View More View Less
  • 1 Department of People and Organisations, Open University Business School, Milton Keynes, , UK
Open access

This commentary considers a recent debate paper which presents and counters 10 work addiction myths. I reflect upon the proposal to move the field forward by distinguishing between, work addiction, which denotes a clinical phenomenon; and workaholism, a term used by the occupational psychology literature with little agreement about its defining dimensions beyond working compulsively. Rather than choosing between these two terms, I argue that addiction experts should lead a transdisciplinary integration of findings from studies where participants report both working compulsively and experiencing significant conflict. I also stress the importance of understanding the macro factors underlying this particular addiction.

Abstract

This commentary considers a recent debate paper which presents and counters 10 work addiction myths. I reflect upon the proposal to move the field forward by distinguishing between, work addiction, which denotes a clinical phenomenon; and workaholism, a term used by the occupational psychology literature with little agreement about its defining dimensions beyond working compulsively. Rather than choosing between these two terms, I argue that addiction experts should lead a transdisciplinary integration of findings from studies where participants report both working compulsively and experiencing significant conflict. I also stress the importance of understanding the macro factors underlying this particular addiction.

The Terminology Debate

Occupational psychologist have studied people’s overengagement with work for some time under the labels of “workaholism,” “compulsive work,” and to a lesser extent, “work addiction” (e.g., Burke, 2001; Burke & Ng, 2006; Clark, Michel, Zhdanova, Pui, & Baltes, 2016; Matuska, 2010; McMillan, O’Driscoll, & Burke, 2003; Mudrack, 2006; Ng, Sorensen, & Feldman, 2007; Quinones & Griffiths, 2015; Quinones, Griffiths, & Kakabadse, 2016; Schaufeli, Shimazu, & Taris, 2009; Schaufeli, Taris, & Bakker, 2006; Taris, Schaufeli, & Shimazu, 2010; Van den Broeck et al., 2011; Van Wijhe, Peeters, & Schaufeli, 2014). The rare use of the term addiction in this field seems to be consistent with the fact that despite its negative consequences (e.g., employee burnout, depression, and low productivity; De Carlo et al., 2014; Innanen, Tolvanen, & Salmela-Aro, 2014; Schaufeli, Bakker, van der Heijden, & Prins, 2009), studies have also reported links with socially and organizationally valued attitudes and behaviors, such as job satisfaction and job involvement (e.g., Baruch, 2011; Ng et al., 2007). I agree with Griffiths, Demetrovics, and Atroszko (2018) that the lack of consensus about the number and type of dimensions proposed in the occupational psychology literature is a strong barrier to integrating the findings and advancing our understanding of working compulsively in a way that causes sustained and significant conflict. Hence, other experiences such as working excessively for a limited period of time, or being over involved with one’s work, although potentially harming in the long term, may also have valued rewards and does not have the more extreme features and devastating effects of addiction. To sum up, I agree with Griffiths et al. that the “miss-use” of addiction terminology (i.e., work addiction and workaholism) is a strong barrier to the advancement of our understanding about the experience of those actually struggling with work addiction.

The widespread use of this terminology has permeated common language, as the general population often use addiction terms to describe someone working long hours, or being much attached to their work. One of the contributing factors to this popularization can be the short, wide-reaching news articles quoting research findings with “catchy” headlines about workaholics (which I witnessed personally from the way my own research was portrayed in some outlets). More widely, cultural artifacts like Hollywood movies have also contributed to making workaholism somehow “sexy.” This is achieved through the combination of socially desirable traits, such as youth, physical attractiveness, and professional ambition of the characters often working in highly regarded sectors, such as law, medicine, or business [e.g., “Up in the air” (2009), “Devil wears Prada” (2006), “The intern” (2015), and “Set it up” (2018)]. The social acceptance of this particular “addiction” as opposed to others can be easily appreciated when thinking about the different reactions friends and family would have to a confession of “I am a workaholic,” as opposed to “I am an alcoholic” or even “I am a pathological gambler.” According to Sussman et al. (2014), workaholism is a “nurturance-type” of addiction; in other words, the addictive behaviors are socially linked to the achievement of financial resources, and in that way it conforms to social expectations about adulthood. In contrast, substance-based addiction, or behavioral addictions such as gambling are perceived to be driven mostly by self-pleasure motives.

