Productivity and stress recollection inaccuracy: Anchoring effects in work-from-home evaluation.

Self-reported productivity and satisfaction have become central metrics in evaluating work-from-home (WFH) policies, yet their reliability remains largely unexamined. Despite growing scrutiny of WFH efficacy, assessments continue to rely heavily on subjective evaluations, creating a persistent gap b...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Martijn Stroom
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2025-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320959
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850216164654841856
author Martijn Stroom
author_facet Martijn Stroom
author_sort Martijn Stroom
collection DOAJ
description Self-reported productivity and satisfaction have become central metrics in evaluating work-from-home (WFH) policies, yet their reliability remains largely unexamined. Despite growing scrutiny of WFH efficacy, assessments continue to rely heavily on subjective evaluations, creating a persistent gap between perceived and objective productivity measures within the working-from-home literature. This study investigates whether retrospective self-reports of productivity during WFH are systematically biased due to recollection inaccuracy, particularly through anchoring biases in memory recall. A two-wave survey data sample consisting of 772 home-workers during the 2020 shift to the home office examines recollection accuracy as well as the underlying mechanism. Using a five-factor productivity scale, within-subject analyses explore consistency within and between multiple waves and evaluate the predictive value of the targeted score compared to the current (inaccurate) score. The signed rank test shows that recollection scores consistently underestimate past scores (one factor: p < .002; four factors: p < 0.0004). The recollected scores are closer to the current score than the targeted score (for all factors: p < .0004) and have a greater magnitude impact on the recollection scores than the targeted score (difference in OLS coefficients ranging from.164 to.606). Exploration of trends additionally suggests that, although the absolute scores are influenced by the current reference point, the relative changes seem consistent over time. These findings highlight the risks of relying on self-reported retrospective productivity measures in shaping WFH policies. The observed biases help contextualize the ongoing discrepancy between optimistic self-reports and more pessimistic objective measures of WFH productivity. Without accounting for recollection biases, assessments of WFH effectiveness may be flawed, potentially leading to suboptimal or counterproductive policy decisions.
format Article
id doaj-art-5dc743aa9e9d4b9c855f79cb4f13f827
institution OA Journals
issn 1932-6203
language English
publishDate 2025-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj-art-5dc743aa9e9d4b9c855f79cb4f13f8272025-08-20T02:08:24ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032025-01-01204e032095910.1371/journal.pone.0320959Productivity and stress recollection inaccuracy: Anchoring effects in work-from-home evaluation.Martijn StroomSelf-reported productivity and satisfaction have become central metrics in evaluating work-from-home (WFH) policies, yet their reliability remains largely unexamined. Despite growing scrutiny of WFH efficacy, assessments continue to rely heavily on subjective evaluations, creating a persistent gap between perceived and objective productivity measures within the working-from-home literature. This study investigates whether retrospective self-reports of productivity during WFH are systematically biased due to recollection inaccuracy, particularly through anchoring biases in memory recall. A two-wave survey data sample consisting of 772 home-workers during the 2020 shift to the home office examines recollection accuracy as well as the underlying mechanism. Using a five-factor productivity scale, within-subject analyses explore consistency within and between multiple waves and evaluate the predictive value of the targeted score compared to the current (inaccurate) score. The signed rank test shows that recollection scores consistently underestimate past scores (one factor: p < .002; four factors: p < 0.0004). The recollected scores are closer to the current score than the targeted score (for all factors: p < .0004) and have a greater magnitude impact on the recollection scores than the targeted score (difference in OLS coefficients ranging from.164 to.606). Exploration of trends additionally suggests that, although the absolute scores are influenced by the current reference point, the relative changes seem consistent over time. These findings highlight the risks of relying on self-reported retrospective productivity measures in shaping WFH policies. The observed biases help contextualize the ongoing discrepancy between optimistic self-reports and more pessimistic objective measures of WFH productivity. Without accounting for recollection biases, assessments of WFH effectiveness may be flawed, potentially leading to suboptimal or counterproductive policy decisions.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320959
spellingShingle Martijn Stroom
Productivity and stress recollection inaccuracy: Anchoring effects in work-from-home evaluation.
PLoS ONE
title Productivity and stress recollection inaccuracy: Anchoring effects in work-from-home evaluation.
title_full Productivity and stress recollection inaccuracy: Anchoring effects in work-from-home evaluation.
title_fullStr Productivity and stress recollection inaccuracy: Anchoring effects in work-from-home evaluation.
title_full_unstemmed Productivity and stress recollection inaccuracy: Anchoring effects in work-from-home evaluation.
title_short Productivity and stress recollection inaccuracy: Anchoring effects in work-from-home evaluation.
title_sort productivity and stress recollection inaccuracy anchoring effects in work from home evaluation
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0320959
work_keys_str_mv AT martijnstroom productivityandstressrecollectioninaccuracyanchoringeffectsinworkfromhomeevaluation