Enhanced work engagement in Japanese employees following a 12-day online gratitude journal intervention

Abstract

Background

Gratitude interventions have shown various psychological benefits, including enhanced motivation in academic settings. However, their impact on work engagement - a key factor in employee well-being and organizational performance - remains underexplored. This study examined whether a 12-day online gratitude journaling intervention enhances work engagement and increases awareness of job resources, based on the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model.

Methods

A total of 100 Japanese employees (mean age = 41.0 ± 5.2 years, evenly split by gender) were randomly assigned to a gratitude journal group or a daily life journal group (control). Participants in the gratitude journal group recorded things they felt grateful for, while the control group documented daily occurrences. Work engagement was assessed using the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES), alongside measures of work motivation, gratitude disposition, perspective-taking, life satisfaction, and psychological well-being. Journal entries were analyzed using word frequency analysis and correspondence analysis to examine whether gratitude journaling enhanced awareness of job resources.

Results

Participants in the gratitude journal group exhibited a significant increase in work engagement (total score and absorption dimension) post-intervention, supporting the idea that gratitude journaling enhances engagement. Journal content analysis revealed that gratitude journaling was associated with greater recognition of job resources, such as social support, suggesting a mechanism through which gratitude influences work engagement. Both groups showed increases in gratitude disposition, life satisfaction, and competitive-oriented work motivation, suggesting possible broader journaling benefits. In contrast, the daily life journal group experienced temporary declines in purpose in life and autonomy.

Conclusions

This study provides experimental evidence that gratitude journaling enhances work engagement by increasing awareness of job resources, integrating gratitude into the JD-R Model. The findings suggest that gratitude must be actively cultivated rather than assumed to arise naturally. Given its accessibility and low cost, gratitude journaling offers a promising tool for organizations to foster employee engagement. Future research should examine its long-term effects and evaluate its applicability across diverse cultural contexts.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40359-025-03494-2.

Background

As a key component of positive psychology [1], the benefits of gratitude have been extensively studied across various domains, including subjective well-being [2], social interactions [3, 4], and health outcomes [5]. Gratitude has been shown to promote positive emotions, strengthen social bonds, and even improve physical health by reducing harmful behaviors and stress.

Recently, there has been growing interest in understanding how gratitude influences motivation, as it is a critical driver of success across different contexts. Research suggests that gratitude plays a significant role in enhancing motivation. For example, Nawa and Yamagishi (2021) found that gratitude interventions improved academic motivation among university students, indicating that focusing on gratitude may help to enhance success in academic settings [6]. Similarly, studies with children and adolescents have shown that gratitude interventions lead to improvements in positive affect [7], which is closely linked to increased intrinsic motivation [8].

For working adults, motivation often translates into work engagement, a crucial concept that represents a positive and fulfilling state of mind toward work [9]. Engaged employees experience an energetic and effective connection with their work activities, leading to sustained effort and enthusiasm [10]. While work motivation alone may not directly enhance work performance, its impact is often mediated by work engagement, highlighting the critical role of engagement in achieving better outcomes [11]. Previous studies have shown that high levels of work engagement are associated with improved well-being, better health, and organizational benefits, including increased productivity and lower turnover rates [12, 13]. Given the importance of work engagement for both employees and organizations, understanding the role of gratitude in fostering engagement at work has emerged as a key area of research.

One theoretical framework that helps explain how gratitude may foster work engagement is the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model [9, 14, 15]. It identifies two key factors that positively impact work engagement: job resources (e.g., autonomy, social support, colleagues’ support, supervisory coaching) and personal resources (e.g., optimism, self-esteem). Interventions targeting job resources typically focus on improving physical, social, or organizational aspects of the job, such as development opportunities, social capital, and coworker support. Meanwhile, interventions targeting personal resources aim to enhance self-efficacy, resilience, or optimism [16].

This study proposes a new way to enhance job resources through gratitude (Fig. 1). When individuals engage in gratitude-focused practices, such as keeping a gratitude journal, they actively reflect on positive experiences in their daily lives [6]. These reflections may include recognizing help from colleagues, support from family members, or opportunities to engage in meaningful tasks. Through this process, individuals may develop a heightened awareness and appreciation of their existing job resources, such as social support, supervisory guidance, and task variety.

Fig. 1.

A Conceptual Model of Gratitude and Work Engagement: Integration into the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model. This model illustrates how a gratitude intervention fosters awareness and engagement with available Job Resources, which in turn contributes to greater Work Engagement

From a psychological perspective, this process aligns with Self-Determination Theory [17], which identifies three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. For example, decision-making opportunities promote autonomy, giving employees a greater sense of control over their work; feedback from supervisors fosters learning, which enhances job competence; and support from colleagues and supervisors strengthens relatedness, fostering a sense of connection and belonging. By enhancing the intrinsic motivational role of job resources, gratitude interventions may strengthen employees’ perceptions of their available resources, thereby boosting work engagement.

Empirical evidence supports this proposed link between gratitude and engagement. Previous studies have found positive correlations between gratitude and work engagement. Nicuta et al. [18] reported that teachers with higher gratitude disposition experienced greater work engagement and lower burnout. Similarly, Komase et al. [19, 20] found that feeling appreciated at work and workplace-wide gratitude (measured as the average gratitude level of employees) were associated with higher engagement, particularly in supportive environments. These findings suggest that gratitude - whether expressed individually or embedded in organizational culture - may contribute to greater engagement at work.

