Workaholism, work engagement, and affective commitment: relationships to self-concept levels and work outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a result of the significant changes in businesses around the globe such as the generalization of remote working and digital transformation, the boundaries between work and private life tend to vanish, causing concerns about whether individuals’ investment in their work could have detrimental effects on their life and health. In such context, the notion of heavy work investment, an umbrella construct that subsumes different forms of investment of the self into the work domain, warrants scholarly attention as it may have both a bright and dark side for individuals. The present study focuses on three forms of heavy work investment, i.e., workaholism, work engagement, and affective organizational commitment, and was aimed at examining their association with three levels of the self-concept, i.e., individual, relational, and collective, as well as their contribution to change in number of hours worked, role overload, depression, and emotional exhaustion over time. We conducted a three-wave study with a four-month time separation between measurements among a sample of alumni from a French business school (N = 544) to explore these relationships. Results indicated that as expected, workaholism was positively associated with the individual self-concept, reflecting a tendency to prioritize individual achievements and success, but was also related to a stronger collective self-concept, which involves a self-definition based on group membership. Work engagement and affective organizational commitment were positively and only related to the collective self-concept. In terms of work outcomes, workaholism, but not work engagement and affective commitment, was found to increase the number of hours employees worked across time as well as to heighten their perception of being overloaded by their work. Workaholism was also associated with a significant increase in the odds of depression over time. In contrast, work engagement was found to protect employees from the risk of depression and emotional exhaustion over time. Affective commitment was unrelated to change in any of the four work outcomes. These findings have significant implications for research on heavy work investment and for our understanding of its nature and consequences for employees, which we elaborate on in the discussion.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".