Hubbry Logo
Compulsive buying disorderCompulsive buying disorderMain
Open search
Compulsive buying disorder
Community hub
Compulsive buying disorder
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Compulsive buying disorder
Compulsive buying disorder
Compulsive buying disorder
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Part of a series on
Anti-consumerism
Theories and ideas
Notable works
Organizations and groups
People
Related social movements
See also

Compulsive buying disorder (CBD) is characterized by an obsession with shopping and buying behavior that causes adverse consequences. It "is experienced as a recurring, compelling and irresistible–uncontrollable urge, in acquiring goods that lack practical utility and very low cost[1] resulting in excessive, expensive and time-consuming retail activity [that is] typically prompted by negative affectivity" and results in "gross social, personal and/or financial difficulties".[2] Most people with CBD meet the criteria for a personality disorder. Compulsive buying can also be found among people with Parkinson's disease[3] or frontotemporal dementia.[4][5]

Compulsive buying-shopping disorder is classified by the ICD-11 among "other specified impulse control disorders".[5] Several authors have considered compulsive shopping rather as a variety of dependence disorder.[6] The DSM-5 did not include compulsive buying disorder in its chapter concerning substance-related and addictive disorders, since there is "still debate on whether other less recognized forms of impulsive behaviors, such as compulsive buying [...] can be conceptualized as addictions."[7]

History

[edit]

According to German physician Max Nordau, French psychiatrist Valentin Magnan coined the term oniomania in the 1892 German translation of his Psychiatric Lectures (Psychiatrische Vorlesungen).[8] Magnan describes compulsive buying as a symptom of social degeneration.[9] In his book Degeneration (1892), Nordau calls oniomania or "buying craze" a "stigma of degeneration".[10] Emil Kraepelin described oniomania as of 1909,[11] and he and Bleuler both included the syndrome in their influential early psychiatric textbooks.[12] Kraepelin described oniomania as "a pathological desire to buy... without any actual need and in great quantities", considering it alongside kleptomania and other conditions that were thought to be related to impulsivity (of the type nowadays denoted impulse control disorders).[5][13]

Relatively little interest seems to have been taken in collocating CBD as a distinct pathology until the 1990s.[13][14] It has been suggested that even in the 21st century, compulsive shopping can be considered a barely recognised mental illness.[15] Since 2019, ICD-11 (the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases) has classified it among "other specified impulse control disorders" (coded as 6C7Y), using the descriptor compulsive buying-shopping disorder.[5]

Characteristics

[edit]

CBD is characterized by an obsession with shopping and buying behavior that causes adverse consequences. According to Kellett and Bolton, it "is experienced as an irresistible–uncontrollable urge, resulting in excessive, expensive and time-consuming retail activity [that is] typically prompted by negative affectivity" and results in "gross social, personal and/or financial difficulties".[2] What differentiates CBD from healthy shopping is the compulsive, destructive and chronic nature of the buying. Where shopping can be a positive route to self-expression, in excess it represents a dangerous threat.[16]

CBD is frequently comorbid with mood, anxiety, substance abuse and eating disorders. People who score highly on compulsive-buying scales tend to understand their feelings poorly and have low tolerance for unpleasant psychological states such as negative moods.[17] The onset of CBD occurs in the late teens and early twenties and is generally chronic. The phenomenon of compulsive buying tends to affect women rather than men. The aforementioned reports on this matter indicated that the dominance of the majority group is so great that it accounts for more than 90% of the affected demographic.[18] Zadka and Olajossy suggest the presence of several similar tendencies between consumer-type mannerisms and pathologic consumption of psychoactive elements. These tendencies include a constant need to consume, personal dependence, and a tendency to lack a sense of self-control over behavior.[19] Additionally, Zadka and Olajossy state that one could conclude that individuals suffering from the disorder are often in the second decade to fourth decade of their lives and exhibit mannerisms akin to neurotic personality and impulse-control disorders.[20]

