The authors define employee psychological well-being as the overall condition that allows a worker to enjoy positive mental health, resilience and job satisfaction, so that they can perform well, maintain positive relationships and continue developing both personally and professionally. That definition may sound straightforward, but as the review makes clear, the underlying literature is anything but unified. Studies of workplace wellbeing have proliferated over recent decades, yet they draw on different theories, measure different constructs, and use different methods, making it difficult to draw cumulative conclusions. The new review was designed precisely to impose order on that fragmentation, offering what the authors describe as methodological rigour and transparency through a systematic literature search.

To achieve this, the team applied the SPAR 4 SLR protocol, short for Scientific Procedures and Rationales for Systematic Literature Reviews. This framework guides reviewers through a structured sequence of acquisition, organization and analysis stages, ensuring that each decision about which studies to include, exclude and how to code them is documented and reproducible. Following this protocol, the researchers finalized 105 peer-reviewed articles relevant to employee psychological well-being. The use of an explicit protocol matters because systematic reviews are only as trustworthy as the procedures behind them; by laying out their rationales at every step, the authors allow other researchers to audit, replicate or extend their synthesis with confidence.

Once the 105 articles were assembled, the team subjected them to a two-level analysis built on the ADO-TCM framework. The TCM component, covering Theories, Contexts and Methods, was used to map the theoretical support underpinning the field, cataloguing which frameworks scholars invoke, in which settings they test them and with what research designs. The ADO component, covering Antecedents, Decisions and Outcomes, was used to analyse the drivers of psychological well-being and trace their influence on wellbeing-related choices and outcomes among employees. Together, the two lenses provide a structured synthesis that goes beyond a simple narrative summary, instead generating an integrative framework that connects causes, mechanisms and consequences of workplace mental health.

The findings are revealing in part because they are as much about the state of the science as about wellbeing itself. The review highlights inconsistencies in how psychological well-being constructs are operationalized across studies, meaning that different papers often measure the same broad idea with different scales, definitions and indicators. It also identifies limited attention to mediators, the intermediate mechanisms that explain how workplace factors translate into wellbeing outcomes, and a lack of multi-level theorization, meaning few studies connect individual experiences to team, organizational or societal layers of analysis. These gaps, the authors suggest, have slowed the field’s cumulative progress and obscured the full picture of how workplaces shape mental health.

To address some of that fragmentation, the study presents a conceptual model summarizing all the antecedents of employee psychological well-being identified in the literature. Antecedents, in this context, are the upstream factors that precede and potentially produce wellbeing, and the model organizes them into a coherent structure that future researchers can use to design studies, test relationships and compare findings. By consolidating what is known about these drivers in one place, the model functions as both a map of existing knowledge and an agenda for what remains unknown. The authors intend it as a practical resource for academics seeking theoretical grounding as well as for HR professionals and practitioners who aim to create sustainable organizational health, a goal they frame as central to long-term organizational performance.

The practical implications extend well beyond academia. In an era when burnout, stress and disengagement dominate headlines about the modern workplace, organizations are under growing pressure to invest in employee mental health, yet they often do so without a clear evidence base. A structured synthesis of 105 studies offers precisely that base, showing which factors the literature consistently identifies as supportive of wellbeing and where the evidence remains thin. For HR practitioners, the review’s emphasis on resilience and job satisfaction as pillars of positive functioning suggests that wellbeing programs should aim at more than stress reduction; they should cultivate the psychological resources that let employees thrive, build relationships and keep growing over the course of their careers.

Methodologically, the paper also serves as a demonstration of how modern review protocols can elevate the quality of evidence synthesis in organizational research. The SPAR 4 SLR approach, by requiring explicit scientific procedures and rationales, stands in contrast to older-style narrative reviews in which inclusion criteria can be opaque and selection biases hard to detect. The pairing with ADO-TCM adds an analytical architecture, ensuring that the review does not merely catalogue studies but actively organizes them around theories, contexts, methods, antecedents, decisions and outcomes. Supplementary materials accompanying the article, provided as downloadable data files, further support transparency by documenting the journals included, the list of theories encountered and the data collection techniques used across the reviewed studies.

The publication also reflects broader currents in the science of work. Research on employee health and wellbeing now sits at the intersection of personnel psychology, positive psychology, psychological methods and counseling psychology, and journals are increasingly publishing open-access reviews designed to be citable and widely accessible. This article, published open access on 22 September 2026 after being received on 21 January 2026 and accepted on 24 August 2026, exemplifies that trend, sharing peer-reviewed, accepted research early to provide faster access while carrying a permanent DOI. The authors report that no external funding was received for the systematic review, with open access funding provided by Symbiosis International (Deemed University), and they declare no competing interests.

For the field, the message of this review is twofold. First, employee psychological wellbeing is a construct worth defending in all its richness: a state of positive mental health, resilience and satisfaction that enables performance, relationships and growth, not merely the absence of illness. Second, the science studying it needs more consistency, more attention to mediating mechanisms and more multi-level thinking if it is to deliver actionable guidance at scale. By consolidating 105 studies into a transparent, protocol-driven synthesis and a unifying conceptual model, kumari, Pandita and Bedarkar have given researchers, HR professionals and organizational leaders a clearer foundation on which to build the next generation of workplace mental health science, one in which sustainable organizational health is treated not as a perk but as a systematically understood and deliberately cultivated outcome.

Subject of Research: A systematic literature review of employee psychological wellbeing using the SPAR 4 SLR and ADO-TCM frameworks

Article Title: Exploring employee psychological wellbeing through the SPAR 4 SLR framework

Article References: kumari, P., Pandita, D., & Bedarkar, M. (2026). Exploring employee psychological wellbeing through the SPAR 4 SLR framework. Discover Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44202-026-00879-1

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s44202-026-00879-1

Keywords: employee psychological well-being, systematic literature review, SPAR-4-SLR, ADO-TCM, workplace mental health, burnout, stress, job satisfaction, resilience, human resource management, organizational health, Discover Psychology