However, despite these correlational findings, a causal relationship between gratitude and work engagement has not yet been established. Most research relies on cross-sectional designs, making it difficult to determine whether gratitude directly enhances engagement or whether engaged employees simply experience more gratitude. Komase et al. [21] conducted a pre-post gratitude intervention where employees attended a one-time workshop and were instructed to express gratitude via email three times a week. However, no significant changes in work engagement were observed. Because the study lacked a control group, it remains unclear whether the absence of an effect was due to the intervention’s ineffectiveness or external unmeasured factors. Additionally, since participation was voluntary and unpaid, selection bias may have influenced the findings, as highly motivated employees may have been more likely to take part in the study.

Despite these efforts, few studies have employed rigorous experimental designs to test the effects of gratitude interventions on work engagement. The present study seeks to address this gap by conducting a controlled gratitude intervention among working adults. Previous research with university students have shown that focusing on grateful events in general, i.e., not limited to experiences directly associated with their academic activities, improved students’ overall academic motivation [6]. Building on such findings, we invited participants to keep a gratitude journal where they could record anything they felt grateful for, not limited to work-related experiences. This inclusive approach allowed for a more comprehensive understanding of gratitude’s potential effects. Participants in the control group, in contrast, were asked to keep a journal of their daily life activities. By comparing outcomes between these groups, this study aims to examine whether gratitude interventions enhance work engagement by increasing the perception and utilization of job resources, in line with the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model.

Contributions of this study

This study contributes to both theory and practice by extending existing research on gratitude and work engagement. Theoretically, it integrates gratitude into the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model, proposing a new mechanism through which gratitude enhances work engagement by strengthening the perception of job resources. This novel perspective builds on Broaden-and-Build Theory [22] by exploring gratitude’s role in workplace motivation. Practically, this study provides experimental evidence for gratitude journaling as a simple, cost-effective intervention to enhance work engagement, which could inform organizational well-being programs. Furthermore, by employing a controlled intervention design, this study addresses a critical gap in the literature, as prior findings have been predominantly correlational rather than causal.

Research objectives

The present study is guided by the following research objectives:

• Objective 1: To measure work engagement before and after a 12-day gratitude journal intervention, using a control group that keeps a daily life journal, in a sample of Japanese employees.

• Objective 2: To compare the effects of journaling on work engagement across groups and time points.

• Objective 3: To examine functional differences between gratitude and daily life journal entries in relation to increased perception of job resources.

Hypotheses

Based on the JD-R framework and previous research on gratitude, this study tests the following hypotheses:

• H1. The gratitude intervention will lead to increased work engagement compared to a control condition.

• H2. The effect of gratitude on work engagement will be mediated by increased awareness and recognition of job resources.

While the primary focus of this study was to examine the impact of gratitude interventions on work engagement, additional psychological measures were included to explore the broader effects of gratitude and ensure pre-intervention comparability between groups. These measures were chosen based on theoretical and empirical considerations:

• Work Motivation was included to test whether the gratitude intervention influenced work-related motivation, given that a previous study with college students have shown that gratitude interventions improve academic motivation [6]. This allowed us to explore whether similar effects extend to workplace settings.

• Gratitude Disposition was assessed for two purposes: (1) to ensure no pre-existing differences in gratitude disposition between the gratitude journal and daily life journal groups at the pre-intervention stage, and (2) to examine whether trait gratitude changed following the 12-day intervention, as it directly reflects the study’s target construct. Although gratitude is generally considered to be a stable trait, previous studies have demonstrated that gratitude interventions can lead to increases in gratitude scores [23]. Additionally, gratitude disposition has been shown to have a positive relationship with work engagement [24], suggesting that changes in work engagement may be accompanied by shifts in gratitude disposition.

• Perspective Taking (PT) was included in this study as a secondary outcome, based on Fredrickson’s Broaden-and-Build Theory [22], which suggests that positive emotions, including gratitude, expand cognitive and social perspectives. Since gratitude fosters openness and awareness of others, it is expected to enhance perspective-taking as gratitude increases. Supporting this, previous research has demonstrated a positive correlation between gratitude and PT [25], though the direction of this relationship remains unclear. Thus, we measured PT to examine whether a gratitude intervention causally enhances empathic perspective-taking alongside its effects on work engagement.

• Life Satisfaction and Psychological Well-Being were measured as secondary outcomes to assess whether the gratitude intervention enhanced overall well-being beyond work engagement. Previous studies have reported mixed findings regarding the effects of gratitude interventions on well-being (for a review, see Komase et al., 2021 [26]). While some studies have found significant improvements [27, 28], others have reported no measurable changes [6]. However, cross-sectional studies have constantly shown positive associations between gratitude and well-being, with particularly strong associations with certain dimensions of psychological well-being [29]. Based on these findings, we included well-being measures to examine whether gratitude journaling enhances well-being in addition to its potential impact on work engagement.

• Personality Traits were measured before the intervention to compare the gratitude journal and the control groups. Given the high correlations between certain personality traits and work engagement [30], this measurement ensured that any observed effects of the gratitude intervention on work engagement were not due to personality differences.

Methods

Participants

This study was conducted as part of the study project of “Well-Living for Well-Being” organized by the Consortium for Applied Neuroscience (CAN), Tokyo, Japan. Participants were recruited from a pool of approximately 50,000 individuals registered in the Human Information Database maintained by the NTT DATA Institute of Management Consulting, Inc., Tokyo, Japan. Interested individuals were directed to an online form outlining the study procedures, schedule, eligibility criteria (full-time employment, Japanese nationals, working in Japan on weekdays, age between 30 and 49, ability to maintain a journal and respond to questionnaires via smartphone), and the compensation to be paid upon completion (32,000 yen). Candidates meeting all requirements were asked to provide their contact information, name, and gender. In adherence to the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki, candidates who opted to participate were required to complete and submit an online consent form. The study received approval from the Shiba Palace Clinic Ethics Review Committee in Tokyo, Japan (approval number: 150926_rn_33852).