Compulsive buying disorder

CBD is similar to, but distinguished from, OCD hoarding and mania. Compulsive buying is not limited to people who spend beyond their means; it also includes people who spend an inordinate amount of time shopping or who chronically think about buying things but never purchase them. Promising treatments for CBD include medication such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), and support groups such as Debtors Anonymous.[21][22][23][24]

Research reveals that 1.8 to 8.1 percent of the general adult population have CBD and that while the usual onset is late adolescence or early adulthood, it is often recognized as a problem later in life.[25]

Distinctions

[edit]

Unlike normal consumers and hoarders, who derive excitement and focus on the items purchased, compulsive buyers gain excitement and focus on the acquisition process itself and not the item purchased.[26]

Compulsive buying disorder is tightly associated with excessive or poorly managed urges related to the purchase of the items and spending of currency in any form; digital, mobile, credit or cash.[27]

Four phases have been identified in compulsive buying: anticipation, preparation, shopping, and spending. The first phase involves a preoccupation with purchasing a specific item or with shopping in general. The second phase the individual plans the shopping excursion. The third phase is the actual shopping event; while the fourth phase is completed by the feelings of excitement connected to spending money on their desired items.[28]

The terms compulsive shopping, compulsive buying, and compulsive spending are often used interchangeably, but the behaviors they represent are in fact distinct.[29] One may buy without shopping, and certainly shop without buying: of compulsive shoppers, some 30 percent described the act of buying itself as providing a buzz, irrespective of the goods purchased.[30]

Causes

[edit]

Compulsive buying can be found among people with Parkinson's disease[3] or frontotemporal dementia.[4][5]

CBD often has roots in early experience. Perfectionism, general impulsiveness and compulsiveness, dishonesty, insecurity, and the need to gain control have also been linked to the disorder.[31][32] From a medical perspective, it can be concluded that impulse-control disorders are attributed to the desire for positive stimuli.[20] The normal method of operation in a healthy brain is that the frontal cortex regulation handles the activity of reward. However, in individuals with behavioral disorders, this particular system malfunctions. Scientists have reported that compulsive buyers have significantly different activity in this area of the brain.[20]

Compulsive buying seems to represent a search for self in people whose identity is neither firmly felt nor dependable, as indicated by the way purchases often provide social or personal identity-markers.[33] Those with associated disorders such as PTSD/CPTSD,[34] anxiety, depression and poor impulse control are particularly likely to attempt to treat symptoms of low self-esteem through compulsive shopping.[35]

Others, however, object, stating that such psychological explanations for compulsive buying do not apply to all people with CBD.[36]

Social conditions also play an important role in CBD, the rise of consumer culture contributing to the view of compulsive buying as a specifically postmodern addiction, particularly with regard to internet buying platforms.[37]

Readily available credit cards enable casual spending beyond one's means, and some would suggest that the compulsive buyer should lock up or destroy credit cards altogether.[38] Online shopping also facilitates CBD, with online auction addiction, used to escape feelings of depression or guilt, becoming a recognizable problem.[39]

Materialism and image-seeking

[edit]

A social psychological perspective suggests that compulsive buying may be seen as an exaggerated form of a more normal search for validation through purchasing.[40] Also, pressures from the spread of materialist values and consumer culture over the recent decades can drive people into compulsive shopping.[41]

Companies have adopted aggressive neuromarketing by associating the identification of a high social status with the purchasing of items. They strive to bring out such an individual as a sort of folk hero for having the ability to buy several items. As a result, according to Zadka and Olajossy, the act of shopping is then associated with the feeling of holding a higher social status or of climbing the social ranks. Zadka holds that these companies take advantage of the frailties of peoples' egos in an attempt to get them to spend their money.[20]

Symptoms and course

[edit]

Diagnostic criteria for compulsive buying have been proposed:

  1. Over-preoccupation with buying.
  2. Distress or impairment as a result of the activity.
  3. Compulsive buying is not limited to hypomanic or manic episodes.[42]
  4. Constant obsessing with buying as well as being dissatisfied all the time.

