2017
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-55134-0_12
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Office Workers’ Perceived Barriers and Facilitators to Taking Regular Micro-breaks at Work: A Diary-Probed Interview Study

Abstract: Abstract.Research has suggested regular breaks in sedentary office work are important for health, wellbeing and long-term productivity. Although many computerized break reminders exist, few are based on user needs and requirements as determined by formative research. This paper reports empirical findings from a diaryprobed interview study with 20 office workers on their perceived barriers and facilitators to taking regular micro-breaks at work. This work makes two contributions to the Persuasive Technology (PT… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1
1

Relationship

5
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This suggests that for employees taking time out to engage in worksite exercise twice during the working day, this did not impact negatively on their reported performance at work, e.g., the interruption of engaging in PA “did no harm”—it had no adverse effects on perceived work performance. This is important on two accounts: First, worker performance (and any associated changes in productivity) is an organisational priority; and second, employees reporting barriers to taking active work breaks have raised concerns about the potential for negative impact on their performance through interruption of work-flow [62].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This suggests that for employees taking time out to engage in worksite exercise twice during the working day, this did not impact negatively on their reported performance at work, e.g., the interruption of engaging in PA “did no harm”—it had no adverse effects on perceived work performance. This is important on two accounts: First, worker performance (and any associated changes in productivity) is an organisational priority; and second, employees reporting barriers to taking active work breaks have raised concerns about the potential for negative impact on their performance through interruption of work-flow [62].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Interviews ranged from 42 to 66 min. The behavioral diagnostic result from the study has been reported elsewhere [ 47 ] and hence will only be briefly summarized here. The following five COM-B components (with theoretical constructs specified in brackets) were identified as important determinants of office workers’ SB: psychological capability (eg, knowledge, cognitive resources, and skills required for monitoring and regulating break patterns), automatic motivation (eg, prolonged sitting habit and effects or emotions associated with breaks), reflective motivation (eg, beliefs about the consequences of taking breaks, perceived behavioral control, the priority and accessibility of health-related goals at work, and the intention to break up sitting regularly), physical opportunity (eg, job demands, time pressure, and organizational climate), and social opportunity (eg, social norm of prolonged sitting versus regular breaks and direct social interactions that prompt or hinder breaks).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The WorkMyWay intervention was developed in accordance with the framework of the UK MRC for complex intervention research [26], by following through the process of identifying and summarizing the best available evidence [16], developing a theoretical understanding that is likely to account for the process of change [27], theorizing the intervention in terms of the key behavior change techniques and mechanisms, and involving the target recipients and stakeholders of the intervention throughout the development process [17].…”
Section: Interventionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A 7-point Likert-style (1=strongly disagree to 7=strongly agree) scale, which was used to assess psychosocial variables theoretically aligned with the constructs underlying office workers' sedentary behavior [27]. These included automaticity of regular break behaviors, using items from the automaticity subscale from the Self-Report Habit Index [39]: intention (eg, "I intend to break up sitting with regular micro-breaks throughout the day"), perceived behavioral control (eg, "All things considered, if I wanted to, I could take regular breaks at work"), prospective and retrospective memory of breaks (eg, "I find it difficult to keep track of time when engrossed in work" or "At the end of each day, I have an idea of how much time I've spent in prolonged sitting in total"), and organizational culture (eg, "The organizational culture and climate here discourages regular breaks and I feel I'm being watched").…”
Section: Psychosocial Determinants Of Regular Break Behaviorsmentioning
confidence: 99%