SynthesisPloS one2024
Work addiction and social functioning: A systematic review and five meta-analyses.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Low-burden data-driven work addiction screening: Comparing demographic and psychosocial predictors using machine learning.Journal of behavioral addictions · 2026Article
- Intact habit learning in work addiction: Evidence from a probabilistic sequence learning task.Addictive behaviors reports · 2025Article
- Long-term chronicity of work addiction: the role of personality and work motivations.BMC psychology · 2025Article
- Empowering leadership and occupational burnout: the moderated mediation model.BMC psychology · 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
- Work addiction, emotional dysregulation, addictive eating, and physical health among full-time employees in the United States.Frontiers in psychology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As theoretical models suggest, work addiction has several adverse correlates and consequences, such as unfavorable personality traits, physical and psychological symptoms, and social conflicts. Both early and recent concepts emphasize that individuals with work addiction have more problematic social life due to obsessive overwork. This includes negative impacts on family, workplace, and other relationships. The present study aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze all the empirical studies that examined the association between work addiction and any dimension of social life, as such an analysis has never been conducted before. Studies published from 1995 to 2022 were identified through a systematic search. 102 eligible studies were included in the review, with 75 studies contributing to five different meta-analyses. The results indicated significant associations between work addiction and: (1) lower work-life balance, (2) reduced social functioning, and increased difficulties in (3) family relationships, (4) intimate relationships, and (5) relationships with the community, friends, and colleagues. The associations were found to be independent of gender and age. The meta-analytic study highlights research gaps in the field and suggests future directions, including exploring attachment styles and early social relationships in work addiction, investigating the association between social and emotional competencies and work addiction, examining the role of escape motivation, and exploring the characteristics of the partners (spouses) of workaholics. Since the quality of social relationships and social support are crucial factors in physical and mental health, the prevention and intervention of work addiction should be prioritized in organizational and clinical settings.
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.