2019
DOI: 10.1007/s12144-019-00438-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The efficacy of work engagement interventions: A meta-analysis of controlled trials

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
21
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 85 publications
0
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Knight et al's (2017) systematic review and meta-analysis of work engagement interventions also identified a few interventions that focused on job resource building, but a closer examination of the interventions revealed that the focus was mostly on educating leaders, job training, and physical activity. In another meta-analysis of controlled trials, Vîrgȃ et al (2021)…”
Section: Jd-r Intervention Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Knight et al's (2017) systematic review and meta-analysis of work engagement interventions also identified a few interventions that focused on job resource building, but a closer examination of the interventions revealed that the focus was mostly on educating leaders, job training, and physical activity. In another meta-analysis of controlled trials, Vîrgȃ et al (2021)…”
Section: Jd-r Intervention Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Future intervention research may want to use outcomes that are less susceptible to psychological biases, for example, objective financial results and client satisfaction ratings. Regarding the longer term impact, Vîrga ˘, Maricut ¸oiu, and Iancu (2019) showed in their meta-analysis of work engagement interventions that the intervention effect decreases as the time lag increases. Moreover, their moderator analysis showed that the effectiveness decreases steeply after 3 months since the end of the intervention.…”
Section: Strengths and Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another choice regarding the method of delivery is related to the face‐to‐face versus online nature of interventions. Previous studies found the effectiveness of online interventions to be comparable to the effectiveness of face‐to‐face interventions (Barak, Hen, Boniel‐Nissim, & Shapira, 2008; Sitzmann, Kraiger, Stewart, & Wisher, 2006), and to be a less time‐consuming and expensive option (Vîrgă, Maricuţoiu, & Lancu, 2019). However, online interventions are also associated with high dropout rates of 50 percent and higher (Bausch, Michel, & Sonntag, 2014; Nistor & Neubauer, 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%