Invisible Barriers to Returning to the Labor Market: A Qualitative Analysis of Unemployed People's Experiences

Introduction

Returning to the labor market is a complex and multidimensional process that cannot be reduced exclusively to qualification, work experience, or the current supply of vacancies. In professional discourse and in employment services practice, emphasis is often placed on so-called visible barriers to employability, such as educational level, professional skills, and mismatches between labor demand and supply.

Less attention is paid to factors that are not immediately apparent but fundamentally shape individuals' behavior in the job search process. These include the internal experience of unemployment, motivation, self-image, and interpretation of one's own situation. These aspects can be understood as a latent dimension of employability, which significantly influences an individual’s actual insertion in the labor market.

Among these barriers are, for example, weakened self-confidence, loss of work habits, repeated experiences of rejection, uncertainty about one's own abilities, and an ambivalent attitude toward work. The individual's relationship to labor-market institutions also plays an important role, and can be influenced by experience of a formalized or insufficiently individualized approach.

From a social work perspective, it is important to reflect that unemployment is not only an economic problem, but also affects an individual's everyday functioning, adaptive strategies, and ability to fulfill social roles. Long-term exposure to failure and uncertainty can lead to a gradual weakening of initiative and the ability to address one's own situation.

The aim of the article is to identify and analyze invisible barriers to returning to the labor market based on the subjective experiences of unemployed individuals and to highlight their significance in the context of social functioning. From the perspective of social work, however, it remains an open question to what extent these latent factors are reflected in everyday practice with clients. Therefore, the article seeks not only to identify these factors but also to understand them within the context of social work interventions.

Theoretical foundations

The issue of returning to the labor market is traditionally associated in professional literature with the concept of employability, which is often defined as the set of individual characteristics, abilities, and resources that enable an individual to obtain and maintain employment (Fugate et al., 2004). This concept, however, often reflects mainly measurable and visible aspects, such as education, work experience, and professional competence, while less frequently considering subjective factors that influence an individual’s actual behavior.

Unemployment is not only an economic but also a significant life situation that affects an individual's everyday functioning. Long-term absence of a work role can disrupt time structure, weaken social ties, and reduce the sense of competence. These changes are reflected in behavior, decision-making, and the approach to job searching.

In this context, invisible barriers to returning to the labor market can be understood as mainly psychological, social, and interactional factors. Among them are low self-efficacy, feelings of helplessness, internalized stigma of unemployment, and repeated experiences of failure. These factors influence not only motivation but also the individual's ability to search for job opportunities and respond to employer demands.

A significant aspect is also the individual's experience with labor-market institutions. Research indicates that a formalized, administratively oriented approach can weaken clients’ trust in support systems and reduce their willingness to cooperate. A lack of individualized support and reflection of specific client needs may contribute to deepening passivity and resignation.

From a social work perspective, returning to the labor market therefore needs to be seen as a process that goes beyond the frame of economic integration and also includes renewal of identity, competencies, and activity. Social work has a key role in identifying and mitigating these barriers, especially through individual client work, support of personal resources, and strengthening participation.

Reflecting on invisible barriers allows for a better understanding of why some individuals remain outside the labor market despite available support and formal prerequisites. At the same time, it opens up space for creating more effective interventions that account for the complexity of their life situation.

Invisible barriers to returning to the labor market in the context of social functioning

Unemployment is a complex social phenomenon that goes beyond economic deprivation and significantly affects an individual’s psychological and social functioning. Classical approaches to employability emphasize structural and individual factors, such as educational level, work experience, and regional labor-market differences. These factors, however, cannot fully explain why some individuals remain outside the labor market despite formal employability.

In this context, the concept of invisible barriers comes to the foreground, including latent psychosocial factors that affect an individual’s ability to actively participate in the job search process. These barriers are not directly measurable, yet they significantly determine the behavior, decision-making, and motivation of unemployed individuals. Their essence lies primarily in the subjective experience of unemployment and the gradual disruption of social functioning.

According to Jahodová (1982), employment fulfills, in addition to manifest functions like income, several latent functions such as time structure, social contacts, a sense of usefulness, and identity. Losing employment therefore means not only an economic loss, but also disruption of these latent functions, which can lead to psychological discomfort and social isolation. More recent research confirms these findings, pointing to the negative impact of unemployment on mental health, including increased risk of depression, anxiety, and reduced life satisfaction (Paul – Moser, 2009). More current systematic reviews confirm these findings, showing significantly higher rates of depression and anxiety among unemployed individuals (Arena et al., 2023). A similar conclusion is drawn by McKee-Ryan et al. (2005), which points to a significant relationship between unemployment and worsening mental as well as physical well-being.

