A Scientometric Analysis on Employee Well-Being Interest – Current Status and Possible Development of Research554924

Introduction

The concept of employee well-being has enjoyed increasing interest among scientists and a growing number of publications. Examples from recent years include publications by authors such as Khatri, P. and Gupta, P. (2019), Molnár, C., Papp, C. and Juhasz, T. (2024), Stankevičienė, A., Tamaševičius, V., Diskiene, D., Grakauskas, Ž. and Rudinskaja, L. (2021), Wilczyński, A. and Kołoszycz, E. (2023), who write about both the phenomenon itself and tools, models or scales.

The growing interest in the topic of employee well-being was particularly visible during the COVID-19 pandemic, when, among others, the effects of lockdown on organizational behavior, including employee behavior and well-being, were analyzed. For example, Carnevale, JB. and Hatak, I. (2020) highlighted the implications of COVID-19 for employee well-being and HRM, while De Kock, JH., Latham, HA., Leslie, SJ., Grindle, M., Munoz, S-A., Ellis, L., Polson, R. and O’Malley, CM. (2021) as well as Denning, M., Goh, ET., Tan, B.,  Kanneganti, A., Almonte, M., Scott, A., Martin, G., Clarke, J., Sounderajah, V., Markar, S., Przybylowicz, J., Chan, YH., Sia, C-H., Chua, YX., Sim, K., Lim, L., Tan, L., Tan, M., Sharma, V., Ooi, S., Beatty, JW., Flott, K., Mason, S., Chidambaram, S., Yalamanchili, S., Zbikowska, G., Fedorowski, J., Dykowska, G., Wells, M., Purkayastha, S. and Kinross, J. (2021) analyzed the impact of the pandemic on psychological well-being. Möhring, K., Naumann, E., Reifenscheid, M., Wenz, A., Rettig, T., Krieger, U., Friedel, S., Finkel, M., Cornesse, C. and Blom, AG. (2021) studied the effects of COVID-19 on subjective well-being, while Ripp, J., Peccoralo, L. and Charney, D. (2020) considered its relevance to emotional well-being. Xiao, YJ., Becerik-Gerber, B., Lucas, G. and Roll, SC. (2021) assessed the impact of working from home during the pandemic on physical and mental well-being, while Núñez-Sánchez, JM., Gómez-Chacón, R., Jambrino-Maldonando, C. and Garcia-Fernandez, J. (2021) looked at the corporate well-being program during the COVID-19 era.

The aim of the paper is to answer questions that arise in the context of the growing interest in this research area, namely:

Q1. Representatives of which fields of science conduct research on the issue of employee well-being?

Q2. In what contexts do scientists consider the issue of employee well-being?

Q3. What research topics represent the potential for the development of research on employee well-being in the coming years?

The responses obtained to such questions may be of interest to representatives of at least several fields of science. They may constitute a guide for them in searching for current contexts and potential for future research and a hint where it is worth publishing in order to obtain the greatest potential for disseminating the acquired knowledge.

Materials and methods

Data preparation

The bibliographic data were from the Web of Science Core Collection, which in the opinion of Estoque, RC., Togawa, T., Ooba, M., Gomi, K., Nakamura, S., Hijioka, Y. and Kameyama, Y. (2019) and Zhang, J., Yu, Q., Zheng, F., Long, C., Lu, Z. and Duan, Z. (2016) is the most often used platform that, according to Martínez, MA., Herrera, M., Contreras, E., Ruiz, A. and Herrera-Viedma, E. (2015) and Sánchez-Núñez, P., Cobo, MJ., de las Heras-Pedrosa, C., Peláez, JI. and Herrera-Viedma, E. (2020), contains the most precise and reliable research information, and a large number of analysis tools to process it.

First, we searched for the concept of well-being in the context of work to see how much interest there is in this issue. We received 19,003 records. The first text listed in the database is dated 01.06.1934, and it is the article by Zimmermann, EW. (1934). The period of interest in this issue can, therefore, be assumed to be 91 years, with significant increases in the number of publications occurring in 2004, when the annual number of texts exceeded 100 items, and 2019, when it exceeded 1,000 for the first time. In the period 2019-2024, a total of 62.14% of all studies were published (Fig 1).

