Work-Family Boundaries in the Digital Age: A Study in France on Technological Intrusion, Work-Family Conflict, and Stress

Main Article Content

Marianna Giunchi
Marco Peña-Jimenez
Sara Petrilli


Off-work technology assisted supplemental work (off-TASW), work-family conflict (WFC), stress perceptions


Background: Since previous studies have shown that the request of off-work technology-assisted supplemental work (off-TASW) can contribute to blurring the boundaries between the work and family domain by increasing work- family conflict (WFC), the purpose of this study is to go further, investigating how this relationship impacts stress perceptions. Method: A cross-sectional study that involved a sample of 221 French workers was carried out using a self-reported questionnaire. The data collected were analyzed by IBM SPSS 25.0 software, and a mediation model was tested. Results: The results showed that off-TASW was associated with higher levels of WFC (b=.32; p=.000), which was in turn associated with stress perceptions (b=.42; p=.000). Conclusions: This study contributes to un- derstanding how the intrusion of technologies during off-work times impacts workers’ perceptions of psychological wellbeing through work-family conflict. These findings should encourage the debate on the risks of staying connected to work through technologies during off-work and leisure time and stimulate the promotion of campaigns to make workers aware of their right to disconnection, to the benefits of detachment from work and recovery experiences.

Abstract 320 | PDF Downloads 356


1. Chaumon M-E, Brangier E, Fadier E. Usage Des Technologies de l’Information et de La Communication et Bien-Être Au Travail. EMC - Pathologie Professionnelle et de L’environnement. 2014; 0, 1-9. Doi: 10.1016/S1877-7856(14)63745-4
2. Dorn D. La montée en puissance des machines : comment l’ordinateur a changé le travail. Revue française des affaires sociales. 2016; 35–63. Doi: 10.3917/rfas.161.0035
3. Derks D, Bakker AB. The Impact of E-mail Communication on Organizational Life. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace. 2010; 4(1), Article 4.
4. International Labour Office (ILO). 2020. Teleworking during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond A practical guide. Available online at: (last accessed 4-07-2023)
5. Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica Italiana. (2018) LEGGE 22 maggio 2017, n. 81 Misure per la tutela del lavoro autonomo non imprenditoriale e misure volte a favorire l'articolazione flessibile nei tempi e nei luoghi del lavoro subordinato. Available online at: (last accessed 4-07-2023)
6. Ďuranová L, Ohly S: Persistent Work-related Technology Use, Recovery and Well-being Processes: Focus on Supplemental Work After Hours. Cham (Zoug): Springer, 2015.
7. Ohly S, Latour A. (2014). Work-related smartphone use and well-being in the evening: The role of autonomous and controlled motivation. Journal of Personnel Psychology. 2014; 13(4), 174-183. Doi: 10.1027/1866-5888/a000114
8. Caroly S, Hubaut R, Guelle K, Landry A. Le travail digital, un enjeu pour les psychologues du travail : L’exemple de l’industrie 4.0. Le Journal des psychologues. 2019; 367, 27-32. Doi: 10.3917/jdp.367.0027
9. Richardson K, Benbunan-Fich R. Examining the antecedents of work connectivity behavior during non-work time. Information and Organization. 2011; 21(3), 142-160. Doi: 10.1016/j.infoandorg.2011.06.002
10. Giunchi M, Vonthron A-M. La relation entre l’usage professionnel des technologies numériques et l’addiction au travail médiatisée par les demandes psychologiques au travail : quelles différences entre les hommes et les femmes ? Psychologie du travail et des organisations. 2023. Doi: 10.1016/j.pto.2023.05.001
11. Ghislieri C, Dolce V, Sanseverino D, et al. Might insecurity and use of ICT enhance internet addiction and exhaust people? A study in two European countries during emergency remote working. Comp Hum Beh. 2022; 126, 107010. Doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2021.107010
12. Vayre E, Vonthron A-M. Identifying work-related Internet’s uses—at work and outside usual workplaces and hours—and their relationships with work–home interface, work engagement, and problematic Internet behavior. Frontiers in Psychology. 2019; 10. Doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02118
