organizing the confusion surrounding workaholism: new structure, measure, and validation
Clicks: 290
ID: 237093
2017
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
30.0
/100
290 views
28 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #316 of 1,131 articles by views in accounts of chemical research
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 1,131 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Since “workaholism” was coined, a considerable body of research was conducted to shed light on its essence. After at least 40 years of studying this important phenomenon, a large variety of definitions, conceptualizations, and measures emerged. In order to try and bring more integration and consensus to this construct, the current research was conducted in two phases. We aimed to formulate a theoretical definitional framework for workaholism, capitalizing upon the Facet Theory Approach. Two basic facets were hypothesized: A. Modalities of workaholism, with three elements: cognitive, emotional, and instrumental; and B. Resources of workaholism with two elements: time and effort. Based on this definitional framework, a structured questionnaire was conceived. In the first phase, the new measure was validated with an Israeli sample comparing two statistical procedures; Factor Analysis (FA) and Smallest Space Analysis (SSA). In the second phase, we aimed to replicate the findings, and to contrast the newly-devised questionnaire with other extant workaholism measures, with a Romanian sample. Theoretical implications and future research suggestions are discussed.
| Reference Key |
shkoler2017frontiersorganizing
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Or Shkoler;Edna Rabenu;Cristinel Vasiliu;Gil Sharoni;Aharon Tziner |
| Journal | accounts of chemical research |
| Year | 2017 |
| DOI |
10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01803
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.