Fig 1. Number of publications on employee well-being (01.01.1934 – 21.09.2024)

Source: Author’s own elaboration

Analytical approach

We limited the publication database downloaded from Web of Science to articles, review articles and proceeding papers (total 94.54% of publications), and subjected it to a preliminary analysis, defining top ten research areas and WoS categories, to determine the sciences where research on employee well-being is most often conducted. We also

checked which journals publish the most studies from this research area. In the second step, we limited the database to articles and review articles, as publications guaranteeing the highest quality of studies, subjected to thorough reviews. For mapping, we adopted texts in English, and limited the analysis period to texts from 01.01.2019 to 21.09.2024, in order to indicate the most current contexts and areas of research (Fig 2).

Fig 2. Flowchart of the bibliographic search and selection process

Source: Author’s own elaboration

We used the VOSviewer program to perform the scientometric analysis. VOSviewer is a program developed by Nees Jan van Eck and Ludo Waltman from Centre for Science and Technology Studies of Leiden University that unify mapping and clustering techniques to run scientometric research. VOSviewer can be used to construct maps of keywords and terms based on co-occurrence data or to construct maps of authors or journals based on co-citation data. The program can display a map in various different ways, each emphasizing a different aspect of the visualization. As van Eck, NJ. and Waltman, L. (2010) and Waltman, L., van Eck, NJ. and Noyons, ECM. (2010) point out, the viewing capabilities of VOSviewer are especially useful for analyzing large number of items.

We used two modules available in the program:

• author keywords co-occurrence analysis,
• terms co-occurrence analysis.

We prepared both maps taking into account previously developed thesauruses, in which we removed all terms related to the COVID-19 pandemic from the original results. During the pandemic and immediately after it, a great many publications were published in which the authors analyzed the impact of the pandemic on employee well-being, but it cannot be assumed that such papers will make a significant contribution to the research field in the coming years. When preparing the thesauruses, we also removed commonly occurring words unrelated to employee well-being (e.g. researcher, future, conclusions), terms related to publishing data (e.g. journal, series, volume), names of research methods, and we also adopted a single way of writing synonymous the ones or terms included in the texts both in the singular and plural. The described corrections allowed us to obtain clearer maps, giving a picture of the current approaches to employee well-being research by scientists from various fields of science, looking at EWB from different research perspectives.

Results

Research areas analysis

If we look at the number of fields of knowledge whose representatives publish studies on EWB, one should assume that it is definitely a multidisciplinary area that can be analyzed taking into account different points of view. In Table 1, we have included the top ten research areas and WoS categories in which scientists have published the most publications.

Table 1: Top ten research areas and WoS categories regarding the amount of publications

Source: Author’s own elaboration

The list shows that most publications in the analyzed topics are published by representatives of psychology, medical sciences, management sciences, sociology and environmental sciences. We also checked which journals published most papers. The top ones are: International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (483 papers; 2.67% of papers), Frontiers in Psychology (445; 2.46%), Sustainability (257; 1.42%), Plos ONE (165; 0.91%), Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (155; 0.86%), Journal of Occupational Health Psychology (138; 0.76%), WORK: A Journal of Prevention Assessment Rehabilitation (135; 0.75%), BMC Public Health (132; 0.73%), Work and Stress (124; 0.68%), BMJ Open (112; 0.62%). A total of 2,146 texts were published, which constitutes 11.84% of all publications.

Keywords and terms co-occurrence analyses

To answer the second question: Q2. In what contexts do scientists consider the issue of employee well-being? and third question: Q3. What research topics represent the potential for the development of research on employee well-being in the coming years? we conducted analyses of the co-occurrence of keywords and terms. Identification of the most important research contexts in the area of ​​well-being will provide a basis for deeper or further research by interested scientists from the scientific disciplines indicated in the previous analysis.

The co-occurrence keyword analysis allows us to determine the main contexts of the analysis adopted by the authors. Therefore, we adopted the “author keywords” for the analysis, and, for the clarity of the results, we introduced the restriction of the minimum number of occurrences of a keyword: 20. The visualization contains 201 words out of the 20,555 that the authors included in their articles. The words were arranged into 9 clusters (Fig 3).

Fig 3. Author keyword co-occurrence map

Source: Author’s own elaboration

The keyword that appears most frequently in the analyzed set is “well-being” (1,821), which should not be surprising, considering the subject of this analysis and the fact that it is a superior category to “employee well-being”, which is in second place in terms of the number of occurrences. The word “well-being” also has the most connections with other keywords (189) and is most frequently connected with the remaining ones (2,902). For “employee well-being”, these values ​​are: 781, 163 and 1,052. The top five keywords in the individual categories of their importance are presented in Table 2.

