Table 6.

Graphical overview of the differences * in psychosocial factors at work (incl. psych. demands, social support, decision authority, skill discretion) and emotional health outcome (emotional exhaustion) in different office designs split by gender.

Outcome	Cell- Office (Ref.)	Shared- Room	Small Open Plan Office	Med.-Sized Open Plan	Large Open Plan Office	Hot-Desking a	Combi-Office	Impact of Office Design per se
	f = 1073–77 m = 962–90	f = 455 m = 357	f = 191 m = 276	f = 128 m = 99–101	f = 172 m = 178	f = 204–5 m = 116	f = 48 m = 33–35
Emotional health outcome:
Emotional exhaustion
Men						■■		*
Women			♦♦		◊		♦	**
Psychosocial factors at work:
Psychological demands
Men		□						─
Women		◊◊◊					♦	***
Social support
Men			■■			■		***
Women								─
Decision authority
Men		■■				■■■
Women		♦	♦♦♦			♦♦	♦
Skill discretion
Men								─
Women					♦♦♦		◊	***

Notes: Synthesis is based on linear multivariate analysis adjusted for age and education. Cell office was used as reference category. * = Differences in strength of significance, not in highest and lowest reported value. When no symbol is presented, there are no significant outcomes for the specific variable. Three markers = p-value < 0.001, two markers = p-value < 0.01, One marker = p-value < 0.05. ^a = hot-desking is a not an office type, but a subgroup to the office type flex-office. □, ■ (squares) = men, ◊, ♦ (diamonds) = women, □, ◊ (white symbol) = significantly positive value, ■, ♦ (black symbol) = significantly negative value.