BEING HIGHLY SENSITIVE AT WORK AND EXPERIENCING FLOW: RISK FACTOR OR RESOURCE AGAINST STRESS AND WORKAHOLISM?

Workaholism (Oates, 1971) is characterized by a compulsive tendency to work, sometimes to the detriment of health, personal relationships and other aspects of life (Burke, 2001).It is often associated with work-related stress (Spence & Robbins, 1992).Stress corresponds to a relationship between an individual and the work environment that is perceived as challenging or overwhelming personal resources, thus posing a threat to well-being (Lazarus & Folkman, 1984).In the workplace, high sensitivity is generally considered a risk factor for stress (Veleanovici et al., 2023) or burnout (Bordarie & Mourtialon, 2023).When faced with overly intense stimuli, highly sensitive people may tend to isolate themselves or invest in activities that they enjoy.At work, this investment can sometimes lead to a state of flow, where a person is so engrossed in an activity that they forget their surroundings (Csikszentmihalyi, 1997).In this study, we focus on the effects of HSPS and flow on stress and workaholism.Our hypotheses are (1) all variables will be positively correlated, (2) HSPS will positively influence stress and workaholism, (3) workaholism will play a mediating role between HSPS and stress and (4) flow will positively influence the relationship between HSPS and other variables.The sample included 231 working adults, of whom 82.7% were women and 17.3% men.They were divided into 5 age groups: 33.3% between 18 and 24, 19.9% between 25 and 34, 16.5% between 35 and 44, 22.1% between 45 and 54 and 8.2% between 55 and 64.They anonymously completed an online questionnaire assessing sensitivity (HSPS-FR, 27 items, Bordarie et al., 2022), flow (FaW, 13 items, Crone et al., unpublished) and stress (PSS4, 4 items, Dupret & Bocran, 2013) and workaholism (WART, 25 items, Ravoux et al., 2018).Statistical analyses, including correlations, linear regressions and mediation models, were performed using JASP (version 0.18.3) and Jamovi (version 2.6.17.0).The results highlighted that the variables were positively correlated (p<.01), with the exception of flow, which was not correlated with HSPS, and perceived stress.HSPS had a positive effect on perceived stress (=.301; p<.001) and workaholism (=.461; p<.001).WART also had a positive effect on stress (=.260; p<.001), playing a mediating role between HSPS and stress.Flow did not play a moderating role.We will discuss the results in relation to our hypotheses and in the light of the literature.We will point out the limitations of the study and suggest concrete ways in which organizations can optimize their working environments for the specific characteristics of employees.