While initially triggered by a perhaps mild need to feel special, the failure of compulsive shopping to actually meet such needs may lead to a vicious cycle of escalation,[43] with them experiencing the highs and lows associated with other addictions.[44] The 'high' of the purchasing may be followed by a sense of disappointment, and of guilt,[45] precipitating a further cycle of impulse buying.[46][47] With the now addicted person increasingly feeling negative emotions like anger and stress, they may attempt to self-medicate through further purchases,[48] followed again by feelings of shame, embarrassment, guilt, regret or depression once they return home,[49] leading to an urge for buying more. The aforementioned symptoms are aggravated further by the availability of money through access to credit cards and easy bank loans.[50]

As debt grows, the compulsive shopping may become a more secretive act.[44] At the point where bought goods are hidden or destroyed, because the person concerned feels so ashamed of their addiction, the price of the addiction in mental, financial and emotional terms becomes even higher.[51]

Individuals who can be considered addicted to shopping are observed to exhibit repetitive and obsessive urges to go buy items, especially when in the vicinity of an environment that supports this venture, such as a mall. In such locations, they mostly purchase things that are cheap and of low value mainly just to satisfy the urge to spend. Normally, these items end up being returned to the shop or disposed of entirely after a while. However, according to Zadka and Olajossy, this rarely works as these individuals are known to have low self-esteem.[20]

Consequences

[edit]

The consequences of compulsive buying, which may persist long after a spree, can be devastating, with marriages, long-term relationships, and jobs all feeling the strain.[52] Further problems can include ruined credit history, theft or defalcation of money, defaulted loans, general financial trouble and in some cases bankruptcy or extreme debt, as well as anxiety and a sense of life spiraling out of control.[53] The resulting stress can lead to physical health problems and ruined relationships, or even suicide.[54]

Treatment

[edit]

Treatment involves becoming conscious of the addiction through studying, therapy and group work. Research done by Michel Lejoyeux and Aviv Weinstein suggests that the best possible treatment for CBD is cognitive behavioral therapy. They suggest that a patient first be "evaluated for psychiatric comorbidity, especially with depression, so that appropriate pharmacological treatment can be instituted." Their research indicates that patients who received cognitive behavioral therapy over 10 weeks had reduced episodes of compulsive buying and spent less time shopping as opposed to patients who did not receive this treatment (251).

Lejoyeux and Weinstein also write about pharmacological treatment and studies that question the use of drugs on CBD. They declare "few controlled studies have assessed the effects of pharmacological treatment on compulsive buying, and none have shown any medication to be effective." (252) The most effective treatment is to attend therapy and group work in order to prevent continuation of this addiction.[55][56]

Hague et al. reports that group therapy rendered the highest results as far as treatment of compulsive buying disorder is concerned. He states that group therapy contributed to about 72.8% in positive change in the reduction of urges of compulsive spending. Additionally, he notes that psychotherapy may not be the treatment of choice for all compulsive buying disorder patients since the suitability of the treatment method to the patient is also an important consideration. He holds that the treatments of the disorder are required to provide a certain reflection of the context in which this phenomenon manifests.[57]

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors such as fluvoxamine and citalopram may be useful in the treatment of CBD, although current evidence is mixed.[58][59] Opioid antagonists such as naltrexone and nalmefene are promising potential treatments for CBD.[58] A review concluded that evidence is limited and insufficient to support their use at present, however.[60] Naltrexone and nalmefene have also shown effectiveness in the treatment of gambling addiction, an associated disorder.[60][61]

Historical examples

[edit]
  • Mary Todd Lincoln (1818–1882), wife of US president Abraham Lincoln, was allegedly addicted to shopping, running up (and concealing) large bills on credit, feeling manic glee at spending sprees, followed by depressive reactions in the face of the results.[62]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Compulsive buying disorder

