What this rests on.

Gallup. (2026). State of the Global Workplace: Australia, United States and United Kingdom country data.

Why it’s here: Daily stress: Australia 50%, US 50%, UK 46%. Country results aggregate 2023–2025.

Limits: Employed adults reporting stress a lot of the previous day, not necessarily caused by work. Rounded survey estimates; not a forecast for a team.

Gallup. (2026). United States country-level data.

Why it’s here: US daily stress: 50%, three-year rolling average ending 2025.

Limits: General daily stress, not established work causation or evidence for a particular intervention.

Gallup. (2026). United Kingdom country-level data.

Why it’s here: UK daily stress: 46%, three-year rolling average ending 2025.

Limits: UK country survey context; separate from Great Britain HSE work-related condition estimates.

Gallup. (2026). State of the Global Workplace: Global data.

Why it’s here: Annual 2025 data: 40% daily stress; 20% engaged, 64% not engaged, 16% actively disengaged.

Limits: Global annual data differ in reporting window from country aggregates. Engagement is a survey classification, not a measure of ability or proof of workplace causation.

Safe Work Australia. (2022). Model Code of Practice: Managing psychosocial hazards at work.

Why it’s here: Work-design hazards including high demands, low control, poor support and low role clarity.

Limits: Legal effect depends on jurisdictional adoption. WeRise’s nine conditions are related prompts, not exhaustive hazard coverage or a compliance assessment.

Safe Work Australia. (2025). Key Work Health and Safety Statistics Australia 2025. Serious claims, 2023–24 preliminary.

Why it’s here: Mental health conditions: 12% of serious claims; almost five times the median time lost of other injuries and diseases.

Limits: Workers’ compensation claims, not all workers or all distress. Serious claims involve at least one week lost. Preliminary data; not a risk forecast for your team.

Health and Safety Executive. (2025). Work-related stress, depression or anxiety statistics in Great Britain, 2025.

Why it’s here: 2024/25 Labour Force Survey estimates: 964,000 affected workers and 22.1 million working days lost.

Limits: Great Britain survey estimates of new or long-standing work-related conditions, not Australian claims. Different populations and methods; not directly comparable.

Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The Job Demands–Resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22, 309–328.

Why it’s here: A theoretical review of job demands and resources in relation to strain and motivation.

Limits: Contextual foundation, not validation of WeRise scoring or workshop qualification.

ISO. (2021). ISO 45003: Psychological health and safety at work — Guidelines for managing psychosocial risks.

Why it’s here: Guidance on psychosocial risk management within occupational health and safety systems.

Limits: A standard, not an app certification. WeRise is not an ISO audit; full standard text may require purchase.

Korzybski, A. (1933). Science and Sanity. International Non-Aristotelian Library Publishing Company.

Why it’s here: The map–territory distinction: a representation is not the thing it represents.

Limits: WeRise uses “terrain” as a practical metaphor. This principle does not validate a diagnostic.

Yerkes, R. M., & Dodson, J. D. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18, 459–482.

Why it’s here: A historical experiment relating stimulus strength and learning in mice, with effects depending on task difficulty.

Limits: Not a universal human stress optimum. WeRise’s curve, regions and dot are illustrative; they do not measure performance, burnout or biological arousal.

Gallup. (2024). State of the Global Workplace: Key insights.

Why it’s here: The Personal introduction uses this historical global daily-stress estimate of 41%.

Limits: Historical data, not the latest estimate or stress proven to have been caused by work.

World Health Organization. (2022). Mental health at work.

Why it’s here: Estimates 12 billion working days lost annually to depression and anxiety; discusses risks and work-design responses.

Limits: An estimated global burden, not all caused by work and not a claim that WeRise prevents these conditions or recovers those days.

McEwen, B. S. (1998). Stress, adaptation, and disease: Allostasis and allostatic load. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 840, 33–44.

Why it’s here: A review of adaptation and the cumulative physiological cost of stress responses.

Limits: WeRise does not measure allostatic load or infer physiology from answers. This is background theory, not evidence that this app prevents illness.

Covey, S. R. (1989). The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. Free Press. Habit 1.

Why it’s here: Circles of Concern and Influence: directing effort towards what can be affected. Linked reading is an Oxford teaching resource.

Limits: WeRise’s separate inner Control ring, parking choices and prompts are adaptations, not a validated Covey assessment.

Epictetus. Enchiridion, §1. Translation by Elizabeth Carter.

Why it’s here: Historical distinction between what is up to us and what is not.

Limits: A philosophical source, not a clinical intervention. Unsafe or unfair conditions may require support or collective action.

Meredith, J. Time Under Tension: Building The Resilience Muscle. Bandwidth Budget, pp. 154–159 (reviewed manuscript).

Why it’s here: Focus, Coordination, Care, Buffer; floors, trade-offs and a Holding Pen.

Limits: Author-designed planning exercise. Envelope percentages and item counts are not measured energy or clinical capacity.

Print book / reviewed manuscript reference; no public full-text link supplied.

Winn, M. (2014). What is your ikigai? The View Inside Me.

Why it’s here: Creator’s account of the modern purpose-diagram / ikigai mashup.

Limits: The four-circle diagram is not traditional Japanese ikigai and does not prove a single calling. WeRise adapts it for values alignment, including unpaid care and contribution.

Frankl, V. E. Man’s Search for Meaning. Originally published in German in 1946.

Why it’s here: Meaning-centred perspective; the link is a review discussing Frankl and logotherapy.

Limits: Frankl did not create this four-circle framework. This exercise is not logotherapy or treatment.

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. Random House.

Why it’s here: Beliefs about whether abilities can develop; a basis for examining “I can’t”.

Limits: A change in wording alone does not establish growth or remove material constraints.

Print book / reviewed manuscript reference; no public full-text link supplied.

Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2020). What can be learned from growth mindset controversies? American Psychologist, 75, 1269–1284.

Why it’s here: Context, heterogeneity and limitations of growth mindset interventions.

Limits: Effects depend on people and environments. WeRise’s “not alone / not this way / not right now” prompts are adaptations, not a tested intervention.

Luthans, F., Avolio, B. J., Avey, J. B., & Norman, S. M. (2007). Positive psychological capital: Measurement and relationship with performance and satisfaction. Personnel Psychology, 60, 541–572.

Why it’s here: Two studies of hope, efficacy, resilience and optimism and their relationships with performance and satisfaction.

Limits: WeRise’s four self-reflection controls are not the Psychological Capital Questionnaire. No total, norm or validated PsyCap score is calculated.

Meredith, J. Time Under Tension: Building The Resilience Muscle (reviewed manuscript).

Why it’s here: WeRise Loop, pp. 121, 136, 257; 3Rs, pp. 211–216; RISE, pp. 235–243; flexible foundations, pp. 144–154.

Limits: Book-to-practice interpretation, not published validation. Edition/page references require founder confirmation before release. No founder recordings or quotations are invented.

Print book / reviewed manuscript reference; no public full-text link supplied.