Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Work addiction (WA) threatens occupation-related health in many countries including China. This research aims to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of Bergen Work Addiction Scale (BWAS), the most common measure of WA, to facilitate relevant studies in Chinese workers. A network analysis was further conducted to identify central and bridge symptoms within the WA-anxiety network to improve intervention practices.
METHODS: A total of 694 Chinese white-collar workers completed an online questionnaire survey in March of 2022, and the responses to BWAS from a subsample of 50 participants one month after this survey were also collected.
RESULTS: The unidimensionality of BWAS was supported by results of exploratory factor analysis, exploratory graph analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis and we found satisfactory internal consistency and acceptable test-retest reliability. Multiple-group factor analyses confirmed the measurement invariance of BWAS across genders, districts (i.e., central China, eastern China, western China, and northeastern China), and age groups (i.e., young and middle-aged adults) while the convergent validity of BWAS was demonstrated by its significant correlations with Dutch Work Addiction Scale (r = 0.62, p < 0.001) and its criterion validity was indicated by its significant correlations with general anxiety, weekly work hours, and health status (r = -0.16 to 0.31, p < 0.001-0.01). Network analysis further revealed two central symptoms (WA-tolerance and WA-problems) and three bridge symptoms (WA-problems, WA-mood modification, and mouth dryness of general anxiety) maintaining the WA-anxiety comorbidity.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that BWAS is a valid measure of WA in Chinese workers and interventions should put special attention to the identified central and bridge symptoms underlying the WA-anxiety network.
METHODS: A total of 694 Chinese white-collar workers completed an online questionnaire survey in March of 2022, and the responses to BWAS from a subsample of 50 participants one month after this survey were also collected.
RESULTS: The unidimensionality of BWAS was supported by results of exploratory factor analysis, exploratory graph analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis and we found satisfactory internal consistency and acceptable test-retest reliability. Multiple-group factor analyses confirmed the measurement invariance of BWAS across genders, districts (i.e., central China, eastern China, western China, and northeastern China), and age groups (i.e., young and middle-aged adults) while the convergent validity of BWAS was demonstrated by its significant correlations with Dutch Work Addiction Scale (r = 0.62, p < 0.001) and its criterion validity was indicated by its significant correlations with general anxiety, weekly work hours, and health status (r = -0.16 to 0.31, p < 0.001-0.01). Network analysis further revealed two central symptoms (WA-tolerance and WA-problems) and three bridge symptoms (WA-problems, WA-mood modification, and mouth dryness of general anxiety) maintaining the WA-anxiety comorbidity.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that BWAS is a valid measure of WA in Chinese workers and interventions should put special attention to the identified central and bridge symptoms underlying the WA-anxiety network.
摘要：
背景：在包括中国在内的许多国家，工作成瘾（WA）威胁着与职业相关的健康。本研究旨在评估卑尔根工作成瘾量表(BWAS)中文版的心理测量特性，最常见的WA测量，促进中国工人的相关研究。进一步进行了网络分析，以确定WA焦虑网络中的中心和桥梁症状，以改善干预实践。
方法：2022年3月，共有694名中国白领完成了一项在线问卷调查，并在调查一个月后收集了50名参与者的子样本对BWAS的回复。
结果：探索性因素分析的结果支持BWAS的一维性，探索性图分析，和验证性因子分析，我们发现令人满意的内部一致性和可接受的重测信度。多群体因素分析证实了BWAS跨性别的测量不变性，地区(即，中国中部,中国东部,中国西部,和中国东北)，和年龄组(即，年轻人和中年人），而BWAS的收敛效度通过其与荷兰工作成瘾量表（r=0.62，p<0.001）的显着相关性来证明，其标准效度通过其与一般焦虑的显着相关性来表明，每周工作时间,和健康状况(r=-0.16至0.31，p<0.001-0.01)。网络分析进一步揭示了两个中心症状(WA耐受性和WA问题)和三个桥梁症状(WA问题，WA-心情修改，和一般焦虑的口腔干燥）维持WA焦虑共病。
结论：我们的研究结果表明，BWAS是中国工人中WA的有效衡量标准，干预措施应特别注意确定的WA-焦虑网络背后的中央和桥梁症状。
方法：2022年3月，共有694名中国白领完成了一项在线问卷调查，并在调查一个月后收集了50名参与者的子样本对BWAS的回复。
结果：探索性因素分析的结果支持BWAS的一维性，探索性图分析，和验证性因子分析，我们发现令人满意的内部一致性和可接受的重测信度。多群体因素分析证实了BWAS跨性别的测量不变性，地区(即，中国中部,中国东部,中国西部,和中国东北)，和年龄组(即，年轻人和中年人），而BWAS的收敛效度通过其与荷兰工作成瘾量表（r=0.62，p<0.001）的显着相关性来证明，其标准效度通过其与一般焦虑的显着相关性来表明，每周工作时间,和健康状况(r=-0.16至0.31，p<0.001-0.01)。网络分析进一步揭示了两个中心症状(WA耐受性和WA问题)和三个桥梁症状(WA问题，WA-心情修改，和一般焦虑的口腔干燥）维持WA焦虑共病。
结论：我们的研究结果表明，BWAS是中国工人中WA的有效衡量标准，干预措施应特别注意确定的WA-焦虑网络背后的中央和桥梁症状。
