how freelancers’ discretionary application of a flexible schedule to work at night consequently undermines their well-being.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrey Shevchuk & Denis Strebkov & Shannon N. Davis, 2019. "The Autonomy Paradox: How Night Work Undermines Subjective Well-Being of Internet-Based Freelancers," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 72(1), pages 75-100, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:ilrrev:v:72:y:2019:i:1:p:75-100
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ilr.sagepub.com/content/72/1/75.abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ana Diakonidze, 2023. "Internalising precariousness: experiences of Georgian platform workers," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 29(4), pages 439-455, November.
    2. Angela Garcia Calvo & Martin Kenney & John Zysman, 2023. "Understanding work in the online platform economy: the narrow, the broad, and the systemic perspectives," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 32(4), pages 795-814.
    3. Janine Berg & Francis Green & Laura Nurski & David A Spencer, 2023. "Risks to job quality from digital technologies: Are industrial relations in Europe ready for the challenge?," European Journal of Industrial Relations, , vol. 29(4), pages 347-365, December.
    4. Jian Zhu & Bin Zhang & Hui Wang, 2024. "The double-edged sword effects of perceived algorithmic control on platform workers’ service performance," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, December.
    5. Bingbing Zhang & Yin Yao & Guangkui Han & Jialiang He & Yu Xie & Xinyu Wang, 2023. "How Does Platform Labour Process Control Affect Courier’s Employment Mobility Intentions?—The Mediating Effects of Overtime Work and Job Autonomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-19, June.
    6. Stefanie Gundert & Janine Leschke, 2024. "Challenges and potentials of evaluating platform work against established job-quality measures," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 45(3), pages 696-718, August.
    7. Paula McDonald & Penny Williams & Robyn Mayes & Maria Khan, 2024. "Income generation on care work digital labour platforms," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 62(2), pages 358-380, June.
    8. Yizhi Han & Jingyi Wang, 2022. "Autonomy or Working Conditions?—Research on Heterogeneity and Influencing Mechanism of Self-Employment on Job Satisfaction in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-22, December.
    9. Gengxin Sun, 2023. "Quantitative Analysis of Online Labor Platforms’ Algorithmic Management Influence on Psychological Health of Workers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-17, March.
    10. Irram Shahzadi & Saira Rafiq & Umair Ali, 2022. "Investigating the Influence of Flexible Work Arrangements on Work-Life Balance in South Asian Gig Workers: Does Ryff's Six-Factor model of Psychological Well-being Moderates?," iRASD Journal of Management, International Research Alliance for Sustainable Development (iRASD), vol. 4(2), pages 316-329, june.

    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:sae:ilrrev:v:72:y:2019:i:1:p:75-100. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ilr.cornell.edu .

    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.