Department of Sociology, University of Geneva, Ginevra, Switzerland.
Swiss Centre of Expertise in Life Course Research LIVES, Lausanne, Switzerland.
PLoS One. 2024 Aug 19;19(8):e0305567. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0305567. eCollection 2024.
Studies of teleworking and well-being increased dramatically during the COVID-19 pandemic. This article aims to provide an overview of this emerging body of knowledge. Following the PRISMA guidelines, we performed a scoping review using Social Sciences Citation Index (Web of Science), Sociological Abstracts (PROQUEST), and SocINDEX with full text (EBSCOhost). Articles published in English up to December 2022 were included. The result was a total of 2695 potentially relevant studies. After a double-screening procedure, 132 studies were chosen for data extraction. A content analysis was carried out to provide a summary of the social mechanisms linking teleworking to indicators of well-being related to mental health and quality of life. A complex picture of variables emerges on the impact of teleworking through direct or indirect mechanisms and a number of interactions with worker's characteristics. First, the features of the environment matter, as it affects well-being, for example, depending on a better digital infrastructure, access to daylight and sufficient space. Second, it is not only a question of "where" we telework, but also "how much". The advantages of a hybrid mode seem to be emerging to avoid an excessive lack of in-person social interaction, while offering greater flexibility in organizing daily life and reducing commuting times. Third, beyond the modalities of teleworking per se, it is key to take into account how these interact with workers' personalities, their choices and preferences, which are often dictated by the stage of life they are in, e.g., parenting and career stages. In sum, the literature suggests that a straight answer on the positive or negative effects of teleworking is neither useful nor necessary. Multiple answers are possible to unveil the specific working arrangements that makes workers' lives better according to their different needs. It seems essential to continue research on teleworking away from the exceptional stressors of the COVID-19 pandemic, which have greatly skewed the evidence on the detrimental effects of teleworking. Planning more complex research designs using longitudinal data and network analyses could improve understanding of how teleworking is changing careers, lifestyles and social relationships.
新冠疫情期间，远程办公与福祉的研究数量显著增加。本文旨在对这一新兴知识领域进行概述。我们根据 PRISMA 指南，通过社会科学引文索引（Web of Science）、社会学文摘（PROQUEST）和社会索引全文（EBSCOhost），对远程办公与福祉的相关文献进行了范围界定式综述。纳入截至 2022 年 12 月发表的英文文献。研究结果共有 2695 篇潜在相关文献。经过双重筛选程序，选择了 132 篇文献进行数据提取。通过内容分析，总结了将远程办公与心理健康和生活质量相关福祉指标联系起来的社会机制。通过直接或间接机制以及与工人特征的多种相互作用，远程办公对福祉的影响呈现出一幅复杂的图景。首先，环境特征很重要，因为它会影响福祉，例如，更好的数字基础设施、接触自然光和足够的空间。其次，问题不仅在于“我们在哪里”远程办公，还在于“工作多少”。混合模式的优势似乎正在显现，以避免过度缺乏面对面的社交互动，同时提供更大的灵活性来组织日常生活并减少通勤时间。第三，除了远程办公本身的模式，关键是要考虑这些模式如何与工人的个性、他们的选择和偏好相互作用，这些通常是由他们所处的生活阶段决定的，例如，育儿和职业阶段。总之，文献表明，对远程办公的积极或消极影响给出一个直接的答案既没有用处也没有必要。根据工人的不同需求，有多种答案可以揭示使工人生活更美好的具体工作安排。从新冠疫情这一特殊压力源中，远离对远程办公负面影响的研究，继续对远程办公进行研究似乎至关重要，这极大地歪曲了远程办公有害影响的证据。使用纵向数据和网络分析进行更复杂的研究设计，可以提高对远程办公如何改变职业、生活方式和社会关系的理解。
