Enriching or Depleting? The Dynamics of Engagement in Work and Family Roles

By Nancy P. Rothbard. 2001

1,948 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/35d8aaa9468eb7e3bb78d4086d57b233cb759ddb

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Managing Multiple Roles: Work-Family Policies and Individuals' Desires for Segmentation (2005, background): “Moreover, greater segmentation reduces interruptions, allowing people to focus more exclusively on the salient role (Ashforth et al. 2000, Rothbard 2001, Rothbard and Edwards 2003).”
Work Engagement and its Relationship with State and Trait Trust: A Conceptual Analysis (2008, background): “As a consequence employees would devote less attention to their work and would be less involved psychologically while performing their job tasks, which may lead to disengagement from work (Kahn, 1990; Rothbard, 2001; May et. al., 2004, Saks, 2006).”
Thriving at work—A diary study (2012, background): “Moreover, when focused on the task, individuals are more likely to become absorbed in their work (Rothbard, 2001) and thus feel vital (Ryan & Deci, 2000).”
Toward a Relational Theory of Employee Engagement: Understanding Authenticity, Transparency, and Employee Behaviors (2020, background): “In like manner, Rothbard (2001) defined engagement as “psychological presence” involving attention (“cognitive availability and the amount of time one spends thinking about a role”) and absorption (“means being engrossed in a role and refers to the intensity of one’s focus on a role”) (p. 656).”
Principal self-efficacy and work engagement: assessing a Norwegian Principal Self-Efficacy Scale (2011, background): “Absorption referred to the intensity of one’s focus on a role (for more extensive reading see Rothbard 2001).”
The Jingle Jangle of Employee Engagement (2013, background): “Following this logic, scholars have even considered commitment to be the prior reason for the state of engagement (Robinson, Perryman, & Hayday, 2004; Rothbard, 2001).”
The Energizing Nature of Work Engagement: Toward a New Need-Based Theory of Work Motivation (2017, background): “, 2002), while other work suggests that the energy reflected in the definition of engagement is a consequence of emotional experiences (e.g., Macey & Schneider, 2008; Rothbard, 2001; Rothbard & Patil, 2012) sometimes referred to as affective events.”
Authentic leadership, trust and work engagement (2011, background): “Unlike satisfaction, work engagement includes a person’s attachment towards his/her organization [37], it is not momentary and specific state [54] but rather more persistent”
Emotional Mechanisms Linking Incivility at Work to Aggression and Withdrawal at Home: An Experience-Sampling Study (2018, background): “…spillover effects have tended to focus on general emotions such as positive or negative affect (e.g., Ilies, Schwind, Wagner, et al., 2007; Rothbard, 2001) and did not examine whether specific marital behaviors (such as aggression) are linked to specific emotions (such as hostility)…”
Examining workplace mindfulness and its relations to job performance and turnover intention (2014, background): “While some researchers have coupled absorption with the concept of flow (e.g. Rothbard, 2001; Salanova et al., 2006), flow may represent a specific form of absorption – one associated with optimally challenging activities and peak performance experiences (Schaufeli et al., 2002; see also Quinn,…”
An investigation into the validity of two measures of work engagement (2012, methodology): “Given that there are currently at least two other engagement measures that have appeared in the academic literature in recent years (Rothbard 2001; Saks 2006) as well as a short-version of the UWES (Schaufeli et al. 2006), there is an urgent need for more research on the measurement of work…”
Too much of a good thing: Curvilinear effect of positive affect on proactive behaviors (2014, background): “…Beal, Green, & Weiss, 2008) and after work (Sonnentag, Binnewies, & Mojza, 2008), enhancing employees’ feeling of energy through providing autonomy, sense of competence, and belongingness (Quinn, Spreitzer, & Lam, 2012), and providing support to manage work–family conflict (Rothbard, 2001).”
Engage Them to Public Service (2013, background): “, 2006), it is not the only measure of EE (May, Gilson, & Harter, 2004; Rich et al., 2010; Rothbard, 2001).”
Workaholism and work engagement: how are they similar? How are they different? A systematic review and meta-analysis (2019, background): “Rothbard (2001), partially inspired by Kahn’s (1990) conceptualization, defined engagement as a two-dimensional construct comprising attention (the cognitions and time spent thinking about one’s role at work) and absorption (the intensity of one’s focus on one’s role at work).”