ArticleScientific reports2023
The neuropsychological profile of work addiction.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Treating Behavioral Addictions With Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality: Scoping Review.Interactive journal of medical research · 2026Review
- Intact habit learning in work addiction: Evidence from a probabilistic sequence learning task.Addictive behaviors reports · 2025Article
- Perceived coworkers' work addiction: Scale development and associations with one's own workaholism, job stress, and job satisfaction in 85 cultures.Journal of behavioral addictions · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to examine, for the first time, the neuropsychological aspects of work addiction, with a specific emphasis on the cognitive factors identified by theoretical models. While previous research has highlighted self-reported obsessiveness and impulsiveness in work addiction, this study sought to go beyond self-report measures by employing also neuropsychological reaction time tasks to assess executive functions. A total of 101 participants were categorized into two groups based on their Work Addiction Risk Test scores: a high-risk group (HWA; n = 39) and a low-risk group (LWA; n = 62) for work addiction. Executive functions were assessed using Go/No-Go, Digit Span, Counting Span, N-back, and Card Sorting Tasks. The findings revealed that the HWA group had poorer inhibitory control and achieved lower scores on the more complex working memory task involving updating (2-back). However, they exhibited unaltered cognitive flexibility and outperformed the LWA group on the 1-back task associated with maintenance and storage of information and sustained attention. Higher levels of impulsiveness and compulsiveness were observed in the HWA group, consistent with previous studies. These findings highlight the role of inhibition and working memory in work addiction, potentially contributing to challenges such as inefficient working strategies and impaired social functioning. This study offers valuable insights into the neurocognitive aspects of work addiction, deepening our understanding of this phenomenon.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.