 Table 2: Top five keywords regarding main values for keyword net

Source: Author’s own elaboration

A deeper insight into contexts is provided by cluster analysis. The largest of them (red) groups words with very different meanings, and it is the most diverse, and it is difficult to determine the leading subject in it. Keywords in this cluster have very general meanings. They are most frequently associated with the others: employee well-being, job satisfaction, work engagement, psychological well-being, and subjective well-being. The situation is similar in the second largest cluster (green), where most associations with the remaining keywords are: well-being, mental health, workplace, work and intervention.

Interesting combinations occur in the third cluster where words of significant importance for research relevant from the point of view of the current development of science appear. They can be divided into 3 groups, which we defined as: modern technologies (keywords: digitalization, artificial intelligence, social media, industry 4.0, industry 5.0 and machine learning), sustainable development (sustainability, sustainable development, social sustainability and corporate social responsibility) and green economy (environment, ecosystem services, climate change).

The yellow cluster contains words that primarily concern two areas that we identified: health care system (health care workers, health care, hospital, physicians, nurses, patient safety, medical education) and employee support (compassion, compassion fatigue, and empathy).

Among the remaining clusters, the thematic connections are shown by the orange and brown clusters. In the first cluster, the words primarily concern: organizational life (human resource management, leadership, managers, organizational change, and organizational culture) and violence (bullying, discrimination, and stigma). The second contains keywords related to the effects of low well-being in employees (anxiety, depression, fatigue, occupational stress, and sleep quality).

We completed the keyword analysis by conducting a term co-occurrence analysis using the option “terms from title and abstract fields”. We assumed 40 as the minimum number of occurrences of a term. As a result, out of 152,786 terms appearing in the set of documents, 266 met the threshold, and of these the most relevant were 160 (relevance score 60%). The map contains 5 clusters connecting mutually related terms (Fig 4).

Fig 4. Term co-occurrence map

Source: Author’s own elaboration

The red cluster dominates the map. The leading topics in it are:

• employee well-being: job satisfaction, life satisfaction, happiness, flourishing, optimism, vitality, vigor [for example the articles of Cooper, B., Wang, J., Bartram, T. and Cooke, FL. (2019); Darvishmotevali, M. and Ali, F. (2020); Gray, P., Senabe, S., Naicker, N., Kgalamono, S., Yassi, A. and Spiegel, JM. (2019); Greenier, V., Derakhshan, A. and Fathi, J. (2021); Scanlan, JN. and Still, M. (2019)],
• leadership: supervisor, supervisor support, leadership, leadership style, transformational leadership, servant leadership and authentic leadership [for example the articles of Kaluza, AJ., Boer, D., Buengeler, C. and van Dick, R. (2020); Salas-Vallina, A., Alegre, J. and López-Cabrales, A. (2021); Sarwar, H., Ishaq, MI., Amin, A. and Siddiqi, RA. (2020); Tummers, LG. and Bakker, AB. (2021); Zeike, S., Bradbury, K., Lindert, L. and Pfaff, H. (2019)],
• modern technologies: remote work, remote worker, knowledge worker, communication technology and technostress [for example the articles of Borle, P., Reichel, K., Niebuhr, F. and Voelter-Mahlknecht, S. (2021); Charalampous, M., Grant, C., Tramontano, C. and Michailidis, E. (2019); Papagiannidis, S. and Marikyan, D. (2020); Pfaffinger, KF., Reif, JAM. and Spieß, E. (2022); Wang, B., Liu, Y. and Parker, SK. (2020)],
• human resource management: human resource management, resources theory, job demands resource and resources model [for example the articles of Ho, H. and Kuvaas, B. (2020); Lesener, T., Gusy, B. and Wolter, C. (2019); Ogbonnaya, C. and Messersmith, J. (2019); Peccei, R. and van de Voorde, K. (2019); Radic, A., Arjona-Fuentes, JM., Ariza-Montes, A., Han, H. and Law, R. (2020)].
• The terms in the green cluster concern medicine, i.e. diseases, treatment and the health care system [for example the articles of Liu, JL., Zheng, J., Liu, K., Wu, Y. and You, L. (2019); Holland, P., Tham, TL., Sheehan, C. and Cooper, B. (2019); Lawn, S., Roberts, L., Willis, E., Couzner, L., Mohammadi, L. and Goble, E. (2020); Slutsky, J., Chin, B., Raye, J. and Creswell, JD. (2019); Vonderlin, R., Biermann, M., Bohus, M. and Lyssenko, L. (2020)].