A key role is also played by the concept of social functioning, which can be understood as an individual’s ability to cope with everyday life situations, maintain social relationships, and fulfill expected social roles. Long-term unemployment can lead to a gradual weakening of these abilities, manifesting in reduced activity, passivity, and resignation. This process is often accompanied by a decline in self-efficacy and disruption of identity.

Closely related is the phenomenon of stigma of unemployed persons. According to Goffman (1963), stigma is a social process in which an individual is marked as “different” or “inferior,” resulting in social disadvantage. Unemployment may be perceived in society as a sign of personal failure, leading to internalization of negative stereotypes and diminished self-worth. This internalized stigma then acts as a barrier to active entry into the labor market.

Another important factor is perceived employability, which represents an individual’s subjective belief in their ability to obtain employment (Fugate et al., 2004). Even when an individual objectively possesses required competencies, low self-confidence and negative experiences in selection processes can lead to reduced activity and willingness to apply for job opportunities.

In the context of Slovakia, it is also necessary to reflect on the specific functioning of employment services. As Hetteš (2013) notes, work with unemployed people often takes place under administrative burden and limited possibilities for individualized approaches. Invisible barriers to returning to the labor market therefore arise at the intersection of individual experiences, social environment, and institutional conditions. Understanding them requires a comprehensive approach that takes into account not only economic but also psychosocial dimensions of unemployment. It is precisely in this context that social work plays a significant role in identifying these barriers and supporting individuals in overcoming them.

Invisible barriers to returning to the labor market

Invisible barriers to returning to the labor market constitute a set of latent factors that are not directly identifiable at first glance through formal employability indicators, yet significantly influence an individual’s ability to perform on the labor market. Unlike visible barriers—such as low qualification, lack of work experience, or regional constraints— invisible barriers are mainly psychosocial in nature and closely linked to the subjective experience of unemployment.

A key aspect of invisible barriers is weakened self-efficacy and self-esteem of the individual. Long-term unemployment, repeated failures in job search, and experiences of rejection by employers lead to a gradual decline in belief in one’s own abilities. This process may lead to passivity, avoidance of job opportunities, and resignation from actively addressing one’s situation.

Closely connected to invisible barriers are the loss of work habits and disruption of daily structure. As Jahodová (1982) points out, employment plays a significant role in organizing an individual’s daily life. Its absence can lead to disorganization of time, reduced activity, and weakening of the ability to adapt to work demands.

Stigmatization of unemployed individuals also plays an important role. Unemployment may be perceived in society as personal failure, which leads to internalization of negative stereotypes and a sense of inferiority. According to Goffman (1963), stigma affects identity and social interactions, which can then reduce willingness to enter new work situations.

Another important factor is reduced motivation and an ambivalent attitude toward work. Although individuals express interest in employment, their behavior may be influenced by prior negative experiences, leading to internal ambivalence between wanting to obtain work and fear of further failure. This state is often accompanied by psychological strain that can negatively affect mental health (Paul – Moser, 2009).

Global studies also confirm a significant association between unemployment and the occurrence of mental disorders, especially anxiety and depression (Yang et al., 2024).

Invisible barriers are also influenced by the functioning context of labor-market institutions. A formalized approach, lack of individual support, and administratively oriented services can weaken clients’ trust in support systems (Hetteš, 2013). As a result, cooperation may decrease and unemployed individuals may adopt a passive approach.

Invisible barriers to returning to the labor market therefore represent a complex set of interrelated factors that significantly affect an individual’s social functioning. Their identification and understanding are crucial for designing effective interventions in social work and employment services.

Psychosocial mechanisms of invisible barriers to returning to the labor market

Invisible barriers to returning to the labor market cannot be understood as a set of isolated factors but as a dynamic system of psychosocial mechanisms that influence behavior, decision-making, and motivation during the return process. Their effect is the result of interaction between individual experiences, social environment, and subjective perception of one’s own possibilities.

A key mechanism is self-efficacy, which represents an individual’s belief in their ability to handle specific situations and achieve set goals (Bandura, 1997). In the context of unemployment, self-efficacy plays a decisive role in deciding between activity and passivity. Repeated failures in job seeking, negative feedback, or an absence of positive experiences lead to a gradual weakening of self-efficacy, which manifests as avoidance of job opportunities, reduced initiative, and resignation from actively solving one’s situation.