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Compulsive buying disorder (CBD), also termed compulsive buying-shopping disorder, is a psychiatric condition defined by intrusive preoccupations with buying or shopping, irresistible urges to purchase items that are often unnecessary or unaffordable, and repetitive buying behaviors that result in marked distress, financial hardship, interpersonal conflicts, or impaired functioning in daily life. Unlike typical , CBD involves a maladaptive cycle of mounting tension before purchases, transient relief during the act, and subsequent guilt or regret, frequently leading to of unopened , accumulation, and concealment of buying from others. Empirical estimates place its prevalence at approximately 5% in adult populations, with higher rates among women (up to 80-95% of cases) and associations with comorbidities such as mood disorders, anxiety, traits, and other behavioral addictions. Although not formally classified in major diagnostic manuals like the , extensive research supports its validity as a distinct impulse-control or addictive pathology, driven by neurobiological factors including reward dysregulation and poor rather than mere cultural . Cognitive-behavioral interventions have shown preliminary in reducing symptoms by targeting cognitive distortions and deficits, though long-term outcomes remain understudied amid debates over diagnostic boundaries with conditions like obsessive-compulsive disorder.

Definition and Classification

Diagnostic Criteria

Compulsive buying disorder (CBD), also termed compulsive buying-shopping disorder (CBSD), lacks formal inclusion in major diagnostic manuals like the , but proposed criteria emphasize maladaptive preoccupations with buying, irresistible impulses leading to repetitive purchases, and resultant distress or functional impairment. Core diagnostic features include frequent intrusive thoughts or urges to buy that cause tension or anxiety prior to purchasing, followed by temporary or gratification post-purchase, with buying behaviors exceeding financial means or needs and persisting despite adverse consequences. These criteria, originally proposed by McElroy et al. in 1994, require that symptoms manifest as irresistible and senseless impulses not confined to hypomanic states, result in marked financial, interpersonal, or legal difficulties, and cannot be attributed to substance use, medical conditions, or other psychiatric disorders such as bipolar . A 2021 Delphi consensus study involving 138 international experts refined these into operational thresholds, stipulating persistent dysfunctional buying behaviors (e.g., acquiring unneeded items without utilization for intended purposes) that occupy excessive time, lead to failed control attempts, and impair social, occupational, or financial functioning, excluding explanations by physiological substance effects or alternative psychopathologies. Onset typically occurs in late or early adulthood, with mean age around 18 years in clinical samples, distinguishing it from normative patterns. necessitates empirical verification of severity, often via validated instruments like the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale-Shopping Version (YBOCS-SV), a 10-item clinician-rated measure assessing time occupied, interference, distress, resistance, and control over shopping obsessions and compulsions, with scores indicating mild to extreme impairment. Symptoms must not align better with cultural spending norms or transient stressors, ensuring differentiation from adaptive .

Status in Diagnostic Manuals

Compulsive buying disorder was classified in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV; published 1994) under the category of impulse-control disorders not otherwise specified (NOS), reflecting its recognition as a clinically significant impulse-related problem without meeting criteria for established disorders like pathological gambling or . This placement acknowledged repetitive buying urges leading to distress but lacked specificity due to limited empirical validation at the time. In the (published 2013), compulsive buying was not elevated to a standalone diagnosis, instead potentially falling under "other specified disruptive, impulse-control, and " when symptoms cause marked distress or impairment without fitting other categories. Exclusion from independent status stemmed primarily from insufficient peer-reviewed evidence establishing distinct diagnostic reliability, validity, and longitudinal course data, alongside diagnostic overlap with conditions such as (where unrestrained buying appears as a symptom) and mood episodes. These evidential gaps, including sparse prospective studies on progression and treatment response, prevented formal inclusion despite advocacy for its impulse-control framing. The International Classification of Diseases, Eleventh Revision (; effective 2022) recognizes compulsive buying-shopping disorder explicitly as an example under other specified disorders of impulse control (code 6C7Y), defined by intrusive buying urges, repetitive purchasing despite harm, and resulting psychological distress. This categorization emphasizes irresistible impulses and impaired control, distinguishing it from normative shopping while noting cultural influences on expression. Ongoing nosological debates center on reclassifying compulsive buying as a , given parallels in reward processing deficits and cue-induced craving akin to substance use disorders, or as an obsessive-compulsive due to shared intrusive thoughts and ritualistic behaviors. evidence of dysregulation supports the addiction model, yet compulsive elements like guilt post-purchase align more with OCD phenomenology, complicating placement without resolved causal distinctions. These proposals await further longitudinal and genetic studies to inform future manuals like DSM-6.

