Cited by 55Impact of Technology on AdolescentsConsumer Retail Behavior StudiesGambling Behavior and Treatments

Self-control predicts attentional bias assessed by online shopping-related Stroop in high online shopping addiction tendency college students

Jiang, Zhaocai, Zhao, Xiuxin, Li, Cancan·2017·Comprehensive Psychiatry

Abstract

Objective The aim of this study was to examine the relationships of personality types (i.e., self-control, BAS/BIS) and online shopping addiction (OSA) behavior and to investigate whether high-OSA tendency individuals display attentional biases toward online shopping-related (OS-related) stimuli as well as the links between attentional bias and personality types. Method The study included 98 college students divided into three groups (i.e., high-, medium- and low-OSA) according to their OSA behavior. The personality types (i.e., self-control, BAS/BIS) and OSA behavior were investigated by questionnaires. The attentional bias was evaluated by the OS-related Stroop and dot-probe task (DPT) paradigms. Results OSA was positively predicted by time spent on online shopping per day and average consumption for online shopping monthly, and negatively by self-control. High-OSA individuals displayed significant attentional biases toward OS-related stimuli in the Stroop, but not DPT paradigm. Moreover, the attentional bias toward OSA-related stimuli in high-OSA individuals was negatively correlated with self-control. Conclusion These findings demonstrated the critical role of self-control in OSA behavior and attentional bias to OS-related stimuli in high-OSA individuals, indicating that more importance should be attached to self-control for the clinical intervention of online shopping addiction in future studies.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.comppsych.2017.02.007

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Jiang et al. (2017) encuentran que el déficit inhibitorio en la adicción a compras online únicamente ocurre para estímulos relacionados con la adicción y no para otro tipo de material.

    “Así, en el caso de la adicción a compras online , Jiang et al., (2017) encuentran que el déficit inhibitorio únicamente ocurre para estímulos relacionados con la adicción, y no para otro tipo de material.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jiang, Z., Zhao, X., & Li, C.
Affiliations
Ludong University (CN)
Corresponding author
Jiang, Zhaocai
Venue
Comprehensive Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-05
Volume
75
Pages
14-21
ISSN
0010-440X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2593338351
Cited by
55
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1
FWCI
11.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Comprehensive Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Retail Behavior Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
Keywords
online shopping addiction, self-control, attentional bias, personality types, Stroop task, dot-probe task, university students, compulsive buying
MeSH terms
Self-Control, Attentional Bias, Commerce, Female, Humans, Male, Obsessive Behavior, Surveys and Questionnaires, Students, Behavior, Addictive, Internet, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review