IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/tbitxx/v39y2020i7p824-836.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does techno-stress justify cyberslacking? An empirical study based on the neutralisation theory

Author

Listed:
  • Utku Güğerçin

Abstract

On the basis of neutralisation theory, this paper associates technology-induced work stress with the engagement in non-business activities while at work. When neutralisation theory is linked to organisational behaviour, the theory states that employees are prone to engage in deviant behaviours in the workplace to balance the difficulties they have suffered. In this context, employees may strive to neutralise the negative consequences of technology-induced stress and feel justified considering that it is their right to engage in deviant behaviours, such as performing non-business activities. Therefore, the aim of this study is to explore the impact of technology-induced stress (techno-stress) on engaging in non-business online activities while at work (minor cyberslacking). To do so, survey method was used and data were gathered from 252 white-collar employees working in the manufacturing sector. Results of the regression analysis suggested that out of three dimensions of techno-stress, techno-invasion is the only predictor for cyberslacking. The practical contribution of this paper is that employers could decrease cyberslacking activities by alleviating techno-invasion level of employees. Recommendations are also offered to draw up policies to cope with techno-stress and cyberslacking.

Suggested Citation

  • Utku Güğerçin, 2020. "Does techno-stress justify cyberslacking? An empirical study based on the neutralisation theory," Behaviour and Information Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(7), pages 824-836, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:tbitxx:v:39:y:2020:i:7:p:824-836
    DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2019.1617350
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/0144929X.2019.1617350
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0144929X.2019.1617350?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:tbitxx:v:39:y:2020:i:7:p:824-836. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/tbit .

    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.