I agree with Griffiths et al. (2018) that going back to a clinical characterization of the phenomenon, and a strong effort to differentiate work addiction from other related patterns of attitudes and behaviors about some people’s engagement with work is necessary. In fact, recent meta-analysis and previous theoretical reviews have led many to agree that an addiction-based explanation of workaholism appears the most sensible approach to understand this phenomenon (Clark et al., 2016; Griffiths, 2011; Griffiths & Karanika-Murray, 2012; Griffiths et al., 2018; Shimazu, Schaufeli, Kamiyama, & Kawakami, 2015). However, I do question the proposal of solving this problem through the term “work addiction” to study clinical manifestations of the behavioral addiction, and using term “workaholism” for all other conceptualizations from the occupational psychology literature.

I believe that the problem with workaholism is not the term itself, but the conceptual chaos that causes the lack of agreement about its key dimensions (Andreassen, 2014; Ng et al., 2007). Hence, removing the use “workaholism” is unnecessary, and would stop us from crediting the author Oates, who coined this term after identifying similar cognitive-behavioral patterns as those present in “alcoholism.” In fact, the author conceptualized workaholism in the same as the component model of addiction, which has been extensively validated across different addictions (Griffiths, 2005, 2011; Andreassen, Griffiths, Hetland, & Pallesen, 2012). Thus, according to Oates, a workaholic is

… a person whose need for work has become so excessive that it creates noticeable disturbance or interference with his bodily health, personal happiness, and interpersonal relations, and with his smooth social functioning” (Oates, 1971, p. 4).

Furthermore, considering that public impact should be at the heart of what we do as scholars, I believe it is important that we work with society educating about different addictions using the vocabulary they already are familiar with. The wider population is aware about the highly damaging effects of having an addiction to alcohol and they know it as “alcoholism.” Hence, they can also learn and become aware of the harm that a specific pattern of compulsive work associated with conflict and loss of control can cause, regardless of whether this is referred to as workaholism or work addiction. However, I do believe that we need to work with the academic community to restrict the use of these two terms to situations when we are examining participants who exhibit the clinical manifestations of the problem. Hence, the “good versus bad workaholic” should be replaced by different labels at least academically in a similar way that we would not expect to find an academic classification about “a good versus bad alcoholic type.”

The article also suggests moving the literature forward by either focusing on psychological addiction literature or a transdisciplinary approach. I believe the first suggestion would leave out the extensive and important work carried out from occupational psychologists for instance on the conditions that maintain and reinforce the problem (e.g., Schaufeli et al., 2006; Schaufeli, Bakker, et al., 2009; Schaufeli, Shimazu, et al., 2009; Taris et al., 2010). Many of us have been trained in different psychological fields; therefore, the insights that can be achieved from collaboration across psychological disciplines should not be underestimated. Furthermore, there are areas of debate within the addictions literature itself, which may benefit from the input of different fields. For instance, in spite of the strong consensus about the validity of the component model of addictions, this has been criticized for emphasizing symptom-focused interventions rather than those who could treat the underlying psychological problems (Billieux et al., 2015). In view of this, I advocate Griffiths et al.’s (2018) alternative proposal of focusing on working transdisciplinary. Notwithstanding, I believe that behavioral and general addiction experts should be the driving force leading a thorough review of how different disciplines have studied workaholism, compulsive work, and work addiction, through the organization of expert symposiums and oral and written debates. This could help in the ultimate aim of effectively integrating the findings from the different disciplines when these studies fit the definition of addiction (as opposed to other phenomena).

Context Matters

In the debate paper, the authors comment briefly on the importance of contextual factors contributing to work addiction. Previously, Sussman, Lisha, and Griffiths (2011) argued that lifestyle and type of social learning from our environment have as much explanatory value (or more) in workaholism than personal vulnerabilities. Nonetheless, as psychologists, we tend to focus on the individual and close relationship levels when characterizing and working on prevention and treatment of these addictions. Critical psychologists have long argued for a thorough consideration of the social determinants of addiction contributing to the etiology and maintenance of the problem (e.g., poverty, weak social support, exclusion, unemployment, hyper-individualism, etc.). Isolating the addiction from these factors shifts responsibility onto “addicts” and their support networks (Reinarman & Granfield, 2015; Van der Linden, 2015), while leaving the social structures that support it untouched (Reinarman & Granfield, 2015; Suissa, 2014). Workaholism is a strong example of an addiction that could not be understood without the socioeconomic context in which it emerges, as it would be difficult to imagine a work addict in a non-capitalist society.