The blue cluster is similar in content to the third cluster on the keyword map as it contains terms relating to:

• green economy and sustainability: sustainability, sustainable development, ecosystem, climate change, utilization, energy, water, food and nutrition [for example the articles of Ahmed, M., Zehou, S., Raza, SA., Qureshi, MA. and Yousufi, SQ. (2020); Amrutha, VN. And Geetha, SN. (2020); Fonseca, LM., Domingues, JP. and Dima, AM. (2020); Singh, SK., Pradhan, RK., Panigrahy, NP. and Jena, LK. (2019); Wang, BJ., Zhang, Q. and Ciu, F. (2021)],
• technology: Internet, digital technology, artificial intelligence, smartphone, construction industry, construction worker, machine [for example the articles of Bhavan, A., Chauhan, P., Hitkul, null. and Shah, RR. (2019); Bianchi, V., Bassoli, M., Lombardo, G., Fornacciari, P., Mordonini, M. and Munari, ID. (2019); Lu, YQ., Zheng, H., Chand, S., Xia, W., Liu, Z., Xu, X., Wang, L., Qin, Z. and Bao, J. (2022); Parker, SK. and Grote, G. (2022); Sherafat, B., Ahn, CR., Akhavian, R., Behzadan, AH., Golparvar-Fard, M., Kim, H., Lee, Y-C., Rashidi, A. and Azar, ER. (2020)].

The terms in the fourth cluster are related to workplace violence: harassment, workplace bullying and workplace violence [for example the articles of Ahmad, S., Sohal, AS. and Cox, JW. (2020); Hayat, A. and Afshari, L. (2021); Rasool, SF., Wang, M., Tang, M., Saeed, A. and Iqbal, J. (2021); Ross, V., Mathieu, SL., Wardhani, R., Gullestrup, J. and Kõlves, K. (2021); Zhou, X., Rasool, SF. and Ma, D. (2020)]. The last cluster contains only two terms and has no diagnostic significance from the point of view of the research issues.

In accordance with the results of the scientometric analysis based on the visualization of author keywords co-occurrence and terms co-occurrence, it can be assumed that several research contexts are currently involved. Below we have presented the research areas, along with the paths to find publications for each of them.

1. The essence of employee well-being (concept, subcategories, models, consequences)

https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/summary/83a4aa10-5dd9-45cb-8b56-5e2ce705b851-01203f4ab6/relevance/1

2. Health care

https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/summary/71920c32-2795-477f-8300-21e1afbe2091-01204588df/relevance/1

3. HRM and leadership

https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/summary/6ea0c2e8-3bf9-4c37-9fb4-25ec593bdc7e-01204fd845/relevance/1

4. Other aspects of organizational life

https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/summary/f6917a89-69be-4819-adc3-548e38d828f5-01204cfa0f/relevance/1

5. Modern technology

https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/summary/0ed90662-8ef0-4c77-bb1b-94ac0587e498-0120cc90ab/relevance/1

6. Green economy and sustainable development

https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/summary/2df1ae9f-5033-4b48-99f3-f92caad15259-0120572f69/relevance/1

The first of these are already well-established in science. The two areas indicated at the end of the list are the latest contexts of interest for scientists analyzing the issue of employee well-being. In Table 3, we have presented the values ​​of the number of publications, shares, and citations for each of the defined research areas.

Table 3: Numerical characteristics of research areas related to EWB

* Some papers cover multiple topics and may therefore appear more than once in searches we defined.

Source: Author’s own elaboration

The earliest research areas analyzed in the context of employee well-being are general issues, then the context of HRM and leadership. Subsequently, publications in the WoS database appeared in the areas of health care, technology in general, and references to other aspects of organizational life. The last chronological issues are modern technologies and green economy paired with sustainable development.

More than a thousand publications in the database appeared in the areas of general knowledge, health, HRM and other issues related to the organization. However, taking into account the number of papers published in the period covered by the analysis (01.01.2019-21.09.2024), it can be stated that the literature on HRM and leadership is developing more dynamically than that covering other issues related to the organizational perspective.

In turn, comparing the number of papers published in the period under consideration with the number of all those published in a given research aspect, it can be stated that the areas of modern technologies, green economy, sustainable development, HRM and leadership are very interesting for scientists. They constitute a small share in all publications in the field of employee well-being, but they show a high increase in the number of publications in recent years. The same is true for the average citation rate of publications from these three areas, which exceeds an average of 14 citations per article (the highest value concerns modern technologies: 19.40).

