+1 Recommend
2 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Myths about “The myths about work addiction” : Commentary on: Ten myths about work addiction (Griffiths et al., 2018)


      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          The present paper encompasses a response to the debate paper by Griffiths et al. about work addiction myths. Generally, we found weak empirical basis for the statement that there exist major myths and controversies regarding work addiction. Although we agree with Griffiths et al. on several issues, we argue that: (a) although work addiction is not a new behavioral addiction, work addiction research is still in its infancy; (b) work addiction is largely similar to other behavioral addictions; (c) work addiction and workaholism are actually the same; and (d) there is no compelling evidence that work addiction occurs before adulthood.

          Related collections

          Most cited references49

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Workaholism, Burnout, and Work Engagement: Three of a Kind or Three Different Kinds of Employee Well-being?

            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Development of a work addiction scale.

            Research into excessive work has gained increasing attention over the last 20 years. Terms such as "workaholism,"work addiction" and "excessive work" have been used interchangeably. Given the increase in empirical research, this study presents the development of the Bergen Work Addiction Scale (BWAS), a new psychometrically validated scale for the assessment of work addiction. A pool of 14 items, with two reflecting each of seven core elements of addiction (i.e., salience, mood modification, tolerance, withdrawal, conflict, relapse, and problems) was initially constructed. The items were then administered to two samples, one recruited by a web survey following a television broadcast about workaholism (n = 11,769) and one comprising participants in the second wave of a longitudinal internet-based survey about working life (n = 368). The items with the highest corrected item-total correlation from within each of the seven addiction elements were retained in the final scale. The assumed one-factor solution of the refined seven-item scale was acceptable (root mean square error of approximation = 0.077, Comparative Fit Index = 0.96, Tucker-Lewis Index = 0.95) and the internal reliability of the two samples were 0.84 and 0.80, respectively. The scores of the BWAS converged with scores on other workaholism scales, except for a Work Enjoyment subscale. A suggested cut-off for categorization of workaholics showed good discriminative ability in terms of working hours, leadership position, and subjective health complaints. It is concluded that the BWAS has good psychometric properties. © 2012 The Authors. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology © 2012 The Scandinavian Psychological Associations.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Beyond workaholism: Towards a general model of heavy work investment


                Author and article information

                Journal of Behavioral Addictions
                J Behav Addict
                Akadémiai Kiadó (Budapest )
                17 December 2018
                December 2018
                : 7
                : 4
                : 858-862
                [ 1 ]Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Social Studies, University of Stavanger , Stavanger, Norway
                [ 2 ]Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Bergen , Bergen, Norway
                [ 3 ]Research Unit Occupational & Organizational Psychology and Professional Learning, KU Leuven , Leuven, Belgium
                [ 4 ]Department of Psychology, Utrecht University , Utrecht, The Netherlands
                [ 5 ]Department of Psychosocial Science, University of Bergen , Bergen, Norway
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author: Cecilie Schou Andreassen; Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Bergen, PO Box 7807 N-5020, Bergen, Norway; Phone: +47 48041699; Fax: +47 55589879; E-mail: cecilie.andreassen@ 123456uib.no ; Present address: Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Social Studies, University of Stavanger, PO Box 8600 Forus N-4036 Stavanger, Norway; Phone: +47 48041699; Fax: +47 51834150; E-mail: cecilie.s.andreassen@ 123456uis.no
                © 2018 The Author(s)

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium for non-commercial purposes, provided the original author and source are credited, a link to the CC License is provided, and changes – if any – are indicated.

                : 24 March 2018
                : 09 May 2018
                : 04 November 2018
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 47, Pages: 5
                Funding sources: None.

                Evolutionary Biology,Medicine,Psychology,Educational research & Statistics,Social & Behavioral Sciences
                myths,work addiction,workaholism


                Comment on this article