An a priori power analysis was conducted using G*Power [31, 32] for a two-way repeated measures ANOVA (within-between interaction), with power set at 0.80, a medium effect size of 0.25, an alpha error rate of 0.05, two groups, three measurements, a correlation among repeated measures of 0.50, and a nonsphericity correlation value of 0.75. The analysis indicated that a minimum total sample size of 34 participants was required. We recruited a total of 100 company employees who met the eligibility criteria, evenly divided between male and female, exceeding the minimum required sample size. All participant communication, including online forms, assessments, and journaling, was conducted in Japanese.

The participants in the experiment came from a wide range of industries, including sales, consulting, IT, manufacturing, logistics, and finance. Their job titles were distributed as follows, in ascending order of managerial position: staff-level employee (57.14%), supervisor (28.57%), department manager (5.71%), and general manager (8.57%). Out of the 100 participants recruited for the journal intervention experiment, 91 individuals wrote journal entries during the study period (45 in the gratitude journal group and 46 in the daily life journal group). Regarding responses to psychological measurements, 74 participants completed the assessment at T1 (right before the intervention, 36 in the gratitude journal group, 38 in the daily life journal group), and 70 individuals completed both T1 and T2 (immediately after the intervention, 35 in each group). All experimental participants were subsequently emailed a delayed follow-up questionnaire at T3 (approximately 1.5 months after the intervention). Of the participants who completed the questionnaires at both T1 and T2, 68 individuals also completed the assessment at T3 (35 in the gratitude journal group and 33 in the daily life journal group).

Procedure

This study was part of a two-month project organized by the CAN, aimed at exploring innovative ways to apply foundational positive psychology research to societal contexts. During this project (October 14th to December 19th, 2022), participants took part in several different studies. The gratitude journal intervention took place over the course of 12 days (October 24th to November 4th, 2022), during which no other experiments were conducted.

A few days before the experiment, participants received an email with instructions for accessing a custom-developed web application, including an individual account name and password. They were asked to log in via the provided URL and complete psychological questionnaires (see "Materials" section). Participants were then randomly assigned to either the gratitude journal group (experimental) or the daily life journal group (control) while ensuring a balanced distribution of gender across groups.

For 12 days, participants received daily email reminders with a URL to the web application, prompting them to write journal entries via their smartphones. Participants in the gratitude journal group were instructed to "Please write down at least one thing (ideally around three) you felt grateful for today. If nothing comes to mind, you may recall something you felt grateful for recently (within the past year)." Participants in the daily life journal group were instructed to "Please write down at least one thing (ideally around three) that happened today." Example entries included expressing gratitude for a colleague’s help (gratitude journal) and describing a visit to a bakery (daily life journal). Each session allowed up to five free-writing spaces, with no limit on daily access. Participants could submit additional entries if desired. While participants were free to write as much or as little as they wished, entry length or word count was not actively monitored during the data collection period. Immediately after the 12-day intervention and 1.5 months later, they completed the same psychological scales as those administered at the pre-intervention stage.

Materials

Work engagement

Work engagement was assessed using the 9-item Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES) [33], which measures workers' positive mental states towards their work and is considered the positive counterpart to burnout. The UWES consists of three dimensions: Vigor, Dedication, and Absorption. While these dimensions can be analyzed separately, the UWES manual recommends using the total score when focusing on overall work engagement, due to the high intercorrelations observed among the three dimensions [34]. Our correlation analyses confirmed this pattern (Vigor-Dedication r = 0.856, Vigor-Absorption r = 0.782, and Dedication-Absorption r = 0.866, all p < 0.001), consistent with the values reported in the UWES manual [34]. Based on this, we primarily used the total UWES scores to examine the effect of gratitude journaling on overall work engagement, as our focus was on engagement as a unified construct rather than its components. We used the Japanese version of the UWES (UWES-J) [35, 36], which includes nine items (three per dimension). Participants rated each item (e.g., “At my work, I feel bursting with energy”) on a 7-point scale from 0 (Never) to 6 (Always/Every day). Cronbach’s alpha for the pre-intervention sample indicated good internal consistency (Total alpha = 0.945, Vigor alpha = 0.89, Dedication alpha = 0.87, and Absorption alpha = 0.85).

Work motivation

Work motivation was assessed using the 36-item Work Motivation Questionnaire in Japanese Organizations (referred to as WM-J) [37], which was developed specifically for Japanese respondents based on the work motivation scale by Barrick et al. [38]. The WM-J measures four aspects of work motivation: Competitive, Cooperative, Learning, and Accomplishment-Oriented motivation, with each dimension assessed by nine items. Participants rated each item on a 5-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Cronbach’s alpha for the pre-intervention sample indicated high internal consistency: Competitive alpha = 0.92, Cooperative alpha = 0.90, Learning alpha = 0.93, and Accomplishment-Oriented alpha = 0.91.

Gratitude disposition

Gratitude disposition was assessed using the Gratitude Questionnaire (GQ-6) [39], which measures individuals' tendency to experience gratitude. Participants rated statements such as “I have so much in life to be thankful for” on a 7-point scale, from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The GQ-6 has been translated into Japanese, and its validity has been confirmed for Japanese individuals [40–42]. However, Shiraki [41] conducted a factor analysis on the Japanese version and found that the sixth item (“Long amounts of time can go by before I feel grateful to something or someone”) had a factor loading lower than 0.4, while the remaining five items showed loadings greater than 0.4, supporting a one-factor structure for the Japanese version. Another study also confirmed the suitability of this five-item version [42]. Therefore, we excluded the sixth item when assessing participants’ gratitude disposition in this study as well. This scale will be referred to as GQ-J. The Cronbach’s alpha for the pre-intervention sample was 0.87, indicating good internal consistency.

