The social construction of workaholism as a representational naturalization.

Workaholism, a term borrowed from the language around alcoholism, first appeared in academic writing in the late 1960s. This article addresses the following questions: How has the concept of workaholism evolved in scientific literature and in society? How do people who identify as workaholics represent and communicate work addiction, and how do they identify it as their lived reality? Drawing on the concept of naturalization as a process of social representation, we argue that workaholism has been constituted as a naturalized object, and we consider the ways in which it is reproduced in everyday life through communication and experience. We situated the definition of workaholism within the scholarly literature. We then conducted semi-structured interviews with eleven individuals who self-identify or have been diagnosed as work addicts. Our research shows that representational naturalization began when workaholism first became a recognizable reality as a result of changes in the world of work. Naturalization was then achieved by eliminating contradictions through the process of decoupling the positive features of workaholism from the overall concept. Our results demonstrate how this naturalized representation of workaholism is reproduced through the communication and lived experience of "workaholics."

The critical reception of the DSM-5: Towards a typology of audiences.

Since its initial publication, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders has been the object of criticism which has led to regular revisions by the American Psychiatric Association. This article analyses the debates that surrounded the publication of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.). Building on the concepts of public arenas and reception theory, it explores the meaning encoded in the manual by audiences. Our results, which draw from a thematic analysis of traditional and digital media sources, identify eight audiences that react to the American Psychiatric Association's narrative of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.): conformist, reformist, humanist, culturalist, naturalist, conflictual, constructivist and utilitarian. While some of their claims present argumentative polarities, others overlap, thus challenging the idea, often presented in academic publications, of a fixed debate. In order to further discuss on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, we draw attention to claims that 'travel' across different communities of audiences.