Recommended Free Tools
iTechGuides is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Learn more
Workaholism is not simply working long hours: researchers describe it as an internally driven compulsion to work, paired with high effort and persistent work thoughts outside work. A 2023 meta-analysis estimated pooled prevalence at 15.2%, but its nationally representative studies estimated 8.0%. Those figures are not a 2025 survey or a definitive worldwide rate. Separately, WHO and the International Labour Organization reported health burdens associated with working at least 55 hours a week; those statistics measure hours, not workaholism.
What researchers mean by workaholism
A 2024 review defines workaholism through two linked features: strong internal pressure to work and unusually high effort expenditure. Examples include continuing to think about work during nonwork time and working beyond what is reasonably expected. That makes workaholism different from simply having a demanding job or putting in long hours.
The review distinguishes workaholism from work engagement, work passion, and Type-A behavior. These concepts can overlap in how someone appears at work, but they are not interchangeable: enthusiasm or ambition alone does not establish compulsive work patterns.
The term has a historical origin. In 1971, Wayne Oates described workaholism as “addiction to work, the compulsive and uncontrollable need to work incessantly,” as reproduced in the 2023 prevalence review. This is a historical definition, not a universally accepted modern clinical diagnostic standard.
#1 Best Overall
How workaholism is measured
One tool used in research is the Bergen Work Addiction Scale (BWAS), a seven-item self-report measure organized around addiction components: salience, mood modification, tolerance, withdrawal, conflict, problems, and relapse. Sample items concern working longer than intended, neglecting hobbies or exercise, distress when prevented from working, and negative effects on health.
A scale result is a measurement or screening result, not a clinical diagnosis. Prevalence estimates can differ depending on the instrument and cut-off used, as well as the population sampled. The 2023 meta-analysis found higher estimates in studies using the Dutch Work Addiction Scale than in studies using BWAS.
Rank #2
How common is workaholism?
Andersen, Djugum, Sjåstad, and Pallesen’s 2023 systematic review and meta-analysis included 53 studies, 71,625 participants, and 23 countries. It estimated pooled workaholism prevalence at 15.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 12.4–18.5). A trim-and-fill adjustment for possible publication bias produced an estimate of 14.1% (95% CI 11.2–17.6).
The pooled figure should not be read as “15.2% of workers worldwide.” The studies were not a global census, and their results varied sharply by sample and measurement method. The meta-analysis reported very high heterogeneity (I² 99.1%) and a 95% prediction interval of 3.0% to 51.0%, indicating that estimates from individual settings may differ greatly from the average.
| Study grouping | Pooled prevalence estimate | What it means |
|---|---|---|
| All included studies | 15.2% (95% CI 12.4–18.5) | Average across the 53 studies, not a universal rate. |
| All studies after trim-and-fill adjustment | 14.1% (95% CI 11.2–17.6) | Adjusted estimate accounting for possible publication bias. |
| Representative samples | 9.8% | Sensitivity estimate for studies using representative samples; a confidence interval is not stated here. |
| Nationally representative studies | 8.0% | Sensitivity estimate based on the 10 nationally representative studies; a confidence interval is not stated here. |
Representativeness is important: estimates from samples designed to reflect a broader population are lower than the overall pooled estimate. The authors also found that sample design and measurement instrument help explain differences, while substantial variation remains unexplained. Because the included studies varied by country, population, scale, and cut-off, ranking countries from unlike surveys would not be a reliable comparison.
What research says about health, work, and family
The 2024 review reports potential adverse outcomes for mental and physical health, well-being, and family life. The 2023 prevalence review discusses prior research associating workaholism with anxiety, burnout, cardiovascular disease, depression, sleep problems, lower life satisfaction and well-being, work-family conflict, partner dissatisfaction, job stress, and work-related accidents. These are reported associations; they do not establish that workaholism alone caused each outcome.
The 2024 review does not find that workaholics perform better than others and notes they may perform worse. It also describes proposed interventions as having unclear effects, so the available reviews do not establish a proven treatment protocol.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
Long-hours statistics are not workaholism statistics
WHO and the International Labour Organization (ILO) estimate health risks tied to working hours, not to a workaholism assessment. Their 2021 publication summarizes estimates for 194 countries covering 2000–2016. For 2016, it estimated that 479 million people—9% of the global population—worked at least 55 hours a week. The WHO/ILO analysis attributed 745,000 deaths and 23.26 million disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) from ischemic heart disease and stroke to long working hours that year.
Best Value
For relative risks, the comparison matters: pooled analyses found that working at least 55 hours weekly, versus 35–40 hours, was associated with a 17% higher risk of ischemic heart disease (339,680 participants across 22 cohort studies) and a 35% higher risk of stroke (162,644 participants across seven studies). These findings concern a defined hours exposure and specific health outcomes. They do not tell us how many people meet a workaholism measure.
- A person may work long hours because of job demands or economic circumstances without meeting a workaholism measure.
- A person may be persistently preoccupied with work without crossing the 55-hour threshold.
- Hours alone, like a self-report scale, cannot diagnose an individual.
How to read workaholism statistics accurately
When comparing estimates, check four details before treating figures as comparable:
- Sampling: Was the sample a convenience group, representative sample, or nationally representative study?
- Measurement: Which scale and cut-off defined workaholism?
- Population and place: Which country, occupation, or other group was studied?
- Date and uncertainty: When was the study conducted, and what confidence interval or range accompanies the estimate?
The best-supported broad summary is therefore a range of results shaped by methods and populations—not one settled rate for every worker. The 2023 meta-analysis supplies the strongest prevalence synthesis in these sources; the 2024 review provides a broader account of how the construct is understood. Neither should be mislabeled as a new 2025 prevalence survey.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Quick Recap
Sources
- Andersen FB, Djugum MET, Sjåstad VS, Pallesen S. The prevalence of workaholism: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 2023.
- Taris TW, de Jonge J. Workaholism: Taking Stock and Looking Forward. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2024.
- World Health Organization. Global, regional and national burdens of ischemic heart disease and stroke attributable to exposure to long working hours for 194 countries, 2000–2016. Q&A, 2021.
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