Perspective taking

The Perspective Taking (PT) Scale is part of the Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) [43, 44] and assesses individuals’ tendency to adopt the perspectives of others. The original scale consists of seven items, such as “Before criticizing somebody, I try to imagine how I would feel if I were in their place,” rated on a 0 to 4 scale (0 = does not describe me well to 4 = describes me very well). In this study, we used the Japanese version of the scale [45], which employs a five-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Cronbach’s alpha for the pre-intervention sample was 0.72.

Life satisfaction

The 5-item Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) [46] was used to assess participants' overall life satisfaction. The SWLS is widely used as a measure of the cognitive component of subjective well-being [47]. Respondents rated statements such as “In most ways my life is close to my ideal” on a 7-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). We employed the Japanese translation of the SWLS available on the website of the original study's first author. Cronbach’s alpha for the pre-intervention sample was 0.89, indicating good internal consistency.

Psychological well-being

Psychological well-being was assessed using the 42-item version of the Psychological Well-Being Scale (PWBS) [48], which measures six dimensions: autonomy, environmental mastery, personal growth, positive relations with others, purpose in life, and self-acceptance (7 items each). We used the Japanese translation of the scale [49]. Items were intermixed and rated on a 7-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The Cronbach's alphas for the pre-intervention sample in this study were: autonomy alpha = 0.75, environmental mastery alpha = 0.74, personal growth alpha = 0.80, positive relations with others alpha = 0.72, purpose in life alpha = 0.62, and self-acceptance alpha = 0.80, consistent with findings from the Japanese development study [49].

Personality traits

Personality traits were assessed using the Neuroticism-Extroversion-Openness Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI), a measure of the Big Five personality traits. The NEO-FFI consists of 60 items, with 12 items per dimension: Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. We used the Japanese translation of the NEO-FFI [50]. Cronbach’s alphas for the pre-intervention sample were: Neuroticism alpha = 0.88, Extraversion alpha = 0.84, Openness alpha = 0.66, Agreeableness alpha = 0.70, and Conscientiousness alpha = 0.77.

Experimental schedule

All psychological measures (UWES/WM-J/GQ-J/PT/SWLS/PWBS/) except NEO-FFI were assessed at three time points to evaluate the effects and persistence of the 12-day journal intervention. Assessments were conducted just before the intervention (T1: October 20th to 23rd), immediately after the intervention (T2: November 4th to 7th), and approximately 1.5 months after the intervention (T3: December 21 st to 25th). The NEO-FFI was administered at T1. Participants were informed about the schedule for the three psychological measurements during recruitment. However, they were unaware of the different groups in the journaling experiment and were not informed of the research hypothesis.

Analysis methods

All statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 29) unless stated otherwise. Group differences were examined by analyzing the dependent variable using two-way repeated measures analysis of variance (rm-ANOVA). Adjustments for degrees of freedom were made using Greenhouse-Geisser estimates of sphericity (Mauchly's sphericity test) as needed. Statistical significance was set at an alpha level of less than 0.05. Post-hoc tests were conducted when appropriate and adjusted for multiple comparisons using the Bonferroni correction if applicable. All textual analyses of journal entry were conducted using KH Coder, a computer software package for quantitative content analyses [51, 52].

To examine the effects of the gratitude journal intervention, we conducted a two-way repeated measures ANOVA with time (T1, T2, and T3) as the within-subject factor and journal group (gratitude journal vs. daily life journal) as the between-subject factor for each one of the outcome measures.

Results

Participants

For the statistical analysis of the journal intervention, we included only participants who wrote at least one journal entry during the intervention period and completed the questionnaires at all three timepoints (34 in the gratitude journal group and 33 in the daily life journal group). The flow of participants through the study is illustrated in the CONSORT flow diagram [53] (Fig. 2). Details regarding the composition of each group are summarized in Table 1.

Fig. 2.

Participant Flow from Enrollment to Analysis. Numbers in parentheses after ‘n = ’ indicate the number of participants at each step

Table 1.

Number of participants by gender and mean age for each one of the groups

	Gratitude journal			Daily life journal			Total	Age Mean (SD) [range]
	Female	Male	Sub-total	Female	Male	Sub-total
Enrollment	25	25	50	25	25	50	100	40.97 (5.17) [31–49]
T1, T2, T3 & Journal entry	19	15	34	15	18	33	67	40.21 (5.15) [31–48]

SD indicates standard deviation. T1 refers to pre-intervention, T2 to post-intervention, and T3 to a follow-up at approximately 1.5 months. To be included in the analysis, participants had to complete the questionnaires at T1, T2 and T3, and additionally provide journal entries during the 12-day intervention period

Personality traits: NEO-FFI

We conducted a two-way rm-ANOVA using the mean scores of the five NEO-FFI dimensions from two journal groups to examine potential differences in personality traits at the pre-intervention stage (T1). Group (gratitude journal vs. daily life journal) served as a between-subjects factor, and personality traits (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness) were within-subject factors.

Results revealed a significant main effect of NEO-FFI traits (F(2.461, 177.219) = 9.393, p < 0.001, η_p² = 0.115), with no significant main effect of group (F(1, 72) = 2.280, p = 0.135, η_p² = 0.031) or interaction between NEO-FFI traits and group (F(2.461, 177.219) = 2.560, p = 0.068, η_p² = 0.034). These findings suggest that there were no substantial differences in NEO-FFI personality traits between the gratitude journal and daily life journal group participants. Mean scores and standard deviations for each trait are detailed by group in Table 2.

Table 2.