Based on the analyses conducted, we hypothesize that in the coming years it will still be possible to observe scientists’ interest in all aspects of employee well-being defined in the paper, both those most firmly established in science (the essence of employee well-being, health, HRM and leadership, and other organizational aspects) and the youngest (modern technologies and green economy, coupled with sustainable development). Taking into account the increase in the number of publications in recent years and the average level of citations in individual research areas, we also assume that the highest relative increase in the number of publications will be visible in relation to the last two areas.

Conclusions

This study is not without limitations. First of all, information was extracted from the Web of Science Core Collection database, which means that other databases, such as Scopus or Dimensions, were not analyzed. In the future, it would be worth conducting a similar study using data from other bibliographic databases.

Secondly, only articles and review articles were accepted for the analysis, skipping books or conference materials.

Thirdly, the articles in languages ​​other than English were omitted. In the case of comparative studies, including cross-cultural studies, which we mentioned in the previous point as potentially worth considering in the future, it would be worth including references published in other languages ​​in the analysis.

Fourthly, we used one of the programs for scientometric analysis (VOSviewer), and within its capabilities, two tools: author keywords co-occurrence analysis and terms co-occurrence analysis. In order to determine the potential for further research, one can use the bibliographic coupling tool, also available in VOSviewer.

Referring to the first question posed in this study (Q1: Representatives of which fields of science conduct research on the issue of employee well-being?), it should be stated that most studies related to employee well-being were recorded in the following research areas: Psychology (4,048), Business Economics (3,650), Public Environmental Occupational Health (2,857), Environmental Sciences Ecology (1,200), Social Sciences Other Topics (1,104), Engineering (971), Educational Research (873), Health Care Sciences Services (829), Nursing (780) and Science Technology Other Topics (695). In total, 93.84% of all studies were published in them.

Referring to the second question (Q2: In what contexts do scientists consider the issue of employee well-being?), it can be assumed that – in accordance with the results of the author keywords co-occurrence analysis – these are: well-being, mental health, burnout, job satisfaction, technologies, sustainable development, green economy, health care system, organizational life, violence, the effects of low well-being in employees.

Referring to the third question (Q3: What research topics constitute the potential for the development of research on employee well-being in the coming years?), based on both analyses (author keywords co-occurrence analysis and terms co-occurrence analysis), it can be assumed that the greatest potential for a dynamic increase in the relative number of studies and publications is in the research contexts defined by us as: modern technologies and green economy paired with sustainable development. It should be emphasized, however, that the remaining five areas defined by us are still interesting for scientists and in the coming future they will deepen their knowledge in these areas.