The idea of “loss of control” is central to disease theories of addiction (Reinerman & Granfield, 2015; Van der Linden, 2015), and it is one of the core symptoms in the components model of addiction (and related biological models). A critical and contextualized approach to addiction also focuses on “loss of control” to explain addiction although from a different angle. Loss of control here is explained by the inherent conflict in contemporary society about encouraging and penalizing consumption. We are surrounded by easy access, fast, frequent (though often short-lived) sources of pleasure, and gratification enveloped in well-designed marketing strategies. Yet, this society also bombards individuals with the idea of taking responsibility, and to exert self-control. When it comes to work addiction, the ability to connect 24/7 has also become a major threat to those vulnerable to work compulsively (Quinones, 2017). Our ability to work transdisciplinary (not only with occupational, but also with critical psychologists, social theorists, and sociologists) will help us better understand and potentially challenge these wider social and economic factors in order to jointly promote more sustainable work patterns and prevent workaholism.

Conclusions

In this commentary, I assessed one of Griffiths et al.’s proposals to move forward the field by distinguishing between “work addiction” and “workaholism.” Since both refer more socially to addiction, I argue that the focus should be on restricting the use of these two terms to describe and study and describe the clinical manifestations of the problem. I also commented not only on the need to work transdisciplinary, but also working beyond the psychology field, to address our bias toward treatment and prevention at the individual level and challenge the social, cultural, and political triggers that sustain unhealthy working ways.

Author’s contribution

CQ is the sole author of this “Commentary” article and responsible for the submission of final version of the manuscript.

Conflict of interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

  • Andreassen, C. S. (2014). Workaholism: An overview and current status of the research. Journal of Behavioural Addictions, 3(1), 111. doi:10.1556/JBA.2.2013.017

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Andreassen, C. S., Griffiths, M. D., Hetland, J., & Pallesen, S. (2012). Development of a Work Addiction Scale. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 53(3), 265265. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9450.2012.00947.x

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Baruch, Y. (2011). The positive wellbeing aspects of workaholism in cross cultural perspective: The chocoholism metaphor. Career Development International, 16(6), 572591. doi:10.1108/13620431111178335

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Burke, R. J. (2001). Workaholism in organizations: The role of organizational values. Personnel Review, 30(6), 637645. doi:10.1108/EUM0000000005977

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Burke, R. J., & Ng, E. S. W. (2006). Workaholic behaviors: Do colleagues agree? International Journal of Stress Management, 14(3), 312320. doi:10.1037/1072-5245.14.3.312

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Billieux, J., Philippot, P., Schmid, C., Maurage, P., De Mol, J., & Van der Linden, M. (2015). Is dysfunctional use of the mobile phone a behavioural addiction? Confronting symptom-based versus process-based approaches. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 22(5), 460468. doi:10.1002/cpp.1910

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Clark, M. A., Michel, J. S., Zhdanova, L., Pui, S. Y., & Baltes, B. B. (2016). All work and no play? A meta-analytic examination of the correlates and outcomes of workaholism. Journal of Management, 42(7), 18361873. doi:10.1177/0149206314522301

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • De Carlo, N. A., Falco, A., Pierro, A., Dugas, M., Kruglanski, A. W., & Higgins, E. T. (2014). Regulatory mode orientations and well-being in an organizational setting: The differential mediating roles of workaholism and work engagement. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 44(11), 725738. doi:10.1111/jasp.12263

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Griffiths, M. D. (2005). A components model of addiction within a biopsychological framework. Journal of Substance Use, 10(4), 191197. doi:10.1080/14659890500114359

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Griffiths, M. D. (2011). Workaholism: A 21st century addiction. The Psychologist: Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 24, 740744. Retrieved from https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/volume-24/edition-10/workaholism-%E2%80%93-21st-century-addiction