A related process is learned helplessness, which describes the state in which an individual, based on repeated negative experiences, comes to believe that their behavior has no effect on outcomes (Seligman, 1975). In conditions of long-term unemployment, this mechanism can lead to loss of control over one’s life, passivity, and reduced willingness to make effort toward finding employment.

Motivational processes in the context of returning to the labor market can also be analyzed through Self-Determination Theory, which emphasizes the importance of three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Deci – Ryan, 2000). When these needs are not met, internal motivation weakens and shifts toward a less stable external form of motivation. In the case of unemployed individuals, lack of support, low control over one’s own situation, and weakened social ties can lead to progressive demotivation and reduced interest in work integration.

A significant aspect is also identity disruption caused by job loss. Work represents not only a source of income but also a major element of personal identity, social status, and self-realization (Blustein, 2006). Its absence may lead to a sense of meaninglessness, uncertainty, and reduced self-esteem, which in turn affects an individual’s ability to actively enter work roles.

Perceived employability represents another important mechanism. As Fugate et al. (2004) state, employability is not merely an objective set of competencies but also an individual’s subjective belief about their ability to place themselves on the labor market. Low perceived employability may lead to reduced activity, avoidance of selection processes, and constrained occupational ambitions.

These mechanisms are simultaneously influenced by a broader social and institutional context. A formalized approach in employment services, lack of individualized support, and weak institutional backing can contribute to reduced trust and the deepening of passive behavioral strategies (Hetteš, 2013). As a result, a vicious circle develops in which individual and systemic factors reinforce one another.

Psychosocial mechanisms of invisible barriers therefore constitute a comprehensive framework that enables deeper understanding of processes leading to demotivation, passivity, and resignation among unemployed persons. Their identification is key to designing effective social work interventions that should be focused not only on competence development but also on strengthening self-efficacy, restoring identity, and supporting active involvement in the process of returning to the labor market.

Research methodology

The goal of the study was to identify and analyze invisible barriers to returning to the labor market based on the subjective experiences of unemployed persons, focusing on psychosocial mechanisms influencing their motivation, behavior, and social functioning.

Research questions

Based on the research objective, the following research questions were formulated:

• What invisible barriers to returning to the labor market do unemployed persons identify based on their own experiences?
• How do these barriers affect their behavior and motivation in the job-search process?
• In what ways do unemployed persons perceive support from labor-market institutions?

Research design

The research was conducted as a qualitative study using grounded theory principles (Grounded Theory), which enables systematic generation of theoretical knowledge based on empirical data (Charmaz, 2014; Strauss – Corbin, 1998). This approach is especially suitable for studying poorly explored or latent phenomena, such as invisible barriers to returning to the labor market.

Grounded theory enables the capture of subjective meanings that individuals attribute to their situation and the identification of processes and mechanisms that influence their behavior in the context of unemployment.

Research sample

The research sample consisted of unemployed individuals registered with the labor office. Participants were selected through purposive sampling with an emphasis on heterogeneity of experience (age, duration of unemployment, work history). The goal was to capture diversity in experiencing unemployment and identify common patterns of behavior and barriers.

The research sample consisted of 11 participants. Data collection was ended when theoretical saturation was reached, i.e., when further interviews did not bring new meaningful categories or substantial expansion of existing concepts (Strauss – Corbin, 1998). For anonymity, participants are referred to in the text by codes P1–P11.

Table 1 Characteristics of participants

Source: own processing, 2026

Data collection

Data were obtained through semi-structured interviews, which allow flexible responses to participants and at the same time preserve the thematic focus of the study. The interviews were focused on unemployed people’s experiences with job searching, living with unemployment, motivation, and barriers to returning to the labor market.

Interviews were conducted individually, recorded with participants’ consent, and then transcribed into text. Emphasis was placed on creating a safe and trusting environment that allowed participants to openly reflect on their experiences.

Data analysis

Data analysis followed grounded theory principles, specifically through open, axial, and selective coding (Strauss – Corbin, 1998).

• Open coding focused on identifying units of meaning in the text and their initial categorization.
• Axial coding enabled identification of relationships between categories and their systematic organization.
• Selective coding led to integration of categories at a higher level of abstraction and formulation of central research themes.

The analysis process was iterative, involving continuous data comparison (constant comparative method), which made it possible to progressively refine categories and their meaning (Charmaz, 2014).