Mean scores and standard deviations of NEO-FFI traits by group

	N	E	O	A	C
Gratitude journal (n = 36)	25.19 (8.31)	24.00 (7.07)	26.67 (5.36)	31.08 (5.97)	29.86 (6.25)
Daily life journal (n = 38)	28.26 (9.67)	21.97 (8.00)	26.03 (5.97)	27.18 (5.45)	27.97 (6.03)

Standard deviations are reported in parentheses. The abbreviations denote each trait: N for Neuroticism, E for Extraversion, O for Openness, A for Agreeableness, and C for Conscientiousness

Psychological scales

Table 3 summarizes the statistical results for all psychological scales examined in this study, including work engagement (UWES), work motivation (WM-J), gratitude (GQ-J), perspective taking (PT), life satisfaction (SWLS), and psychological well-being (PWBS). Below, we describe the key findings, followed by a brief overview of secondary findings.

Table 3.

Summary of Statistical Results for Psychological Scales

		For Time			For Group			Interaction
Psychological Scale		F value	p value	ηp2	F value	p value	ηp2	F value	p value	ηp2	Simple main effects	Post-hoc tests (Bonferroni correction)
UWES	Total	F(2, 130) = 1.357	0.261	0.020	F(1,65) = 1.223	0.273	0.018	F(1, 130) = 5.548	0.005	0.079	[For the gratitude journal: Time] F(2, 130) = 4.82, P = 0.010, ηp2 = 0.069	[For the gratitude journal: Time] T1 (2.807) < T2 (3.141)
	Vigor	F(1.757, 114.220) = 0.383	0.656	0.006	F(1,65) = 1.273	0.263	0.019	F(1.757, 114.220) = 3.073	0.051	0.047
	Dedication	F(2, 130) = 0.400	0.671	0.006	F(1,65) = 1.077	0.303	0.016	F(2, 130) = 4.352	0.015	0.063
	Absorption	F(2, 130) = 3.456	0.034	0.050	F(1,65) = 1.058	0.308	0.016	F(2, 130) = 3.176	0.045	0.047	[For the gratitude journal: Time] F(2, 130) = 3.77, P = 0.026, ηp2 = 0.055	[For the gratitude journal: Time] T1(2.520 < T2(2.922)
WM-J	Competitive	F(2, 130) = 10.264	<.001	0.136	F(1,65) = 0.037	0.848	0.001	F(2, 130) = 0.041	0.96	0.001		[For Time] T1(2.823) < T2(3.022), T1 < T3(3.154)
	Cooperative	F(2, 130) = 2.117	0.125	0.032	F(1,65) = 0.872	0.354	0.013	F(2, 130) = 1.603	0.205	0.024
	Learning	F(1.697, 110.328) = 1.146	0.321	0.017	F(1,65) = 1.672	0.201	0.025	F(1.697, 110.328) = 0.771	0.446	0.012
	Accomplishment-oriented	F(2, 130) = 2.287	0.106	0.034	F(1,65) = 1.366	0.247	0.021	F(2, 130) = 0.872	0.421	0.013
GQ-J		F(1.826, 118.711) = 8.825	< 0.001	0.12	F(1,65) = 0.422	0.518	0.006					[For Time] T1(24.79) < T2(25.88), T1 < T3 (26.45)
PT		F(2, 130) = 2.212	0.114	0.033	F(1,65) = 1.610	0.209	0.024	F(2, 130) = 0.361	0.697	0.006
SWLS		F(2, 130) = 5.908	0.004	0.083	F(1,65) = 0.210	0.649	0.003	F(2, 130) = 0.041	0.960	0.001		[For Time] T1(17.51) < T3(19.07)
PWBS	Autonomy	F(2, 130) = 1.320	0.271	0.020	F(1,65) = 0.283	0.596	0.004	F(2, 130) = 3.731	0.027	0.054	[For the daily life journal: Time] (F(2, 130) = 4.32, P = 0.015, ηp2 = 0.06228	[For the daily life journal: Time] T2(31.21) > T3 (29.39)
	Environmental mastery	F(1.793, 116.570) = 0.360	0.699	0.006	F(1,65) = 0.823	0.368	0.013	F(1.793, 116.570) = 2.367	0.104	0.035
	Personal growth	F(2, 130) = 0.845	0.432	0.013	F(1,65) = 0.233	0.631	0.004	F(2, 130) = 1.668	0.193	0.025
	Positive relations with others	F(1.670, 108.533) = 1.481	0.231	0.022	F(1,65) = 3.377	0.071	0.049	F(1.670, 108.533) = 0.321	0.687	0.005
	Purpose in life	F(1.826, 118.720) = 2.484	0.093	0.037	F(1,65) = 0.450	0.505	0.007	F(1.826, 118.720) = 6.053	0.004	0.085	[For the daily life journal: Time] F(2, 130) = 5.73, P = 0.004, ηp2 = 0.081	[For the daily life journal: Time] T1(31.88) > T2(30.64)
	Self-acceptance	F(2, 130) = 0.189	0.828	0.003	F(1,65) = 0.196	0.659	0.003	F(2, 130) = 1.565	0.213	0.024

η_p² represents partial eta-squared, a measure of effect size. For simple main effects and post-hoc tests, only significant results are reported, with Bonferroni correction applied at α = 0.05. The following abbreviations denote each psychological scale: UWES (Utrecht Work Engagement Scale), WM-J (Work Motivation Questionnaire for Japanese), GQ-J (Japanese version of the GQ-6, Gratitude Questionnaire), PT (Perspective Taking Scale), SWLS (Satisfaction With Life Scale), and PWBS (Psychological Well-Being Scale)

The two-way repeated measures ANOVA on UWES (Total scores) revealed a significant interaction between time and group (F(1, 130) = 5.548, p = 0.005, η_p² = 0.079). Furthermore, in the gratitude journal group, the simple main effect of time was significant, and post-hoc analyses (Bonferroni corrected at α = 0.05) showed a significant increase in work engagement total scores from T1 to T2 (Fig. 3). No significant change was observed in the daily life journal group. A similar pattern was found for UWES Absorption (Fig. 4, see details in Table 3). Overall, these findings suggest that the gratitude journaling effectively enhanced work engagement, supporting Hypothesis 1.