References

• Ahmad, S., Sohal, AS. and Cox, JW. (2020) ‘Leading well is not enough A new insight from the ethical leadership, workplace bullying and employee well-being relationships’, European Business Review, 32 (2), 159-180.
• Ahmed, M., Zehou, S., Raza, SA., Qureshi, MA. and Yousufi, SQ. (2020) ‘Impact of CSR and environmental triggers on employee green behavior: The mediating effect of employee well-being’, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 27 (5), 2225-2239.
• Amrutha, VN. And Geetha, SN. (2020) ‘A systematic review on green human resource management: Implications for social sustainability’, Journal of Cleaner Production 247, 1119131.
• Beas, MI. and Salanova, M. (2006) ‘Self-efficacy beliefs, computer training and psychological well-being among information and communication technology workers’, Computers in Human Behavior 22 (6), 1043-1058.
• Bhavan, A., Chauhan, P., Hitkul, null. and Shah, RR. (2019) ‘Bagged support vector machines for emotion recognition from speech’, Knowledge-Based Systems 184, 104886.
• Bianchi, V., Bassoli, M., Lombardo, G., Fornacciari, P., Mordonini, M. and Munari, ID. (2019) ‘IoT Wearable Sensor and Deep Learning: An Integrated Approach for Personalized Human Activity Recognition in a Smart Home Environment’, IEEE Internet of Things Journal 6 (5), 8553-8562.
• Borle, P., Reichel, K., Niebuhr, F. and Voelter-Mahlknecht, S. (2021) ‘How Are Techno-Stressors Associated with Mental Health and Work Outcomes? A Systematic Review of Occupational Exposure to Information and Communication Technologies within the Technostress Model’, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18 (16), 8673.
• Carnevale, JB. and Hatak, I. (2020) ‘Employee adjustment and well-being in the era of COVID-19: Implications for human resource management’, Journal of Business Research 116, 183-187.
• Charalampous, M., Grant, C., Tramontano, C. and Michailidis, E. (2019) ‘Systematically reviewing remote e-workers’ well-being at work: a multidimensional approach’, European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 28 (1), 51.
• Cooper, B., Wang, J., Bartram, T. and Cooke, FL. (2019) ‘Well-being-oriented human resource management practices and employee performance in the Chinese banking sector: The role of social climate and resilience’, Human Resource Management 58 (1), 85-97.
• Darvishmotevali, M. and Ali, F. (2020) ‘Job insecurity, subjective well-being and job performance: The moderating role of psychological capital’, International Journal of Hospitality Management 87, 102462.
• De Kock, JH., Latham, HA., Leslie, SJ., Grindle, M., Munoz, S-A., Ellis, L., Polson, R. and O’Malley, CM. (2021) ‘A rapid review of the impact of COVID-19 on the mental health of healthcare workers: implications for supporting psychological well-being’, BMC Public Health 21 (1), 104.
• Denning, M., Goh, ET., Tan, B.,  Kanneganti, A., Almonte, M., Scott, A., Martin, G., Clarke, J., Sounderajah, V., Markar, S., Przybylowicz, J., Chan, YH., Sia, C-H., Chua, YX., Sim, K., Lim, L., Tan, L., Tan, M., Sharma, V., Ooi, S., Beatty, JW., Flott, K., Mason, S., Chidambaram, S., Yalamanchili, S., Zbikowska, G., Fedorowski, J., Dykowska, G., Wells, M., Purkayastha, S. and Kinross, J. (2021) ‘Determinants of burnout and other aspects of psychological well-being in healthcare workers during the Covid-19 pandemic: A multinational cross-sectional study’, PLOS ONE 16 (4), e0238666.
• Estoque, RC., Togawa, T., Ooba, M., Gomi, K., Nakamura, S., Hijioka, Y. and Kameyama, Y. (2019) ‘A review of quality of life (QOL) assessments and indicators: Towards a “QOL-Climate” assessment framework’, AMBIO 48, 619–638.
• Fonseca, LM., Domingues, JP. and Dima, AM. (2020) ‘Mapping the Sustainable Development Goals Relationships’, Sustainability 12 (8),
• Frankenhaeuser, M. (1977) ‘Job Demands, Health And Wellbeing’, Journal of Psychosomatic Research 21 (4), 313-321.
• Gray, P., Senabe, S., Naicker, N., Kgalamono, S., Yassi, A. and Spiegel, JM. (2019) ‘Workplace-Based Organizational Interventions Promoting Mental Health and Happiness among Healthcare Workers: A Realist Review’, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 16 (22), 4396.
• Greenier, V., Derakhshan, A. and Fathi, J. (2021) ‘Emotion regulation and psychological well-being in teacher work engagement: A case of British and Iranian English language teachers’, System 97, 102446.
• Hayat, A. and Afshari, L. (2021) ‘Supportive organizational climate: a moderated mediation model of workplace bullying and employee well-being’, Personnel Review 50 (7-8), 1685-1704.