Ethical aspects of the research

The study was conducted in accordance with ethical principles of social research. Participants were informed about the purpose of the research, anonymity, and voluntary participation. All collected data were processed anonymously and used exclusively for research purposes.

Research findings

Analysis of the data through open, axial, and selective coding led to the identification of several key categories representing invisible barriers to returning to the labor market. These categories reflect the subjective experience of unemployment and point to psychosocial mechanisms that determine participants’ behavior and motivation in the job search process.

Weakened self-confidence and self-efficacy

One of the most pronounced categories was weakened self-confidence, which manifested as doubts about one’s own abilities and reduced belief in the possibility of placing oneself on the labor market. Negative experiences in selection processes gradually shaped participants’ belief in their own inadequacy. This type of experience is illustrated by the following statement: “I do not even want to respond anymore, because the answer is always the same—they did not choose me” (P2). These experiences led to internalization of failure and weakening of self-efficacy. As one participant stated: “The more I kept trying, the more I felt like I could not do it” (P5). Subsequently, activity in job searching became restricted and situations that could lead to further failure were avoided.

Experience of repeated rejection

A significant factor was the experience of repeated rejection by employers, which had a cumulative character and progressively affected the participants’ emotional experience. Repeated failures translated into frustration, a sense of unfairness, and reduced motivation to continue job searching. This process is illustrated by the following quote: “After a while, I no longer even expect an answer because I know it won’t come” (P6). Among some participants, a sense of stigmatization also appeared, especially related to the length of unemployment or age, which further weakened their willingness to actively participate in selection processes.

Loss of work habits and daily structure

Another significant category was the loss of work habits and disruption of daily structure. Long-term unemployment led to reduced regularity, disorganization of time, and erosion of work discipline, which subsequently affected participants’ readiness to start employment. As one participant said: “When I stay at home for a long time, I lose my routine, and then it is hard to reset myself again” (P9). Loss of daily rhythm was often accompanied by passivity and lower levels of activity, which made returning to a work environment harder.

Ambivalent motivation

The findings also showed the presence of ambivalent motivation. Participants expressed willingness to work; however, their behavior was often influenced by internal tension between striving for employment and fear of further failure. This contradiction is reflected in the following statement: “I want to work, but sometimes I am afraid it will not work out again” (P7). Ambivalence manifested in selective responses to job offers, postponing decisions, or low intensity of job searching. This state can be interpreted as a consequence of long-term exposure to failure and psychological burden.

Resignation and passivity

In part of the participants, resignation was identified as a more advanced phase of demotivation. This state was characterized by a loss of interest in job opportunities and the belief that one cannot influence one’s own situation. As one participant put it: “I have already come to terms with the fact that I probably won’t be working” (P8). Resignation was closely linked to long-term unemployment and repeated negative experiences, leading to a complete withdrawal from active job searching.

Distrust of the support system

A significant category was also distrust toward labor-market institutions. Participants perceived the support offered as formal and insufficiently responsive to their individual needs. This attitude is illustrated by the following statement: “At the office they tell me what I should do, but in reality it does not actually help me find work” (P3). Distrust in the system was expressed in reduced willingness to cooperate and a passive approach to offered services. A summary of identified categories of invisible barriers and their manifestations is shown in Table 2.

Table 2 Invisible barriers to returning to the labor market – categories and manifestations

Source: own processing, 2026

The data analysis also led to the identification of a central category integrating the individual identified barriers into a coherent process. This process can be characterized as the progressive loss of activity in job searching, which arises from the cumulative effect of psychosocial factors such as reduced self-efficacy, repeated experiences of failure, and disruption of adaptive strategies.

Based on the analysis, a conceptual model was developed that captures the dynamics of invisible barriers to returning to the labor market and their interconnections over time. The model points to the processual nature of the identified categories and their arrangement into sequentially linked phases.

Invisible barriers do not act in isolation; they create a gradually developing process in which individual activity progressively weakens. This process is initiated by weakened self-efficacy and experiences of repeated rejection, then deepens through the disruption of work habits and ambivalent motivation, and in some cases ends in resignation and passivity. The entire process is simultaneously influenced by contextual factors, especially distrust toward labor-market institutions, which functions as a transversal factor modifying the course of individual phases and can either intensify this process or partially mitigate it.

