Myths about “The myths about work addiction”

Abstract

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.

Is the Polythetic Approach Efficient in Identifying Potentially Addicted to Work Individuals? Comparison of the Polythetic Approach With the Item Response Theory Framework

“…To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study investigating whether the polythetic approach is efficient in identifying potentially addicted to work individuals. This (Andreassen et al, 2018;Atroszko, 2019;Atroszko et al, 2019;Billieux et al, 2015;Griffiths et al, 2018;Kardefelt-Winther et al, 2017;Kun, 2018;Lior et al, 2018;Malinowska, 2018;Quinones, 2018;Starcevic et al, 2018;Sussman, 2018;Tóth-Király et al, 2018).…”

“…Additionally, the same researchers (Griffiths et al, 2018) initiated a much-needed debate between researchers in the area of work addiction regarding the current state of the art and directions for future studies of this phenomenon. The researchers agreed that work addiction represents a problematic behaviour; nevertheless, they also pointed out that "more highquality data are needed to have a better understanding of its symptoms, etiology, epidemiology, course, treatment, and prognosis" (Atroszko et al, 2019, p. 7; see also Andreassen, Schaufeli, & Pallesen, 2018;Griffiths et al, 2018;Kun, 2018;Lior, Abira, & Aviv, 2018;Malinowska, 2018;Quinones, 2018;Sussman, 2018;Tóth-Király, Bőthe, & Orosz, 2018). One of the recommended aims for future studies was to study the prevalence rates of work addiction in different working populations.…”

Work Addiction, Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder, Burn-Out, and Global Burden of Disease: Implications from the ICD-11

“…The substantial increase in peer-reviewed papers concerning work addiction resulted in a recent unprecedented debate on the current status of this problematic behavior. It gave rise to consensus agreements among leading experts researching in the field regarding work addiction [18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27]. Most importantly, all of the experts viewed compulsive overworking as a genuine problem.…”

“…While work addiction is currently not formally recognized as a disorder in official psychiatric classifications, its considerable similarities to the OCPD/APD point to a need for further studies to clarify both concepts and their relationship. Moreover, a Web of Science search yields almost 50% more papers for 'work addiction' or 'workaholism' search in comparison to OCPD/APD, most of them appearing in the past 10 years [18]. Currently, there is a greater interest and more rapidly developing investigation into addictive properties of compulsive overworking than to its aspects related to disordered personality.…”

Unique versus shared associations between self-reported behavioral addictions and substance use disorders and mental health problems: A commonality analysis in a large sample of young Swiss men

“…The highest contribution of an individual addiction to the variance in the severity of MD and BPD was work addiction. The construct of work addiction remains understudied; however, several studies have identified stressors such as work-related organizational difficulties or perceived effortreward imbalance as possible determinants of work addiction (Andreassen, Schaufeli, & Pallesen, 2018). The probable association between such stressors and work addiction could partly explain work addiction's contribution to MD.…”