Exercise addiction is studied along with behavioral addictions but has no diagnostic
criteria mainly because dysfunctional cases have incomparable etiologies, and research
is based on a presumed risk assessment that may never turn into dysfunction. The scalar
measurements of the risk of exercise addiction (REA) share substantial variance with
passion, perfectionism, and sports commitment. However, the extent to which their
subdomains jointly determine the REA is unknown. Consequently, this study aimed to
fill this gap and then evaluated possible group differences (gender, competition status,
and individual vs. team sports), intending to emphasize the need to control these
covariates of REA to avoid false interpretations based on simple group comparisons.
An international sample (mean age 31.65 (± SD = 14.48) of 1003 regular exercisers
(46.86% males)) completed validated instruments to assess the REA, its predictors,
and exercise characteristics. Although all measures showed medium to strong correlations
with the REA, a bootstrapped hierarchical regression yielded six predictors (exercise
volume and intensity, harmonious and obsessive passion, rigid perfectionism, and constrained
commitment), sharing 42.7% of the variance with the REA. Three bootstrapped univariate
tests yielded gender, competition status, and sports‐form differences in REA when
the predictors were not included in the model as covariates. However, all group differences
vanished when the predictors were controlled. Our results suggest a conceptual unclarity
between what is currently conceptualized as REA and its covariates. More of the latter
could entirely obscure the impact of REA. Hence, research should develop more specific
tools to assess exercise addiction as a potential dysfunction.