• Ho, H. and Kuvaas, B. (2020) ‘Human resource management systems, employee well-being, and firm performance from the mutual gains and critical perspectives: The well-being paradox’, Human Resource Management 59 (3), 235-253.
• Holland, P., Tham, TL., Sheehan, C. and Cooper, B. (2019) ‘The impact of perceived workload on nurse satisfaction with work-life balance and intention to leave the occupation’, Applied Nursing Research 49, 70-76.
• Kaluza, AJ., Boer, D., Buengeler, C. and van Dick, R. (2020) ‘Leadership behaviour and leader self-reported well-being: A review, integration and meta-analytic examination’, Work and Stress 34 (1), 34-56.
• Khatri, P. and Gupta, P. (2019) ‘Development and validation of employee wellbeing scale – a formative measurement model. Employee wellbeing scale’, International Journal of Workplace Health Management, 12 (5), 352-368.
• Lawn, S., Roberts, L., Willis, E., Couzner, L., Mohammadi, L. and Goble, E. (2020) ‘The effects of emergency medical service work on the psychological, physical, and social well-being of ambulance personnel: a systematic review of qualitative research’, BMC Psychiatry 20 (1), 348.
• Lesener, T., Gusy, B. and Wolter, C. (2019) ‘The job demands-resources model: A meta-analytic review of longitudinal studies’, Work and Stress 33 (1), 76-103.
• Liu, JL., Zheng, J., Liu, K., Wu, Y. and You, L. (2019) ‘Workplace violence against nurses, job satisfaction, burnout, and patient safety in Chinese hospitals’, Nursing Outlook 67 (5), 558-566.
• Lu, YQ., Zheng, H., Chand, S., Xia, W., Liu, Z., Xu, X., Wang, L., Qin, Z. and Bao, J. (2022) ‘Outlook on human-centric manufacturing towards Industry 5.0’, Journal of Manufacturing Systems 62, 612-627.
• Martínez, MA., Herrera, M., Contreras, E., Ruiz, A. and Herrera-Viedma, E. (2015) ‘Characterizing Highly Cited Papers in Social Work through H-Classics’, Scientometrics 102, 1713-1729.
• Menzies, D., Pasztor, J., Rand, T. and Bourbeau, J. (1999) ‘Germicidal ultraviolet irradiation in air conditioning systems: effect on office worker health and wellbeing: a pilot study’, Occupational and Environmental Medicine 56 (6), 397-402.
• Moen, P. and Forest, KB. (1990) ‘Working parents, workplace supports, and well-being – the Swedish experience’, Social Psychology Quarterly 53 (2), 117-131.
• Möhring, K., Naumann, E., Reifenscheid, M., Wenz, A., Rettig, T., Krieger, U., Friedel, S., Finkel, M., Cornesse, C. and Blom, AG. (2021) ‘The COVID-19 pandemic and subjective well-being: longitudinal evidence on satisfaction with work and family’, European Societies 23, 601-617.
• Molnár, C., Papp, C. and Juhasz, T. (2024) ‘Organizational strategies and tools of employee well-being perceived by employees’, Management and Marketing 19 (2), 336-361.
• Núñez-Sánchez, JM., Gómez-Chacón, R., Jambrino-Maldonando, C. and Garcia-Fernandez, J. (2021) ‘Corporate Well-Being Programme in COVID-19 Times. The Mahou San Miguel Case Study’, Sustainability 13 (11), 6189.
• Ogbonnaya, C. and Messersmith, J. (2019) ‘Employee performance, well-being, and differential effects of human resource management subdimensions: Mutual gains or conflicting outcomes?’, Human Resource Management Journal 29 (3), 509-526.
• Papagiannidis, S. and Marikyan, D. (2020) ‘Smart offices: A productivity and well-being perspective’, International Journal of Information Management 51, 102027.
• Parker, SK. and Grote, G. (2022) ‘Automation, Algorithms, and Beyond: Why Work Design Matters More Than Ever in a Digital World’, Applied Psychology – An International Review – Psychologie Appliquee – Revue Internationale 71 (4), 1171-1204.
• Peccei, R. and van de Voorde, K. (2019) ‘Human resource management-well-being-performance research revisited: Past, present, and future’, Human Resource Management Journal 29 (4), 539-563.
• Pfaffinger, KF., Reif, JAM. and Spieß, E. (2022) ‘When and why telepressure and technostress creators impair employee well-being’. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics 28 (2), 958-973.
• Porterfield, AL. (1947) ‘Rank of the states in professional leadership and social well-being’, Social Forces 25(3):303-309.
• Radic, A., Arjona-Fuentes, JM., Ariza-Montes, A., Han, H. and Law, R. (2020) ‘Job demands-job resources (JD-R) model, work engagement, and well-being of cruise ship employees’, International Journal of Hospitality Management 88, 102518.
• Rasool, SF., Wang, M., Tang, M., Saeed, A. and Iqbal, J. (2021) ‘How Toxic Workplace Environment Effects the Employee Engagement: The Mediating Role of Organizational Support and Employee Wellbeing’, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18 (5), 2294.
