A Bibliometric and Thematic Analysis of the Workplace Dignity Literature
Öz
This study aims to examine the scientific development, conceptual orientations, and intellectual structure of the workplace dignity literature through bibliometric methods. The interdisciplinary nature of workplace dignity, spanning the sociology of work and business ethics as well as organizational behavior, human resource management, and psychology, necessitates a holistic assessment of the field. Accordingly, 107 publications covering the 2005–2026 period and retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection were analyzed using the R-based Bibliometrix package and its Biblioshiny interface. The findings indicate that scholarly output has increased steadily, particularly since 2020, while international research collaboration has remained relatively limited. The conceptual structure of the field is concentrated around respect, autonomy, inequality, recognition, organizational culture, human resource management, and working conditions. The intellectual structure further reveals that the literature has developed around two interconnected research traditions: one centered on management, organizational behavior, and business ethics, and the other on the sociology of work, organization theory, and employment relations. By mapping key patterns in the workplace dignity literature, the study highlights the connections between employee-level experiences and broader organizational and structural conditions of work. Future research could test multilevel models across different cultural and occupational contexts to examine how organizational practices and structural employment conditions jointly shape workplace dignity.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Kaynakça
- Ackroyd, S. (2007). Dirt, work and dignity. In S. C. Bolton (Ed.), Dimensions of dignity at work (pp. 30–49). Butterworth-Heinemann.
- Ahmed, A., Liang, D., Anjum, M. A., & Durrani, D. K. (2022). Stronger together: Examining the interaction effects of workplace dignity and workplace inclusion on employees’ job performance. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 891189. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.891189
- Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). Bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007
- Baker, S. J., & Lucas, K. (2017). Is it safe to bring myself to work? Understanding LGBTQ experiences of workplace dignity. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 34(2), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1002/cjas.1439
- Blustein, D. L., & Allan, B. A. (2025). Dignity at work: A critical conceptual framework and research agenda. Journal of Career Assessment, 33(3), 489–509. https://doi.org/10.1177/10690727241283685
- Bolton, S. C. (2007). Dignity in and at work: Why it matters. In S. C. Bolton (Ed.), Dimensions of dignity at work (pp. 3–16). Butterworth-Heinemann.
- Bolton, S. C. (2010). Being human: Dignity of labor as the foundation for the spirit–work connection. Journal of Management, Spirituality, and Religion, 7(2), 157–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/14766081003746422
- Brennan, A., & Lo, Y. S. (2007). Two conceptions of dignity: Honour and self-determination. In J. Malpas & N. Lickiss (Eds.), Perspectives on human dignity: A conversation (pp. 43–58). Springer.
Ayrıntılar
Birincil Dil
İngilizce
Konular
Politika ve Yönetim (Diğer)
Bölüm
Araştırma Makalesi
Yazarlar
Kutay Özdemir
*
0000-0003-0161-148X
Türkiye
Yayımlanma Tarihi
11 Ekim 2026
Gönderilme Tarihi
15 Ağustos 2026
Kabul Tarihi
10 Ekim 2026
Yayımlandığı Sayı
Yıl 2026 Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2026