Fig. 3.

Changes in UWES (Total) Scores Across Three Time Points. UWES (Total) average scores for the gratitude journal and daily life journal groups before (T1), after (T2), and 1.5 months following (T3) the 12-day online gratitude journal intervention. Vertical bars represent the standard error of the mean for each data point

Fig. 4.

Changes in UWES (Absorption) Scores Across Three Time Points. UWES (Absorption) average scores for the gratitude journal and daily life journal groups before (T1), after (T2), and 1.5 months following (T3) the 12-day online gratitude journal intervention. Vertical bars represent the standard error of the mean for each data point

Because gratitude disposition may vary by age and gender [54, 55], we conducted exploratory analyses to examine whether these factors moderated the intervention effects. Specifically, we ran a three-way repeated measures ANOVA on the total UWES and absorption scores, with group and gender as between-subject factors, time as a within-subject factor, and participant age as a covariate. These analyses revealed no significant moderating effects of age or gender on work engagement outcomes. Full details are provided in the Supplementary Material (“Additional Analyses - Age and Gender”).

A significant main effect of time was observed, indicating overall increases in competitive work motivation (WM-J, Fig. 5), gratitude (GQ-J, Fig. 6), and life satisfaction (SWLS, Fig. 7) across participants, regardless of journal type. These results suggest that the act of journaling, regardless of thematic content, may drive certain psychological changes.

Fig. 5.

Changes in WM-J (competitive-oriented motivation) Scores Across Three Time Points. WM-J (competitive-oriented motivation) average scores for the gratitude journal and daily life journal groups before (T1), after (T2), and 1.5 months following (T3) the 12-day online gratitude journal intervention. Vertical bars represent the standard error of the mean for each data point

Fig. 6.

Changes in GQ-J Scores Across Three Time Points. GQ-J average scores for the gratitude journal and daily life journal groups before (T1), after (T2), and 1.5 months following (T3) the 12-day online gratitude journal intervention. Vertical bars represent the standard error of the mean for each data point

Fig. 7.

Changes in SWLS Scores Across Three Time Points. SWLS average scores for the gratitude journal and daily life journal groups before (T1), after (T2), and 1.5 months following (T3) the 12-day online gratitude journal intervention. Vertical bars represent the standard error of the mean for each data point

Interestingly, only the daily life journal group showed a significant decrease in the purpose in life dimension of the Psychological Well-Being Scale (PWBS) from T1 to T2 (Fig. 8). Additionally, a decrease in the autonomy dimension of PWBS was observed from T2 to T3 in the daily life journal group (Fig. 9). Overall, these findings suggest that reflecting on daily events without a gratitude focus can have detrimental effects. Further research is needed to clarify the underlying mechanisms.

Fig. 8.

Changes in PWBS (purpose in life) Scores Across Three Time Points. PWBS (purpose in life) average scores for the gratitude journal and daily life journal groups before (T1), after (T2), and 1.5 months following (T3) the 12-day online gratitude journal intervention. Vertical bars represent the standard error of the mean for each data point

Fig. 9.

Changes in PWBS (Autonomy) Scores Across Three Time Points. PWBS (Autonomy) average scores for the gratitude journal and daily life journal groups before (T1), after (T2), and 1.5 months following (T3) the 12-day online gratitude journal intervention. Vertical bars represent the standard error of the mean for each data point

Journal entry contents

To examine Hypothesis 2, which proposes that the gratitude intervention enhance awareness and recognition of job resources, we analyzed the journal entries using KH Coder [51, 52]. In contrast with the results obtained using the psychological scale, which are based on participants' self-assessments, this analysis examines the content of their journal reflections by identifying word usage patterns.

A total of 91 participants wrote journal entries (45 in the gratitude journal group and 46 in the daily life journal group). For this analysis, we focused on the journal entry contents of 67 participants (34 in the gratitude group and 33 in the daily life journal group) who provided journal entries during the journal intervention period and completed the psychological measurements at T1, T2, and T3.

To provide a descriptive overview of participants' journaling activity, we first examined general patterns of the journal entries. On average, participants in the gratitude journal group wrote on 9.47 days (SD = 2.12, range 4 - 12) out of 12 days of the intervention. Participants in the daily life journal group were equally compliant, writing on average on 9.64 days (SD = 2.00, range 6 - 12) during the 12-day intervention. Moreover, gratitude journal participants wrote on average 1.54 entries per day (SD = 0.88, range 1 - 8), with each entry containing 44.51 Japanese characters (SD = 23.54, range 4 - 169). Daily life journal participants wrote 3.06 entries per day (SD = 0.89, range 1 - 7), with an average length of 28.18 characters per entry (SD = 15.08, range 2 - 141).

Word frequency analysis

First, we conducted a word frequency analysis to identify the most commonly used words in each journal type (gratitude journal vs. daily life journal). Table 4 presents the 10 most frequently used words in each group’s journal entries. Participants in the gratitude journal group typically used words such as "thank you" (114 occurrences), "gratitude" (87), "colleagues" (53), and "happy" (41), as well as words related to personal relationship, such as "children" (52), suggesting an increased tendency to recognize both workplace and personal social connections, along with positive experiences. In contrast, participants in the daily life journal group primarily described routine events, with words such as "today" (239), "work" (135), "go" (86), "eat" (59), and "cold" (48). These results indicate that gratitude journaling encouraged participants to reflect more on interpersonal and positive resources, while daily life journaling focused more on neutral descriptions of daily activities.