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Griffiths, M. D., Demetrovics, Z., & Atroszko, P. A. (2018). Ten myths about work addiction. Journal of Behavioral Addictions. Advance online publication. doi:10.1556/2006.7.2018.05

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Griffiths, M. D., & Karanika-Murray, M. (2012). Contextualising over-engagement in work: Towards a more global understanding of workaholism as an addiction. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 1(3), 8795. doi:10.1556/JBA.1.2012.002

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Innanen, H., Tolvanen, A., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2014). Burnout, work engagement and workaholism among highly educated employees: Profiles, antecedents and outcomes. Burnout Research, 1(1), 3849. doi:10.1016/j.burn.2014.04.001

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Matuska, K. M. (2010). Workaholism, life balance, and well-being: A comparative analysis. Journal of Occupational Science, 17(2), 104111. doi:10.1080/14427591.2010.9686681

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • McMillan, L. H. W., O’Driscoll, M. P., & Burke, R. J. (2003). Workaholism: A review of theory, research, and future directions. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 18, pp. 167189). New York, NY: Wiley.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Mudrack, P. E. (2006). Understanding workaholism: The case for behavioral tendencies. In R. J. Burke (Ed.), Research companion to working time and work addiction (pp. 108128). Northapton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ng, T. W. H., Sorensen, K. L., & Feldman, D. C. (2007). Dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of workaholism: A conceptual integration and extension. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28(1), 111136. doi:10.1002/job.424

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Oates, W. (1971). Confessions of a workaholic: The facts about work addiction. New York, NY: World Publishing Co.

  • Quinones, C. (2017). Does intense ICT use after work help or hinder psychological recovery? CIPD Applied Research Conference 2016: The shifting landscape of work and working lives (Conference paper number: CIPD/ARC/2016/1). Retrieved from https://www.cipd.co.uk/learn/events-networks/applied-research-conference

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Quinones, C., & Griffiths, M. (2015). Addiction to work: A critical review of the workaholism construct and recommendations for assessment. Journal of Psychiatric Nursing, 53(10), 4859. doi:10.3928/02793695-20150923-04

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Quinones, C., Griffiths, M., & Kakabadse, N. (2016). Compulsive Internet use and workaholism: An exploratory two-wave longitudinal study. Computers in Human Behaviour, 60, 492499. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.060

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Reinarman, C., & Granfield, R. (2015). Addiction is not just a brain disease: Critical studies of addiction. In R. Granfield & C. Reinarman (Eds.), Expanding addictions: Critical essays (pp. 121). New York, NY: Routledge.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., van der Heijden, F. M. M. A., & Prins, J. T. (2009). Workaholism, burnout and well-being among junior doctors: The mediating role of role conflict. Work & Stress, 23(2), 155172. doi:10.1080/02678370902834021

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Schaufeli, W. B., Shimazu, A., & Taris, T. W. (2009). Being driven to work excessively hard: The evaluation of a two-factor measure of workaholism in the Netherlands and Japan. Cross-Cultural Research, 43(4), 320348. doi:10.1177/1069397109337239

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Schaufeli, W. B., Taris, T. W., & Bakker, A. (2006). Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hide: On the differences between work engagement and workaholism. In R. Burke (Ed.), Research companion to working time and work addiction (pp. 193217). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Shimazu, A., Schaufeli, W. B., Kamiyama, K., & Kawakami, N. (2015). Workaholism vs. work engagement: The two different predictors of future well-being and performance. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 22(1), 1823. doi:10.1007/s12529-014-9410-x

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Suissa, A. J. (2014). Cyberaddictions: Toward a psychosocial perspective. Addictive Behaviors, 39(12), 19141918. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2014.07.027

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sussman, S., Arpawong, T. E. M., Sun, P., Tsai, J., Rohrbach, L. A., & Sprutjt-Metz, D. (2014). Prevalence and co-occurrence of addictive behaviors among former alternative high school youth. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 3(1), 3340. doi:10.1556/JBA.3.2014.005

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sussman, S., Lisha, N., & Griffiths, M. (2011). Prevalence of the addictions: A problem of the majority or the minority? Evaluation and the Health Professions, 34(1), 356. doi:10.1177/0163278710380124

