Heavy Study Investment in Italian College Students. An Analysis of Loscalzo and Giannini’s (2017) Studyholism Comprehensive Model

Abstract

Loscalzo and Giannini (2017) recently proposed the construct of studyholism (or obsession toward study) and a theoretical model highlighting its potential antecedents and outcomes. This study aims to analyze some of these antecedents and outcomes by means of a path analysis including both studyholism and study engagement. The participants are 1,958 Italian college students aged between 18 and 60 years ( M age = 23.53 ± 4.43) and heterogeneous as far as their year and major of study are concerned, as well as concerning the city in which they attended their courses. They filled some instruments that allow evaluating studyholism and study engagement, along with individual and situational antecedents (e.g., worry and overstudy climate) and outcomes (e.g., sleep quality, study–relationships conflict, dropout intention). In addition to the path model we performed aiming to test the direct effects we hypothesized, we performed two MANOVAs for analyzing if there were differences on the antecedents and outcomes among the four kinds of student suggested by Loscalzo and Giannini (2017; i.e., engaged studyholics, disengaged studyholics, engaged students, and detached students). The results of this study support Loscalzo and Giannini’s (2017) conceptualization of studyholism as an internalizing disorder, since worry is the strongest predictor of studyholism (β = .67, p < .001). In addition, in line with Loscalzo and Giannini’s (2017) theorization, we found some differences among the four kinds of student on both the antecedents and outcomes we analyzed. This study has critical theoretical, preventive, and clinical implications. It supports the definition of studyholism as an OCD-related disorder. Also, about preventive implications, it shows that interventions aiming to favor students’ wellbeing should target also engaged students, since study engagement predicts social impairment as well as studyholism. Finally, it suggests that in a clinical setting, it is important to distinguish between disengaged studyholics and engaged studyholics as they have different relationships with some antecedents and outcomes; also, they both have functional impairment, even if in different areas.

Studyholism inventory (si-10): A short instrument for evaluating study obsession within the heavy study investment framework

“…Future studies should use causal models to test the causal relationships between the antecedents and outcomes of studyholism and study engagement proposed by Loscalzo and Giannini (2017a) . One first attempt in this direction has recently been made by Loscalzo and Giannini (2019a) through their path analysis model.…”

“…Moreover, Loscalzo and Giannini (2017a) developed a comprehensive model of studyholism that comprehends its antecedents and outcomes, and that they recently tested in many of its suggested variables ( Loscalzo & Giannini, 2019a ).…”

“…In sum, problematic overstudying seems to be not a pure behavioral addiction ( Atroszko et al, 2015 ) neither a clinical disorder characterized by both addiction and obsessive-compulsive symptoms, as preliminarily hypothesized by Loscalzo and Giannini (2017a) . It seems to be better defined as an obsessive-compulsive related disorder ( Loscalzo & Giannini, 2017a , 2018b , 2018c , 2019a ; Loscalzo et al, 2018 ). However, further studies are needed to analyze its internalizing and/or externalizing nature.…”

Studyholism: A New Obsessive-Compulsive Related Disorder? An Analysis of Its Association With Internalizing and Externalizing Features

“…In line with this, since Loscalzo and Giannini believed that unveiling the real nature of a new potential clinical condition requires avoiding a confirmatory approach [refer to Kardefelt-Winther (2015) concerning the need to avoid an a priori assumption of addiction when analyzing new potential behavioral addictions], they reviewed some elements of their preliminary definition ( Loscalzo and Giannini, 2017b ) based on their empirical findings. In fact, the results of the outcomes associated with Engaged and Disengaged Studyholism showed that students demonstrating Disengaged Studyholism are not the most impaired type of students in all the functional areas ( Loscalzo and Giannini, 2019a ; Loscalzo, 2021 ). Hence, Loscalzo and Giannini (2019a) suggested conceptualizing both Disengaged and Engaged Studyholics as clinical types of Studyholism and using the following two specifiers: (i) Level of study engagement (high, average, or low); (ii) Area of functional impairment (academic, social, or both).…”

“…After the first publication by Loscalzo and Giannini (2017b) , the definition of problematic overstudying as a condition more similar to an obsession—or Studyholism (e.g., Loscalzo and Giannini, 2017b , 2018a , 2018b )—than to addiction (i.e., Study Addiction; Atroszko et al, 2015 ), or as an OCD-related disorder, has been substantiated by a thorough comparison of DSM-5 ( American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2013 ) diagnostic criteria for OCD, substance-use disorder, and obsessive-compulsive personality disorder ( Loscalzo and Giannini, 2018a ). Moreover, worry, an internalizing feature contributing to OCD ( Comer et al, 2004 ), proved to be a strong predictor of Studyholism both in college ( Loscalzo and Giannini, 2019a ) and adolescent ( Loscalzo, 2021 ) students. Though, the authors concluded these papers by underlining that the literature concerning problematic overstudying is too scant to reach any firm conclusion and that more studies are needed to uncover its real internalizing and/or externalizing nature.…”