13. Turel O, Serenko A, Bontis N. Family and work-related consequences of addiction to organizational pervasive technologies. Information & Management. 2011; 48(2-3), 88-95. Doi: 10.1016/
14. Ghislieri C, Emanuel F, Molino M, et al. New Technologies Smart, or Harm Work-Family Boundaries Management? Gender Differences in Conflict and Enrichment Using the JD-R Theory. Front Psychol. 2017; 8, 1070. Doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01070
15. Dolce V, Vayre E, Molino M, Ghislieri C. Far Away, So Close? The Role of Destructive Leadership in the Job Demands–Resources and Recovery Model in Emergency Telework. Soc Sci. 2020; 9(11), 196. Doi: 10.3390/socsci9110196
16. Berg-Beckhoff G, Nielsen G, Ladekjær Larsen E. Use of information communication technology and stress, burnout, and mental health in older, middle-aged, and younger workers - results from a systematic review. Int J Occup Environ Health. 2017;23(2), 160-171. Doi: 10.1080/10773525.2018.1436015
17. Molino M, Cortese CG, Ghislieri C. Unsustainable Working Conditions: The Association of Destructive Leadership, Use of Technology, and Workload with Workaholism and Exhaustion. Sustainability. 2019; 11, 446. Doi: 10.3390/su11020446
18. Allen TD, Golden TD, Shockley KM. How Effective Is Telecommuting? Assessing the Status of Our Scientific Findings. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 2015; 16(2), 40-68. Doi: 10.1177/1529100615593273
19. Angelici M, Profeta P. Smart-Working: Work Flexibility Without Constraints. (2020). CESifo Working Paper No. 8165. Available online at: (last accessed 4-07-2023)
20. Marin R. Implementation of Telework in the European Union. J. Hum Res Man Res. 2021; 2021, 13. Doi: 10.5171/2021.857780
21. Klein T, Ratier D. L’impact des TIC sur les conditions de travail. Centre d’analyse stratégique, Direction générale du travail. Rapports et documents 49. Paris, France, 2012.
22. Boudokhane-Lima F, Felio C. Les usages professionnels des TIC : des régulations à construire. Comm Organ. 2015; 48, 139-150. Doi: 10.4000/communicationorganisation.5105
23. Howard H, Antczak R, Albertsen K. Third European Survey of Enterprises on New and Emerging Risks (ESENER 2019): Overview Report. How European workplaces manage safety and health. European Agency for Safety and Health at Work. 2022.
24. Ghislieri C, Molino M, Dolce V, et al. Work-family conflict during the Covid-19 pandemic: teleworking of administrative and technical staff in healthcare. An Italian study. Med Lav. 2021; 112(3), 229-240. Doi: 10.23749/mdl.v112i3.11227
25. Ghislieri C, Molino M, Cortese CG. Work and organizational psychology looks at the fourth industrial revolution: How to support workers and organizations? Front Psychol. 2018; 9, 2365. Doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02365
26. Ministro del Lavoro e delle Politiche Sociali. Protocollo nazionale sul lavoro in modalità agile. 7 dicembre 2021. Available online at: (last accessed 4-07-2023).
27. Singh P, Bala H, Dey BL, Filieri R. Enforced remote working: The impact of digital platform-induced stress and remote working experience on technology exhaustion and subjective wellbeing. J Bus Res. 2022; 151, 269-286. Doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.07.002
28. Vayre E. Challenges in Deploy Telework: Benefits and Risks for Employees. In Digital Transformations in the Challenge of Activity and Work: Understanding and Supporting Technological Changes, 1st ed.; Marc-Eric Bobillier Chaumon; ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: London, England, 2021; Volume 3, 87-100.
29. Fenner GH, Renn RW. Technology-assisted supplemental work: construct definition and a research framework. Hum. Resour. Manage. 2004; 43, 179-200. Doi: 10.1002/hrm.20014
30. Bakker AB, Demerouti E. The Job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 2007; 22(3), 309-328. Doi:10.1108/02683940710733115
31. Demerouti E, Bakker AB, Nachreiner F, Schaufeli WB. The job demands-resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2001; 86(3), 499-512. Doi:10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.499