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Taris, T. W., Schaufeli, W., & Shimazu, A. (2010). The push and pull of work: The difference between workaholism and work engagement. In A. B. Bakker & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (pp. 3953). Hove, UK: Psychological Press.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Van den Broeck, A., Schreurs, B., De Witte, H., Vansteenkiste, M., Germeys, F., & Schaufeli, W. (2011). Understanding workaholics’ motivations: A self-determination perspective. Applied Psychology, 60(4), 600621. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2011.00449.x

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Van Der Linden, M. (2015). Commentary on: Are we overpathologizing everyday life? A tenable blueprint for behavioral addiction research: Addictions as a psychosocial and cultural construction. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 4(3), 145147. doi:10.1556/2006.4.2015.025

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Van Wijhe, C. I., Peeters, M. C., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2014). Enough is enough: Cognitive antecedents of workaholism and its aftermath. Human Resource Management, 53(1), 157177. doi:10.1002/hrm.21573

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Andreassen, C. S. (2014). Workaholism: An overview and current status of the research. Journal of Behavioural Addictions, 3(1), 111. doi:10.1556/JBA.2.2013.017

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Andreassen, C. S., Griffiths, M. D., Hetland, J., & Pallesen, S. (2012). Development of a Work Addiction Scale. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 53(3), 265265. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9450.2012.00947.x

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Baruch, Y. (2011). The positive wellbeing aspects of workaholism in cross cultural perspective: The chocoholism metaphor. Career Development International, 16(6), 572591. doi:10.1108/13620431111178335

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Burke, R. J. (2001). Workaholism in organizations: The role of organizational values. Personnel Review, 30(6), 637645. doi:10.1108/EUM0000000005977

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Burke, R. J., & Ng, E. S. W. (2006). Workaholic behaviors: Do colleagues agree? International Journal of Stress Management, 14(3), 312320. doi:10.1037/1072-5245.14.3.312

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Billieux, J., Philippot, P., Schmid, C., Maurage, P., De Mol, J., & Van der Linden, M. (2015). Is dysfunctional use of the mobile phone a behavioural addiction? Confronting symptom-based versus process-based approaches. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 22(5), 460468. doi:10.1002/cpp.1910

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Clark, M. A., Michel, J. S., Zhdanova, L., Pui, S. Y., & Baltes, B. B. (2016). All work and no play? A meta-analytic examination of the correlates and outcomes of workaholism. Journal of Management, 42(7), 18361873. doi:10.1177/0149206314522301

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • De Carlo, N. A., Falco, A., Pierro, A., Dugas, M., Kruglanski, A. W., & Higgins, E. T. (2014). Regulatory mode orientations and well-being in an organizational setting: The differential mediating roles of workaholism and work engagement. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 44(11), 725738. doi:10.1111/jasp.12263

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Griffiths, M. D. (2005). A components model of addiction within a biopsychological framework. Journal of Substance Use, 10(4), 191197. doi:10.1080/14659890500114359

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Griffiths, M. D. (2011). Workaholism: A 21st century addiction. The Psychologist: Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 24, 740744. Retrieved from https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/volume-24/edition-10/workaholism-%E2%80%93-21st-century-addiction

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Griffiths, M. D., Demetrovics, Z., & Atroszko, P. A. (2018). Ten myths about work addiction. Journal of Behavioral Addictions. Advance online publication. doi:10.1556/2006.7.2018.05

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Griffiths, M. D., & Karanika-Murray, M. (2012). Contextualising over-engagement in work: Towards a more global understanding of workaholism as an addiction. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 1(3), 8795. doi:10.1556/JBA.1.2012.002

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Innanen, H., Tolvanen, A., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2014). Burnout, work engagement and workaholism among highly educated employees: Profiles, antecedents and outcomes. Burnout Research, 1(1), 3849. doi:10.1016/j.burn.2014.04.001

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Matuska, K. M. (2010). Workaholism, life balance, and well-being: A comparative analysis. Journal of Occupational Science, 17(2), 104111. doi:10.1080/14427591.2010.9686681

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • McMillan, L. H. W., O’Driscoll, M. P., & Burke, R. J. (2003). Workaholism: A review of theory, research, and future directions. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 18, pp. 167189). New York, NY: Wiley.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Mudrack, P. E. (2006). Understanding workaholism: The case for behavioral tendencies. In R. J. Burke (Ed.), Research companion to working time and work addiction (pp. 108128). Northapton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Ng, T. W. H., Sorensen, K. L., & Feldman, D. C. (2007). Dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of workaholism: A conceptual integration and extension. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28(1), 111136. doi:10.1002/job.424

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Oates, W. (1971). Confessions of a workaholic: The facts about work addiction. New York, NY: World Publishing Co.