Table 4.

Top 10 most frequent words in gratitude and daily life journal entries

Gratitude journal		Daily life journal
Word	Number of occurrences	Word	Number of occurrences
Thank you	114	Today	239
Gratitude	87	Work	135
Work	71	Go	86
Think	62	Eat	59
Colleagues	53	Cold	48
Children	52	Tomorrow	46
Myself	51	Buy	45
Happy	41	Morning	41
Person	40	Delicious	37
Make	36	Think	37

The total number of words was 4449 for the gratitude journal entries, and 5685 for the daily life journal entries

Correspondence analysis

To further investigate the relationship between journal type and word usage, we conducted a correspondence analysis [56] based on the words that appeared 20 or more times in either journal. This analysis uses the chi-square distance to quantify the association between words and journal type, with larger absolute values indicating stronger associations. In essence, words are mapped along a single axis, with words that were more commonly used by participants in the gratitude journal group loaded with negative values, words that were more commonly used by the participants in the daily life journal loaded with positive values, and words that appeared in both groups located around the origin of the axis. Importantly, the analysis highlights distinct and contrasting word usage patterns between the two groups.

Table 5 presents the 10 most characteristic words for each journal type. The words "thank you" (−1.819), "gratitude" (−1.763), "kind" (−1.705), "colleague" (−1.580), and "daughter" (−1.281) were strongly associated with the gratitude journal group, reinforcing the idea that gratitude journaling enhances recognition of both workplace support and personal relationships, including family connections. In contrast, words such as "cold" (1.386), "today" (1.169), "bad" (1.156), "tomorrow" (1.076), and "sleep" (1.076), were uniquely associated with the daily life journal, reflecting a greater focus on daily experiences and physical states rather than interpersonal relationships. These results provide strong evidence that gratitude journaling facilitates a cognitive shift toward recognizing and appreciating available job resources, supporting Hypothesis 2.

Table 5.

Top 10 words most strongly associated with the gratitude and daily life journal groups based on correspondence analysis results

Gratitude journal		Daily life journal
Word	Chi-square distance	Word	Chi-square distance
Thank you	−1.819	Cold	1.386
Gratitude	−1.763	Done	1.351
Kind	−1.705	Today	1.169
Colleague	−1.580	Bad	1.156
Be saved	−1.563	Tomorrow	1.076
Help	−1.548	Sleep	1.076
Correspondence	−1.383	Use	1.070
Daughter	−1.281	Walk	1.070
Tell	−1.259	Night	1.042
Myself	−1.218	Lunch	0.948

Positive chi-square distances reflect stronger association with the daily life journal group, while negative distances reflect stronger association with the gratitude journal group

Discussion

Summary of key findings

This study tested whether a 12-day gratitude journal could enhance work engagement and explored whether increased awareness of job resources mediates this effect. Participants in the gratitude journal group showed significant improvements in overall work engagement, supporting the effectiveness of gratitude journaling. Text analyses of the journal entries suggest that the intervention helped shift attention toward interpersonal job resources, such as colleague’s support, aligning with the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model.

Theoretical contributions

The present findings extend the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model by demonstrating that gratitude can function as a psychological mechanism that enhances employees’ awareness of existing job resources. Regularly reflecting on gratitude may increase sensitivity to supportive aspects of the work environment which in turn promotes engagement. The intervention also prompted recognition of non-work-related support (e.g., from family), suggesting that gratitude broadens attention beyond the workplace. This aligns with Fredrickson’s Broaden-and-Build Theory, which posits that positive emotions expand cognitive scope and help individuals recognize more resources in their environment. Notably, the gratitude journal group’s reflections often included personal relationships, highlighting how general social support may contribute indirectly to work engagement. These findings contribute to a growing body of research suggesting that gratitude is not only correlated with engagement but can causally influence it by reinforcing awareness of one’s social and occupational resources.

Secondary findings

In contrast to the benefits observed in the gratitude journal group, the daily life journal group showed a decline in purpose in life scores immediately after the intervention, and a reduction in autonomy at the follow-up period. One possible explanation is that reflecting on daily events without a specific emotional focus may have encouraged self-focused perspective, which has been linked to negative affect and decreased well-being in previous research [57]. In line with this, analyses based on the journal entries revealed that participants in the daily life journal group used more negative words, suggesting a shift toward more negative emotional tone and processing. This underscores the importance of guided journaling frameworks that emphasize constructive or positive reflection to avoid unintended negative consequences [58].

Interestingly, both journal groups shared certain psychological gains, suggesting that while the specific focus of journaling shapes distinct psychological outcomes, the act of journaling itself may serve as a broadly beneficial reflective practice. Journaling provides a structure for self-reflection and increased self-awareness [59], which can support goal setting, self-regulation and motivation [60, 61]. These findings highlight journaling’s dual role: as a general tool for self-reflection and as a targeted intervention shaped by its focus. Gratitude journaling, emphasizing positive recognition, may be particularly effective for enhancing work engagement, while daily life journaling offers broader but less targeted and more variable benefits. Future research should explore ways to optimize different journaling approaches for diverse populations and workplace settings.

Practical implications

This study highlights the value of cultivating gratitude intentionally in the workplace. The absence of gratitude-related words in the daily life journal group suggests that expressing gratitude is not automatic for many individuals. Notably, the benefits of gratitude journaling extended beyond work-related experiences, indicating that a holistic focus may enhance its effectiveness. As a simple, low-cost intervention, gratitude journaling can improve employee engagement and contribute to a more positive organizational culture. Future research should examine how such interventions can be tailored to different work environments and assess their long-term impact.

