The study I have seen claimed that 40-50 hours long term have same output and then it goes down.
The studies on game development teams found that crunch raise productivity of short (don't recall if 3 or 6 weeks) and productivity goes down only after.
This article does not seem to adress concrete studies nor their results - it just generally theorise about what might be wrong about them without knowing what is on them.
Do you have a citation? The post is mostly to address this constant claims that 40 hours is proven by science and no convincing citations are provided.
I am also writing in the context of self-managing knowledge workers who can manage their own time. I explicitly write that the flexibility we have may mitigate many of the downsides observed in mandated long hours. For example, I do work >40 hours, but I rarely have to wake up with an alarm clock. I can follow the occasional 16 hour day with a 10 hour sleep cycle and stroll into work at lunch time the next day feeling pretty relaxed.
The studies on game development teams found that crunch raise productivity of short (don't recall if 3 or 6 weeks) and productivity goes down only after.
This article does not seem to adress concrete studies nor their results - it just generally theorise about what might be wrong about them without knowing what is on them.