  • Quinones, C. (2017). Does intense ICT use after work help or hinder psychological recovery? CIPD Applied Research Conference 2016: The shifting landscape of work and working lives (Conference paper number: CIPD/ARC/2016/1). Retrieved from https://www.cipd.co.uk/learn/events-networks/applied-research-conference

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Quinones, C., & Griffiths, M. (2015). Addiction to work: A critical review of the workaholism construct and recommendations for assessment. Journal of Psychiatric Nursing, 53(10), 4859. doi:10.3928/02793695-20150923-04

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Quinones, C., Griffiths, M., & Kakabadse, N. (2016). Compulsive Internet use and workaholism: An exploratory two-wave longitudinal study. Computers in Human Behaviour, 60, 492499. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.060

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Reinarman, C., & Granfield, R. (2015). Addiction is not just a brain disease: Critical studies of addiction. In R. Granfield & C. Reinarman (Eds.), Expanding addictions: Critical essays (pp. 121). New York, NY: Routledge.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., van der Heijden, F. M. M. A., & Prins, J. T. (2009). Workaholism, burnout and well-being among junior doctors: The mediating role of role conflict. Work & Stress, 23(2), 155172. doi:10.1080/02678370902834021

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Schaufeli, W. B., Shimazu, A., & Taris, T. W. (2009). Being driven to work excessively hard: The evaluation of a two-factor measure of workaholism in the Netherlands and Japan. Cross-Cultural Research, 43(4), 320348. doi:10.1177/1069397109337239

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Schaufeli, W. B., Taris, T. W., & Bakker, A. (2006). Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hide: On the differences between work engagement and workaholism. In R. Burke (Ed.), Research companion to working time and work addiction (pp. 193217). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Shimazu, A., Schaufeli, W. B., Kamiyama, K., & Kawakami, N. (2015). Workaholism vs. work engagement: The two different predictors of future well-being and performance. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 22(1), 1823. doi:10.1007/s12529-014-9410-x

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Suissa, A. J. (2014). Cyberaddictions: Toward a psychosocial perspective. Addictive Behaviors, 39(12), 19141918. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2014.07.027

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sussman, S., Arpawong, T. E. M., Sun, P., Tsai, J., Rohrbach, L. A., & Sprutjt-Metz, D. (2014). Prevalence and co-occurrence of addictive behaviors among former alternative high school youth. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 3(1), 3340. doi:10.1556/JBA.3.2014.005

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Sussman, S., Lisha, N., & Griffiths, M. (2011). Prevalence of the addictions: A problem of the majority or the minority? Evaluation and the Health Professions, 34(1), 356. doi:10.1177/0163278710380124

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Taris, T. W., Schaufeli, W., & Shimazu, A. (2010). The push and pull of work: The difference between workaholism and work engagement. In A. B. Bakker & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (pp. 3953). Hove, UK: Psychological Press.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Van den Broeck, A., Schreurs, B., De Witte, H., Vansteenkiste, M., Germeys, F., & Schaufeli, W. (2011). Understanding workaholics’ motivations: A self-determination perspective. Applied Psychology, 60(4), 600621. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2011.00449.x

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Van Der Linden, M. (2015). Commentary on: Are we overpathologizing everyday life? A tenable blueprint for behavioral addiction research: Addictions as a psychosocial and cultural construction. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 4(3), 145147. doi:10.1556/2006.4.2015.025

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • Van Wijhe, C. I., Peeters, M. C., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2014). Enough is enough: Cognitive antecedents of workaholism and its aftermath. Human Resource Management, 53(1), 157177. doi:10.1002/hrm.21573

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
The author instruction is available in PDF.
Please, download the file from HERE

