Fig. 4.

Predicting remote work hindrance stress in remote work (Hypothesis 4). Note. N = 391 remote workers. Simple slopes for both groups shown are significant (p < .01). No slopes were significantly different from each other, including high-low and low–high combinations, which fell between these two lines (both non-significant simple slopes) but are not shown here since they were not the focus of our hypothesis. The only exception was the high-low group, which was significantly different (at p < .05) from both slopes shown (simple slope =  − 0.13, t =  − 0.71, p = .48)