32. Lei CF, Ngai EWT. The double-edged nature of technostress on work performance: A research model and research agenda: Completed research paper. Thirty Fifth International Conference on Information Systems, Auckland, 2014.
33. Lazarus RS, Folkman S. Stress, Appraisal, and Coping; Springer: New York, NY, 1984.
34. Shi S, Chen Y, Cheung CMK. How technostressors influence job and family satisfaction: Exploring the role of work–family conflict. Inf Syst J. 2023; 1-33. Doi: 10.1111/isj.12431
35. Netemeyer RG, McMurrian R, Boles JS. Development and validation of work-family conflict and family-work conflict scales. J. Appl. Psychol. 1996; 81, 400-410. Doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.81.4.400
36. Cohen S, Kamarck T, Mermelstein R. A Global Measure of Perceived Stress. J Health Soc Behav. 1983; 24(4): 385-96. Doi: 10.2307/2136404
37. Hayes AF. Partial, conditional, and moderated moderated mediation: Quantification, inference, and interpretation. Comm Mon. 2018; 85(1), 4-40. Doi: 10.1080/03637751.2017.1352100
38. Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee J-Y, Podsakoff NP. Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2003; 88(5), 879-903. Doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
39. Harman HH. Modern factor analysis 3rd edn.; University of Chicago Press, 1976.
40. Peter O, Ben Allouch S. Always connected: a longitudinal field study of mobile communication. Telemat.Inform. 2005; 22(3), 239-256. Doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2004.11.002
41. Syvertsen T, Enli G. Digital detox: Media resistance and the promise of authenticity. Convergence. 2020; 26(5-6), 1269-1283. Doi: 10.1177/13548565198473
42. Wang Z, Chen X, Duan Y. Communication Technology Use for Work at Home during Off-job Time and Work– Family Conflict: The Roles of Family Support and Psychological Detachment. Anales de psychología. 2017; 33(1), 93-101. Doi: 10.6018/analesps.33.1.238581
43. Cho S, Kim S, Chin SW, Ahmad U. Daily effects of continuous ICT demands on work–family conflict: Negative spillover and role conflict. Stress & Health. 2020; 36(4), 533-545. Doi: 10.1002/smi.2955
44. Andrade C, Petiz Lousã E. Telework and Work–Family Conflict during COVID-19 Lockdown in Portugal: The Influence of Job-Related Factors. Admin Sc. 2021; 11, 103. Doi: 10.3390/admsci 11030103
45. Mihelič KK, Tekavčič M. Work-Family Conflict: A Review Of Antecedents And Outcomes. Int J Manag Inf Syst. 2014; 18(1), 15-26. Doi: 10.19030/ijmis.v18i1.8335
46. Sugawara N, Danjo K, Furukori H, et al. Work–family conflict as a mediator between occupational stress and psychological health among mental health nurses in Japan. Neur Dis Treat, 2017; 13, 779-784. Doi: 10.2147/ NDT.S127053
47. Mcelwain AK, Korabik K, Rosin HM. An Examination of Gender Differences in Work-Family Conflict. Can J Beh Sc. 2005; 37(4), 269-284. Doi: 10.1037/h0087263
48. Ammons SK, Markham WT. Working at home: Experiences of skilled white collar workers. Soc Forum. 2004; 24(2), 191-238. Doi: 10.1080/02732170490271744
49. Loscocco K. Work-Family Linkages among Self-employed Women and Men. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 1997; 50(2), 204-26. Doi: 10.1006/jvbe.1996.1576
50. Olson KE, O'Brien MA, Rogers WA, Charness N. Diffusion of Technology: Frequency of Use for Younger and Older Adults. Ageing Int. 2011; 36(1), 123-145. Doi: 10.1007/s12126-010-9077-9
51. Wang HY, Sigerson L, Cheng C. Digital Nativity and Information Technology Addiction: Age cohort versus individual difference approaches. Comp Hum Beh. 2019; 90, 1-9. Doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2018.08.031
52. Sito del Ministero del lavoro e delle politiche sociali. Available online at: (last accessed 4-07-2023).
53. Von Bergen CW, Bressler MS. Work, non-work boundaries and the right to disconnect. J. Appl. Econ. Bus. Stud. 2019; 21(2), 51-69. Doi: 10.33423/jabe.v21i1.1454
54. Adkins CL, Premeaux SA. The use of communication technology to manage work-home boundaries. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 2014; 15(2), 82-100. Doi: 10.21818/001c.17939
55. Pollock K, Hauseman DC. The use of e-mail and principals’ work: A double-edged sword. Leadersh. Policy Sch. 2019; 18(3), 382-393. Doi: 10.1080/15700763.2017.1398338