Scholarlink

<p>Electronic performance monitoring (EPM) is increasingly used to track workers’ behaviors, often without their input or consent. While prior research has documented mixed effects of EPM on stress and performance, these outcomes must be understood in the broader context of work precarity. Drawing on a nationally representative survey of US workers (<i>N</i> = 2515), we examine how structural and psychological precarity relate to both the presence and perceived intrusiveness of EPM. Results show that precarious workers are more likely to be subjected to EPM, to experience more intensive monitoring, and to report more negative psychological reactions to surveillance. Positive perceptions of EPM, such as beliefs that it improves safety or productivity, were more common among workers with greater security and control. These findings suggest that EPM functions not only as a technological intervention but also as a mechanism reflecting and reinforcing existing power imbalances in the workplace. The discussion considers implications for psychological theory, regulation, and policy, highlighting the need for equitable implementation of monitoring practices in an era of increasing workplace surveillance.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Work Precarity and Workplace Surveillance Experiences

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月26日

查看全文
  • Tara S. Behrend,
  • Mindy Shoss,
  • Meaghan Tracy,
  • Dennis Stolle,
  • Benjamin Blachly,
  • Mark Chan,
  • Beth Schwartz

摘要

Electronic performance monitoring (EPM) is increasingly used to track workers’ behaviors, often without their input or consent. While prior research has documented mixed effects of EPM on stress and performance, these outcomes must be understood in the broader context of work precarity. Drawing on a nationally representative survey of US workers (N = 2515), we examine how structural and psychological precarity relate to both the presence and perceived intrusiveness of EPM. Results show that precarious workers are more likely to be subjected to EPM, to experience more intensive monitoring, and to report more negative psychological reactions to surveillance. Positive perceptions of EPM, such as beliefs that it improves safety or productivity, were more common among workers with greater security and control. These findings suggest that EPM functions not only as a technological intervention but also as a mechanism reflecting and reinforcing existing power imbalances in the workplace. The discussion considers implications for psychological theory, regulation, and policy, highlighting the need for equitable implementation of monitoring practices in an era of increasing workplace surveillance.