• Ripp, J., Peccoralo, L. and Charney, D. (2020) ‘Attending to the Emotional Well-Being of the Health Care Workforce in a New York City Health System During the COVID-19 Pandemic’, Academic Medicine 95 (8), 1136-1139.
• Ross, V., Mathieu, SL., Wardhani, R., Gullestrup, J. and Kõlves, K. (2021) ‘Factors Associated With Workplace Bullying and the Mental Health of Construction Industry Apprentices: A Mixed Methods Study’, Frontiers in Psychiatry 12, 629262.
• Salas-Vallina, A., Alegre, J. and López-Cabrales, A. (2021) ‘The challenge of increasing employees’ well-being and performance: How human resource management practices and engaging leadership work together toward reaching this goal’, Human Resource Management 60 (3), 333-347.
• Sánchez-Núñez, P., Cobo, MJ., de las Heras-Pedrosa, C., Peláez, JI. and Herrera-Viedma, E. (2020) ‘Opinion Mining, Sentiment Analysis and Emotion Understanding in Advertising: A Bibliometric Analysis’, IEEE 8, 134563-134576.
• Sarwar, H., Ishaq, MI., Amin, A. and Siddiqi, RA. (2020) ‘Ethical leadership, work engagement, employees’ well-being, and performance: a cross-cultural comparison’, Journal of Sustainable Tourism 28 (12), 2008-2026.
• Scanlan, JN. and Still, M. (2019) ‘Relationships between burnout, turnover intention, job satisfaction, job demands and job resources for mental health personnel in an Australian mental health service’, BMC Health Services Research 19, 62.
• Sherafat, B., Ahn, CR., Akhavian, R., Behzadan, AH., Golparvar-Fard, M., Kim, H., Lee, Y-C., Rashidi, A. and Azar, ER. (2020) ‘Automated Methods for Activity Recognition of Construction Workers and Equipment: State-of-the-Art Review’, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 146 (6), 3120002.
• Singh, SK., Pradhan, RK., Panigrahy, NP. and Jena, LK. (2019) ‘Self-efficacy and workplace well-being: moderating role of sustainability practices’, Benchmarking – An International Journal 26 (6), 1692-1708.
• Slutsky, J., Chin, B., Raye, J. and Creswell, JD. (2019) ‘Mindfulness Training Improves Employee Well-Being: A Randomized Controlled Trial’, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 12 (8), 3359.
• Stankevičienė, A., Tamaševičius, V., Diskiene, D., Grakauskas, Ž. and Rudinskaja, L. (2021) ‘The mediating effect of work-life balance on the relationship between work culture and employee well-being’, Journal of Business Economics and Management 22 (4), 988–1007.
• Tummers, LG. and Bakker, AB. (2021) ‘Leadership and Job Demands-Resources Theory: A Systematic Review’, Frontiers in Psychology 12, 722080.
• van Eck, NJ. and Waltman, L. (2010) ‘Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping’, Scientometrics 84, 523-538.
• Vonderlin, R., Biermann, M., Bohus, M. and Lyssenko, L. (2020) ‘Mindfulness-Based Programs in the Workplace: a Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials’, Mindfulness 11 (7), 1579-1598.
• Waltman, L., van Eck, NJ. and Noyons, ECM. (2010) ‘A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric net-works’, Journal of Informetrics 4 (4), 629-635.
• Wang, B., Liu, Y. and Parker, SK. (2020) ‘How does the use of Information Communication Technology affect individuals? A work design perspective’, Academy of Management Annals 14 (2), 695-725.
• Wang, BJ., Zhang, Q. and Ciu, F. (2021) ‘Scientific research on ecosystem services and human well-being: A bibliometric analysis’, Ecological Indicators 125, 107449.
• Wilczyński, A. and Kołoszycz, E. (2023) ‘Applying the PERMA model in employee wellbeing’, e-mentor 2 (99), 39-46.
• Xiao, YJ., Becerik-Gerber, B., Lucas, G. and Roll, SC. (2021) ‘Impacts of Working From Home During COVID-19 Pandemic on Physical and Mental Well-Being of Office Workstation Users’, Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine 63 (3), 181-190.
• Zacher, H. and Cort, WR. (2021) ‘Individual Differences and Changes in Subjective Wellbeing during the Early Stages of the COVID-19 Pandemic’, American Psychologist 76, 50–62.
• Zeike, S., Bradbury, K., Lindert, L. and Pfaff, H. (2019) ‘Digital Leadership Skills and Associations with Psychological Well-Being’, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 16 (14), 2628.
• Zhang, J., Yu, Q., Zheng, F., Long, C., Lu, Z. and Duan, Z. (2016) ‘Comparing keywords plus of WOS and author keywords: A case study of patient adherence research’, JASIST 67, 967-972.
• Zhou, X., Rasool, SF. and Ma, D. (2020) ‘The Relationship between Workplace Violence and Innovative Work Behavior: The Mediating Roles of Employee Wellbeing’, Healthcare 8 (3), 332.
• Zimmermann, EW. (1934) ‘The Relationship Between Output of Work and Economic Well-Being’, The American Economic Review 24 (2), 239-249.