Dr. Zsolt Demetrovics
Institute of Psychology, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University
Address: Izabella u. 46. H-1064 Budapest, Hungary
Phone: +36-1-461-2681
E-mail: jba@ppk.elte.hu

Indexing and Abstracting Services:

  • Web of Science [Science Citation Index Expanded (also known as SciSearch®)
  • Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition
  • Social Sciences Citation Index®
  • Journal Citation Reports/ Social Sciences Edition
  • Current Contents®/Social and Behavioral Sciences
  • EBSCO
  • GoogleScholar
  • PsycINFO
  • PubMed Central
  • SCOPUS
  • Medline
  • CABI
2020  
Total Cites 4024
WoS
Journal
Impact Factor
6,756
Rank by Psychiatry (SSCI) 12/143 (Q1)
Impact Factor Psychiatry 19/156 (Q1)
Impact Factor 6,052
without
Journal Self Cites
5 Year 8,735
Impact Factor
Journal  1,48
Citation Indicator  
Rank by Journal  Psychiatry 24/250 (Q1)
Citation Indicator   
Citable 86
Items
Total 74
Articles
Total 12
Reviews
Scimago 47
H-index
Scimago 2,265
Journal Rank
Scimago Clinical Psychology Q1
Quartile Score Psychiatry and Mental Health Q1
  Medicine (miscellaneous) Q1
Scopus 3593/367=9,8
Scite Score  
Scopus Clinical Psychology 7/283 (Q1)
Scite Score Rank Psychiatry and Mental Health 22/502 (Q1)
Scopus 2,026
SNIP  
Days from  38
submission  
to 1st decision  
Days from  37
acceptance  
to publication  
Acceptance 31%
Rate  

2019  
Total Cites
WoS
2 184
Impact Factor 5,143
Impact Factor
without
Journal Self Cites
4,346
5 Year
Impact Factor
5,758
Immediacy
Index
0,587
Citable
Items
75
Total
Articles
67
Total
Reviews
8
Cited
Half-Life
3,3
Citing
Half-Life
6,8
Eigenfactor
Score
0,00597
Article Influence
Score
1,447
% Articles
in
Citable Items
89,33
Normalized
Eigenfactor
0,7294
Average
IF
Percentile
87,923
Scimago
H-index
37
Scimago
Journal Rank
1,767
Scopus
Scite Score
2540/376=6,8
Scopus
Scite Score Rank
Cllinical Psychology 16/275 (Q1)
Medicine (miscellenous) 31/219 (Q1)
Psychiatry and Mental Health 47/506 (Q1)
Scopus
SNIP
1,441
Acceptance
Rate
32%

 

Journal of Behavioral Addictions
Publication Model Gold Open Access
Submission Fee none
Article Processing Charge 850 EUR/article
Printed Color Illustrations 40 EUR (or 10 000 HUF) + VAT / piece
Regional discounts on country of the funding agency World Bank Lower-middle-income economies: 50%
World Bank Low-income economies: 100%
Further Discounts Editorial Board / Advisory Board members: 50%
Corresponding authors, affiliated to an EISZ member institution subscribing to the journal package of Akadémiai Kiadó: 100%
Subscription Information Gold Open Access
Purchase per Title  

Journal of Behavioral Addictions
Language English
Size A4
Year of
Foundation
2011
Publication
Programme
2021 Volume 10
Volumes
per Year
1
Issues
per Year
4
Founder Eötvös Loránd Tudományegyetem
Founder's
Address
H-1053 Budapest, Hungary Egyetem tér 1-3.
Publisher Akadémiai Kiadó
Publisher's
Address
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Responsible
Publisher
Chief Executive Officer, Akadémiai Kiadó
ISSN 2062-5871 (Print)
ISSN 2063-5303 (Online)

