Work Addiction and Workaholism are Synonymous: An Analysis of the Sources of Confusion (a Commentary on Morkevičiūtė and Endriulaitienė)

Morkevičiūtė and Endriulaitienė (Int J Ment Health Addict 21(5):13–23) provided an interesting and important overview of research on work addiction/workaholism since 2007. In their conclusions, they suggest that “workaholism” is a separate phenomenon from “work addiction.” However, this conclusion is (i) inconsistent with the data on which they base their analyses and (ii) other conclusions that they draw from these analyses. The current paper examines these inconsistencies and explains the sources of confusion. Work addiction and workaholism are investigated both by clinical researchers and organizational scholars. The limited exchange of expertise between these two major frameworks may cause misunderstandings. Addictions are complex biological, psychological, social, and cultural phenomena. Behavioral addictions are defined as behavioral patterns and, similarly to other mental disorders, as syndromes. They manifest as different symptoms, including behavioral, emotional, and cognitive. Components of excessive and compulsive working are defined as indicators or symptoms of addiction and not as different conceptualizations of workaholism. Treating different facets of work addiction by Morkevičiūtė and Endriulaitienė as different conceptualizations of it leads to theoretical and terminological confusion. The current paper analyzes these problems as they emerge on the boundaries of clinical and organizational frameworks in the work of different authors.

This work was supported by the National Science Centre, Poland [grant no. 2020/39/D/HS6/00198].