Figure 1 Conceptual model of invisible barriers to returning to the labor market

Source: own processing, 2026

The model of identified invisible barriers to returning to the labor market is schematically shown in Figure 1. It captures the processual nature of the influence of each category and their progressive dynamics over time. It shows that the identified barriers do not appear in isolation, but create a linked sequence leading to the gradual weakening of an individual’s activity in job searching. The central integrative role in this process is played by the category of “progressive loss of activity,” which represents the outcome of the cumulative influence of psychosocial factors. The model also suggests that the identified barriers may create a self-reinforcing mechanism in which individual factors mutually reproduce and stabilize passive adaptive strategies.

Discussion

The findings provide answers to the set research questions. In relation to the first research question, specific invisible barriers to returning to the labor market were identified, especially weakened self-confidence, repeated experiences of rejection, loss of work habits, ambivalent motivation, resignation, and distrust of the support system.

The second research question points to the way these barriers affect participants’ behavior and motivation, especially through reduced activity, avoidant behavior, and progressive resignation. The third question reflects perceptions of support from labor-market institutions, which is often characterized as formal and insufficiently individualized. On the first level, they identify specific invisible barriers to returning to the labor market, especially weakened self-confidence, repeated experiences of rejection, loss of work habits, ambivalent motivation, resignation, and distrust of the support system. On the second level, they show how these barriers influence behavior and motivation, especially through reduced activity, avoidant behavior, and progressive resignation. On the third level, the findings also reflect perceptions of support from labor-market institutions, often characterized as formal and insufficiently individualized.

The findings confirm that returning to the labor market cannot be explained solely through formal employability indicators; it requires accounting for latent psychosocial processes that shape individual behavior. This conclusion is also supported by the latest systematic reviews, which indicate increased risk of mental health problems during unemployment and their mitigation after re-employment (Sterud et al., 2025).

The identified categories point to the existence of a dynamic process in which the way individuals interpret their situation and respond to labor market demands changes over time. Unlike traditional approaches that emphasize qualification deficits, the results of this study show that even individuals with relatively preserved qualification potential may exhibit low levels of activity due to reduced self-efficacy and negative experiences.

In line with the concept of self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997), it appears that repeated rejection leads to a gradual decline in belief in one’s own abilities, which translates into avoidant behavior and constrained occupational ambitions. This process can take the form of learned helplessness (Seligman, 1975), where passivity is not the result of a lack of effort, but an adaptive response to repeated failure.

Compared with existing studies (Paul – Moser, 2009), the findings more precisely capture the transition between phases—from active job searching to resignation. The study’s contribution is precisely the identification of this process as continuous development rather than a static condition.

Ambivalent motivation represents another significant aspect that expands knowledge from self-determination theory (Deci – Ryan, 2000). Findings suggest that individuals do not move linearly between motivation and demotivation, but often experience inner tension between striving for labor market integration and fear of further failure.

A significant finding is also the linkage of individual and systemic factors. Distrust of labor-market institutions points to the fact that an individual’s behavior is co-shaped by the quality of support provided. This aspect corresponds to Hetteš’s findings (2013), but the results of this study more explicitly show how a lack of individualization translates into clients’ passive adaptive strategies. From the perspective of social functioning, these findings can be interpreted as a weakening of an individual’s ability to fulfill social roles and adapt to changing conditions. At the same time, the capacity to effectively use available resources declines. Invisible barriers thus are not merely an individual problem but a complex phenomenon emerging at the intersection of personal experience and social environment. The results therefore extend existing knowledge on employability by adding its latent dimension and pointing to the need to reconsider support approaches in employment policies. A major contribution of the study is the conceptualization of invisible barriers as a dynamic and self-reinforcing process that goes beyond the traditional view of employability as a static set of individual characteristics. From the perspective of social work, these findings have significant implications for everyday practice. It becomes clear that social workers should pay increased attention to identifying psychosocial barriers—such as weakened self-efficacy, ambivalent motivation, and resignation—that are not captured by standard employability assessment tools. Working with these factors can significantly affect the level of client activity in the process of returning to the labor market.

Conclusion

Invisible barriers to returning to the labor market represent a significant, yet often overlooked, aspect of unemployment. The study’s findings indicate that returning to the labor market is not determined solely by qualification and structural factors, but also, to a substantial extent, by psychosocial mechanisms that shape behavior, decision-making, and adaptive strategies.

The identified categories—weakened self-confidence, repeated experiences of rejection, loss of work habits, ambivalent motivation, resignation, and distrust of the support system—form an interconnected system of barriers that leads to a gradual weakening of individual activity and limits the capacity to respond effectively to labor market demands.

