CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 380Consumer Retail Behavior StudiesObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersGambling Behavior and Treatments

The prevalence of compulsive buying: a meta‐analysis

Open access
Maraz, Aniko, Griffiths, Mark D., Demetrovics, Zsolt·2016·Addiction
DOI 10.1111/add.13223
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Aims: To estimate the pooled prevalence of compulsive buying behaviour (CBB) in different populations and to determine the effect of age, gender, location and screening instrument on the reported heterogeneity in estimates of CBB and whether publication bias could be identified. Methods: Three databases were searched (Medline, PsychInfo, Web of Science) using the terms ‘compulsive buying’, ‘pathological buying’ and ‘compulsive shopping’ to estimate the pooled prevalence of CBB in different populations. Forty studies reporting 49 prevalence estimates from 16 countries were located ( n = 32 000). To conduct the meta‐analysis, data from non‐clinical studies regarding mean age and gender proportion, geographical study location and screening instrument used to assess CBB were extracted by multiple independent observers and evaluated using a random‐effects model. Four a priori subgroups were analysed using pooled estimation (Cohen's Q ) and covariate testing (moderator and meta‐regression analysis). Results: The CBB pooled prevalence of adult representative studies was 4.9% (3.4–6.9%, eight estimates, 10 102 participants), although estimates were higher among university students: 8.3% (5.9–11.5%, 19 estimates, 14 947 participants) in adult non‐representative samples: 12.3% (7.6–19.1%, 11 estimates, 3929 participants) and in shopping‐specific samples: 16.2% (8.8–27.8%, 11 estimates, 4686 participants). Being young and female were associated with increased tendency, but not location ( United States versus non‐ United States ). Meta‐regression revealed large heterogeneity within subgroups, due mainly to diverse measures and time‐frames (current versus life‐time) used to assess CBB. Conclusions: A pooled estimate of compulsive buying behaviour in the populations studied is approximately 5%, but there is large variation between samples accounted for largely by use of different time‐frames and measures.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/add.13223

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • There are very few largescale nationally representative epidemiological studies in any of the three proposed disorders, and much of the self-report data comprise small self-selected convenience samples.

    “In relation to self-report data, there are very few largescale nationally representative epidemiological studies in any of the three proposed disorders, and much of the self-report data comprise small self-selected convenience samples (Fernandez & Griffiths, 2021; Kuss & Griffiths, 2017; Maraz, Griffiths, & Demetrovics, 2016).”

    From Disorders due to addictive behaviors: Further issues, debates, and controversies •: Commentary to the debate: “Behavioral addictions in the ICD-11” (2022) · cites this paper as Maraz, Griffiths, & Demetrovics, 2016

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Faber RJ, O'Guinn TC, Krych R. Compulsive consumption. Adv Consum Res 1987;14:132-5.
  2. Stroup D. F., Berlin J. A., Morton S. C., Olkin I., Williamson G. D., Rennie D. et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. JAMA 2000; 283: 2008-12.
  3. Müller A., Smits D. J., Claes L., Gefeller O., Hinz A., de Zwaan M. The German version of the material values scale. GMS Psychosoc Med 2013; 10: 1-9.
  4. Maraz A, Király O, Demetrovics Z. The diagnostic pitfalls of surveys: if you score positive on a test of addiction, you still have a good chance not to be addicted. A response to Billieux et al. 2015. J Behav Addict 2015; 4: 151-54.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Maraz, A., Griffiths, M. D., & Demetrovics, Z.
Affiliations
  • Institute of Psychology Eötvös Loránd University Budapest Hungary
  • Nottingham Trent University (GB)
  • Eötvös Loránd University (HU)
ORCID
Venue
Addiction
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-01-08
Volume
111
Issue
3
Pages
408-419
ISSN
  • 0965-2140 (ISSN-L)
  • 1360-0443
DOI
10.1111/add.13223
OpenAlex
W1921532565
Cited by
380
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 52 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 79 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 14
FWCI
4.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • Addiction (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Nottingham Trent University's Institutional Repository (Nottingham Trent Repository) (acceptedVersion)
  • Repository of the Academy's Library (Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
Eötvös Loránd Tudományegyetem
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Retail Behavior Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Obsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
Keywords
compulsive buying, prevalence, university students, age and gender differences, screening tool, publication bias, heterogeneity of prevalence estimates
MeSH terms
Australia, Brazil, Commerce, Compulsive Behavior, Europe, Female, Humans, Male, Regression Analysis, Students, Taiwan, United States, Universities, Prevalence, Age Distribution, Sex Distribution, Republic of Korea

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