A Structural and Discriminant Analysis of the Work Addiction Risk Test

By Claudia Flowers, B. Robinson. 2002

160 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b70bd6f3da7d15546f5a91012d111ced273b2738

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

All Work and No Play? A Meta-Analytic Examination of the Correlates and Outcomes of Workaholism (2016, background): “The WART consists of several dimensions (i.e., compulsive tendencies, control, impaired communication and self-absorption, inability to delegate, and self-worth; Flowers & Robinson, 2002).”
Relating work engagement and workaholism to entrepreneurial performance (2014, background): “Others have claimed the opposite (e.g. Flowers and Robinson, 2002; Oates, 1971; Porter, 2001; Schaufeli, Taris and Bakker, 2006a), and suggested that workaholics may work hard, but not particularly smart.”
Beyond workaholism: Towards a general model of heavy work investment (2012, methodology): “…Taris et al., 2005), most samples have included students (that are typically young and do not necessarily work), members of Workaholics Anonymous (which constitute a biased/range-restricted sample), or psychotherapists as expert observers (e.g., Flowers & Robinson, 2002; Robinson, 1996, 1999).”
Work engagement and workaholism: comparing the self-employed and salaried employees (2010, methodology): “Others, however, have claimed the opposite (Flowers & Robinson, 2002; Oates, 1971; Porter, 2001).”
The push and pull of work: The differences between workaholism and work engagement (2010, unknown): “The first was a nine-item Dutch version (Taris, Schaufeli, & Verhoeven 2005a) of the Compulsive Tendencies scale proposed by Flowers and Robinson (2002), which was relabeled Working Excessively (WE, α = .84, sample items are “I seem to be in a hurry and racing against the clock” and “I find myself c”
ENRICHING THE SPENCE AND ROBBINS TYPOLOGY OF WORKAHOLISM: DEMOGRAPHIC, MOTIVATIONAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL CORRELATES (2004, background): “the work addiction risk test (WART) ( Flowers and Robinson, 2002”
BEYOND THE BIG FIVE: HOW NARCISSISM, PERFECTIONISM, AND DISPOSITIONAL AFFECT RELATE TO WORKAHOLISM (2010, methodology): “Flowers and Robinson (2002) conducted a principal components analysis on the WART, and found a five factor solution: Compulsive tendencies, control, impaired communication and self-absorption, inability to delegate, and self-worth.”
All day and all of the night: The relative contribution of two dimensions of workaholism to well-being in self-employed workers (2008, background): “…(Korn, Pratt, & Lambrou, 1987; Peiperl & Jones, 2001), whereas others regard them as obsessive and unhappy individuals who are not performing well in their jobs and have difficulties with their colleagues (Flowers & Robinson, 2002; Oates, 1971; Porter, 2001; Schaufeli, Taris, & Bakker, 2006).”
Problematic mobile phone use in adolescence: a cross-sectional study (2011, background): “Several studies have determined its reliability and validity (Flowers and Robinson 2002; Robinson 1996; Robinson 1999; Robinson and Post 1994; Robinson et al. 1992).”
The Workaholism Analysis Questionnaire: Emphasizing Work-Life Imbalance and Addiction in the Measurement of Workaholism (2013, background): “Robinson (1989), the developer of the WART, defines workaholism as “the overindulgence in and preoccupation with work, often to the exclusion and detriment of the workaholic’s health, intimate relationships, and participation in child rearing” (Flowers & Robinson, 2002; p. 517).”