The findings suggest that traditional employment support tools, primarily focused on qualification aspects, may not be sufficient unless they also consider the individual’s internal orientation, experiences, and adaptive strategies. Effective support for returning to the labor market therefore requires a comprehensive and individualized approach that combines competency development with strengthening self-efficacy, restoring work habits, and supporting active coping with one’s life situation.

From the perspective of social work, it is essential to apply a holistic approach that reflects the subjective experience of the client, their life situation, and social contexts. Emphasis should be placed on supporting autonomy, active participation, and client dignity as foundational principles of professional practice. The findings also indicate the need to connect active labor market policy tools with elements of psychosocial support, including individual counseling, motivational interventions, and longer-term client accompaniment. Such an approach can contribute to more effective handling of barriers and a more sustainable return to the labor market. Ultimately, the findings open space for further research focused on deeper understanding of latent barriers in different groups of unemployed people and their reflection in the context of social work and public policy. On the basis of the findings, concrete practical implications for social work practice can also be formulated.

Author: PhDr. Daniela Lorko Praznovská

List of bibliographic references

ARENA, A. F. et al. 2023. Mental health and unemployment: A systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions. In: Journal of Affective Disorders. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2023.05.027.

BLUSTEIN, D. L. 2006. The psychology of working: A new perspective for career development, counseling, and public policy. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2006. 384 p. ISBN 978-0805856231.

FUGATE, M. – KINICKI, A. J. – ASHFORTH, B. E. 2004. Employability: A psycho-social construct, its dimensions, and applications. In: Journal of Vocational Behavior. ISSN 0001-8791, 2004, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 14–38. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2003.10.005.

GOFFMAN, E. 1963. Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity. New York: Prentice-Hall, 1963. 147 p. ISBN 978-0671622440.

GREENBERG, J. 1990. Organizational justice: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. In: Journal of Management. ISSN 0149-2063, 1990, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 399–432. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639001600208.

CHARMAZ, K. 2014. Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage, 2014. 416 p. ISBN 9780857029140.

HETTEŠ, M. 2013. Zamestnanosť a sociálna práca. Bratislava: VŠZaSP sv. Alžbety, 2013. 192 p. ISBN 978-80-8132-070-2.

JAHODA, M. 1982. Employment and unemployment: A social-psychological analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982. 208 p. ISBN 978-0521289670.

KOLTÁŠ, M. 2025. Sociálna diagnostika a kazuistika v sociálnej práci. Bratislava: VŠZaSP sv. Alžbety, 2025. 209 p. ISBN 978-80-8132-305-8.

LACA, P. – LACA, S. 2020. Koncept filozofie a etiky v sociálnej práci. Příbram: Ústav sv. Jana Nepomuka Neumanna, 2020. 314 p. ISBN 978-80-88206-20-0.

McKEE-RYAN, F. M. et al. 2005. Psychological and physical well-being during unemployment: A meta-analytic study. In: Journal of Applied Psychology. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.1.53.

PAUL, K. I. – MOSER, K. 2009. Unemployment impairs mental health: Meta-analyses. In Journal of Vocational Behavior. ISSN 0001-8791, 2009, vol. 74, no. 3, pp. 264–282. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2009.01.001.

SEN, A. 1999. Development as freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999. 366 p. ISBN 978-0385720274.

STERUD, T. – LUNDE, L.-K. – BERG, R. et al. 2025. Mental health effects of unemployment and re-employment: a systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. In: Occupational and Environmental Medicine. ISSN 1351-0711, 2025, vol. 82, no. 7, pp. 343–353. Available online: https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2025-110194.

STRAUSS, A. – CORBIN, J. 1998. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1998. 312 p. ISBN 978-0803959408.

VANSAČ, P. – SEMANOVÁ, M. (eds.) 2025. Zborník z XII. medzinárodnej vedeckej konferencie: Medzigeneračné vzťahy v kontexte sociálnej práce a zdravotníckych vied – teória a prax. Michalovce, 13. November 2025. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu VIZJA, 2025. Available online: https://www.vssvalzbety.sk/static/editor/In%C5%A1tit%C3%BAt%20Bl.%20M.%20D.%20Tr%C4%8Dku%20Michalovce/ZBORNI%CC%81K%20Z%20XII.%20MEDZINA%CC%81RODNEJ%20VEDECKEJ%20KONFERENCIE%20-%20MI%202025/ZBORNIK.pdf.

YANG, Y. et al. 2024. Unemployment and mental health: a global study. In: Frontiers in Public Health. ISSN 2296-2565, 2024. Available online: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2024.1440403