Limitations and future directions

While this study provides valuable insights into how gratitude interventions enhance work engagement, several limitations should be considered.

First, the control group wrote about daily life events without being explicitly directed to focus on mental or emotional content, whereas the gratitude journal group reflected on gratitude-related experiences. Although both groups followed similar procedures, this key difference in emotional focus may have influenced the degree of introspection and recognition of job resources. Future research should explore whether the benefits observed in work engagement are unique to gratitude journaling or whether they may also emerge from other forms of reflective writing [62]. For example, journaling tasks with a positive emotional focus [63] or neutral writing prompts that instruct participants to factually describe their day without emotion [64] could serve as meaningful comparison groups. These additional conditions would help clarify whether deliberate attention to gratitude is essential for increasing engagement or if a broader reflective practice could also enhance job resources.

Second, differences in writing patterns between groups may have influenced outcomes. Participants in the gratitude journal group tended to write fewer entries per day but at greater length, suggesting a deeper level of reflection. In contrast, participants in the daily life journal group wrote more frequent but shorter entries, potentially reflecting a more superficial level of reflection. While we did not formally assess content depth, these patterns raise the possibility that the quality and amount of reflection differed between groups, potentially influencing psychological outcomes. Future studies should consider standardizing journaling instructions (e.g., specifying the number of entries and suggested length) to ensure comparable writing effort across groups and better isolate the specific effects of gratitude interventions.

Third, all participants were Japanese employees, which may limit the generalizability of the findings. Cultural differences, particularly in how gratitude and daily reflections are perceived, could have influenced the results. Previous research has shown that the frequency and intensity of experiencing gratitude can vary across cultures, and these differences are associated with factors such as self-esteem, loneliness, and perceived stress [65]. This suggests that the effects of keeping a gratitude journal might lead to different emotional outcomes across cultural groups. Future studies should replicate this research in diverse cultural settings to better understand how these findings translate across different populations.

Fourth, the analysis of age and gender effects was exploratory. When considering age and gender in the analysis, each subgroup had a relatively small sample size, making it difficult to determine whether the absence of significant effects truly reflects a lack of influence of these factors or is due to insufficient statistical power. In addition, the relatively narrow age range of participants (30 - 49 years) may limit the generalizability and robustness of the findings. Previous research has shown that the disposition to experience gratitude changes with age [54], and differs by gender [55], suggesting that the effects of gratitude journaling may vary across different age and gender groups. Future research should include a broader age range, such as individuals in their 20 s and 50 s, and employ larger sample sizes to enable separate analyses by age and gender. This approach could clarify whether certain demographic groups derive more benefits from gratitude interventions.

Finally, it remains an open question how the results might differ if the effects of gratitude on work engagement were assessed using methods other than self-report scales. Self-report measures are prone to biases, such as social desirability or the tendency to respond in ways that maintain a positive self-concept [66, 67]. To more comprehensively assess the impact of gratitude journaling on work engagement, future research should consider incorporating additional measures. One potential approach could be to track work performance indicators that may reflect levels of work engagement. For example, a recent study found that work performance was significantly associated with cognitive functions such as attention, executive functioning, and working memory among general workers [68]. This suggests that cognitive performance tests could be used as more objective measures, alongside traditional metrics such as productivity rates, task completion accuracy, sales performance, presenteeism, absenteeism rates, and performance evaluations conducted by supervisors. Combining such data with self-report measures would provide a more comprehensive understanding of how gratitude interventions influence employees’ work engagement and overall job performance.

Conclusions

This study provides experimental evidence that a simple gratitude journaling intervention enhances work engagement by increasing awareness and recognition of job resources, supporting the Job Demands-Resources Model and Broaden-and-Build Theory. The findings suggest that gratitude does not naturally arise in everyday reflections but must be actively cultivated, offering practical implications for workplace interventions. Given its low-cost, scalable nature, gratitude journaling may serve as an accessible tool for fostering engagement, well-being, and positive work culture. Future research should explore long-term effects, cross-cultural applications, and objective performance outcomes to further establish its effectiveness in diverse work settings.

Abbreviations

GQ-J

Japanese version of the Gratitude Questionnaire

NEO-FFI

Neuroticism-Extraversion-Openness Inventory Five-Factor Inventory

PT

Perspective Taking Scale

PWBS

Psychological Well-Being Scale

rm-ANOVA

repeated measures analysis of variance

SD

Standard deviation

SWLS

Satisfaction With Life Scale

UWES

Utrecht Work Engagement Scale

WM-J

Work Motivation Questionnaire in Japanese Organizations

Authors’ contributions

NY and NEN conceived the study, and NY, NEN and SI designed the experiment. SI acquired the data. NY performed the statistical analyses and wrote the manuscript with inputs from NEN and SI. All authors have approved the final manuscript.

Funding

This study was partially funded by a grant from the Ritsumeikan Inamori Philosophy Research Center to NY and NEN. This study was conducted as part of the "Well-Living for Well-Being" project organized by the Consortium for Applied Neuroscience (CAN). JMA Management Center Inc., Tokyo, Japan, provided partial support for this project. The authors alone were responsible for study’s design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, and preparation of the manuscript, with no input from other parties.

Data availability

Data sharing is subject to participant consent restrictions. According to the informed consent form, all data were to be statistically processed and anonymized, and no personal or company-identifiable information would be disclosed. Therefore, only de-identified and aggregated data can be shared upon reasonable request.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was approved by the ethics committee of the Shiba Palace Clinic, Tokyo, Japan that is working under the authorization of the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare (approval number: 150926_rn_33852). All participants submitted an online consent form before taking part in the experiments, in accordance with the principles stated in the Declaration of Helsinki.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interest

The authors declare no competing interests.