Senior editors

Editor(s)-in-Chief: Zsolt DEMETROVICS

Assistant Editor(s): Csilla ÁGOSTON

Associate Editors

  • Judit BALÁZS (ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Hungary)
  • Joel BILLIEUX (University of Lausanne, Switzerland)
  • Matthias BRAND (University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany)
  • Anneke GOUDRIAAN (University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands)
  • Daniel KING (Flinders University, Australia)
  • Ludwig KRAUS (IFT Institute for Therapy Research, Germany)
  • H. N. Alexander LOGEMANN (ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Hungary)
  • Anikó MARÁZ (Humboldt University of Berlin, Germany)
  • Astrid MÜLLER (Hannover Medical School, Germany)
  • Marc N. POTENZA (Yale University, USA)
  • Hans-Jurgen RUMPF (University of Lübeck, Germany)
  • Attila SZABÓ (ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Hungary)
  • Róbert URBÁN (ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Hungary)
  • Aviv M. WEINSTEIN (Ariel University, Israel)

Editorial Board

  • Max W. ABBOTT (Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand)
  • Elias N. ABOUJAOUDE (Stanford University School of Medicine, USA)
  • Hojjat ADELI (Ohio State University, USA)
  • Alex BALDACCHINO (University of Dundee, United Kingdom)
  • Alex BLASZCZYNSKI (University of Sidney, Australia)
  • Kenneth BLUM (University of Florida, USA)
  • Henrietta BOWDEN-JONES (Imperial College, United Kingdom)
  • Beáta BÖTHE (University of Montreal, Canada)
  • Wim VAN DEN BRINK (University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands)
  • Gerhard BÜHRINGER (Technische Universität Dresden, Germany)
  • Sam-Wook CHOI (Eulji University, Republic of Korea)
  • Damiaan DENYS (University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands)
  • Jeffrey L. DEREVENSKY (McGill University, Canada)
  • Naomi FINEBERG (University of Hertfordshire, United Kingdom)
  • Marie GRALL-BRONNEC (University Hospital of Nantes, France)
  • Jon E. GRANT (University of Minnesota, USA)
  • Mark GRIFFITHS (Nottingham Trent University, United Kingdom)
  • Heather HAUSENBLAS (Jacksonville University, USA)
  • Tobias HAYER (University of Bremen, Germany)
  • Susumu HIGUCHI (National Hospital Organization Kurihama Medical and Addiction Center, Japan)
  • David HODGINS (University of Calgary, Canada)
  • Eric HOLLANDER (Albert Einstein College of Medicine, USA)
  • Jaeseung JEONG (Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Republic of Korea)
  • Yasser KHAZAAL (Geneva University Hospital, Switzerland)
  • Orsolya KIRÁLY (Eötvös Loránd University, Hungary)
  • Emmanuel KUNTSCHE (La Trobe University, Australia)
  • Hae Kook LEE (The Catholic University of Korea, Republic of Korea)
  • Michel LEJOXEUX (Paris University, France)
  • Anikó MARÁZ (Eötvös Loránd University, Hungary)
  • Giovanni MARTINOTTI (‘Gabriele d’Annunzio’ University of Chieti-Pescara, Italy)
  • Frederick GERARD MOELLER (University of Texas, USA)
  • Daniel Thor OLASON (University of Iceland, Iceland)
  • Nancy PETRY (University of Connecticut, USA)
  • Bettina PIKÓ (University of Szeged, Hungary)
  • Afarin RAHIMI-MOVAGHAR (Teheran University of Medical Sciences, Iran)
  • József RÁCZ (Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Hungary)
  • Rory C. REID (University of California Los Angeles, USA)
  • Marcantanio M. SPADA (London South Bank University, United Kingdom)
  • Daniel SPRITZER (Study Group on Technological Addictions, Brazil)
  • Dan J. STEIN (University of Cape Town, South Africa)
  • Sherry H. STEWART (Dalhousie University, Canada)
  • Attila SZABÓ (Eötvös Loránd University, Hungary)
  • Ferenc TÚRY (Semmelweis University, Hungary)
  • Alfred UHL (Austrian Federal Health Institute, Austria)
  • Johan VANDERLINDEN (University Psychiatric Center K.U.Leuven, Belgium)
  • Alexander E. VOISKOUNSKY (Moscow State University, Russia)
  • Kimberly YOUNG (Center for Internet Addiction, USA)

 

Monthly Content Usage

Abstract Views Full Text Views PDF Downloads
Jun 2021 0 9 3
Jul 2021 0 7 5
Aug 2021 0 9 5
Sep 2021 0 9 7
Oct 2021 0 9 15
Nov 2021 0 22 27
Dec 2021 0 0 0