Open AccessA Review of Methodological Choices Relating to Work-Life Boundary Research
Author(s) -
Sulakshana De Alwis,
Patrik Hernwall
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
managing global transitions
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 1854-6935
pISSN - 1581-6311
DOI - 10.26493/1854-6935.19.73-101
Subject(s) - management science , variety (cybernetics) , reliability (semiconductor) , boundary (topology) , research design , validity , field (mathematics) , work (physics) , systematic review , data collection , psychology , applied psychology , data science , computer science , sociology , social science , psychometrics , medline , clinical psychology , engineering , political science , mechanical engineering , mathematical analysis , power (physics) , physics , mathematics , quantum mechanics , artificial intelligence , law , pure mathematics
A methodological review was performed on work-life boundary-related studies published from the year 2010 to 2018. This review systematically selected 59 journal articles on the work boundary phenomenon. The selection criteria for this review closely followed three previous systematic methodological reviews performed on work-life research. Where possible, comparisons were made to integrate the findings of the current study with these previous systematic reviews. Articles were reviewed based on methodological choices such as research design, sampling strategy, data collection, data analysis, reliability, and validity measures. Findings of the review revealed that researchers had utilised a variety of methodological stances to conduct their studies. The majority of the studies in the field followed a quantitative approach, and most studies relating to work boundary management were field studies with a cross-sectional design. Qualitative studies in the area were primarily based on grounded theory. Significant methodological gaps were identified that could be bridged by future studies. Further, notable suggestions were proposed relating to reliability and validity measures taken by the researchers.