Technostress Measurement in the Field: A Case Report

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingsConference contributionpeer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)


Contemporary technostress research is mainly based on studies in laboratory settings and online surveys. To foster technostress research in the field, we compared four data collection methods, a blend of self-reports and physiological measurements, in the context of a case study in one organization. Over three non-consecutive workweeks, 16 participants filled out online surveys, wrote an online diary, wore a chest strap to measure their heart rate, and measured their blood pressure using a wrist-worn device. All four methods were assumed to imply a low level of intrusiveness as it enabled self-measurement by the participants without the need for continuous researcher intervention. The four data collection methods are compared based on six major criteria to determine measurement quality (i.e., reliability, validity, sensitivity, diagnosticity, objectivity, and intrusiveness). We find that each data collection method has its strengths and weaknesses. What follows is the need for mixed methods designs in technostress field studies.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationInformation Systems and Neuroscience - NeuroIS Retreat 2020
EditorsFred D. Davis, René Riedl, Jan vom Brocke, Pierre-Majorique Léger, Adriane B. Randolph, Thomas Fischer
Number of pages8
ISBN (Print)9783030600723
Publication statusPublished - 2020
EventVirtual conference NeuroIS Retreat, 2020 - Vienna, Austria
Duration: 2 Jun 20204 Jun 2020

Publication series

NameLecture Notes in Information Systems and Organisation
ISSN (Print)2195-4968
ISSN (Electronic)2195-4976


ConferenceVirtual conference NeuroIS Retreat, 2020


  • Blood pressure
  • Case report
  • Case study
  • Field study
  • Heart rate
  • Survey
  • Technostress


Dive into the research topics of 'Technostress Measurement in the Field: A Case Report'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this