Epidemiology

Prevalence Rates

Lifetime prevalence estimates for compulsive buying disorder general stand at approximately 5.8%, derived from a national telephone survey of 2,500 respondents using validated screening tools. Globally, a 2016 meta-analysis of 23 studies encompassing over 12,000 participants yielded a pooled of around 5% for compulsive buying , with representative samples showing rates of 4.9% (95% CI: 3.4–6.9%), though methodological differences such as screening instruments and sample types contributed to substantial heterogeneity (I² = 98%). Prevalence rates exhibit variation across study designs, with non-representative samples like university students reporting higher figures, up to 8–10% in some assessments, potentially reflecting developmental vulnerabilities or selection biases rather than population norms. In contrast, rates appear lower among older adults, though community-based surveys often capture underreporting linked to and reluctance to disclose impulsive behaviors. Post-2020 studies indicate potential upticks in compulsive buying tendencies amid the , with longitudinal data showing gradual increases during the initial six months, particularly following economic stimulus measures that facilitated online purchasing surges; however, these observations stem from samples and do not yet establish firmly elevated population-level , necessitating further generalizable to disentangle transient effects from baseline trends.

Demographic Patterns

Population-based surveys indicate that compulsive buying disorder affects men and women at nearly equivalent rates, with point prevalence estimates of 5.5% among men and 6.0% among women in the United States general adult population. This contrasts with clinical treatment samples, where approximately 80-90% of patients are female, likely attributable to gender differences in help-seeking behaviors and societal stigma around male shopping impulses. Such discrepancies highlight potential biases in clinical data, as community studies using standardized scales like the Compulsive Buying Scale reveal no significant differences in disorder severity between genders. The disorder typically emerges in late or early adulthood, with mean onset ages reported around 18-19 years, though symptoms may persist or recur into midlife, contributing to chronic financial and psychological impairment. appears elevated among urban dwellers and individuals in higher socioeconomic strata, correlating with greater access to credit cards and environments that facilitate impulsive purchases. Cross-cultural research underscores rising patterns in emerging economies amid expanding , as evidenced by longitudinal data from showing increased compensatory and compulsive buying tendencies from 2010 to 2023, particularly among those using shopping to alleviate emotional distress in transitional societies. In developed nations, stable but persistent rates suggest entrenched influences from and , while lower reported incidences in rural or lower-income groups may reflect limited financial means rather than absence of underlying tendencies.

Etiology and Risk Factors

Psychological Contributors

Compulsive buying disorder involves core deficits in impulse control, with affected individuals demonstrating significantly higher and compulsivity scores on validated scales such as the and Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory compared to non-affected controls. Low distress tolerance further exacerbates this, as buying episodes often function as an immediate escape from emotional discomfort, bypassing adaptive regulation strategies. This pattern reflects a failure in sustaining exposure to negative affective states, leading to repetitive acquisition behaviors that provide transient relief but fail to address underlying tensions. Associations with low are well-documented, wherein purchases serve as compensatory mechanisms to temporarily enhance self-perception, yet result in post-purchase guilt that undermines long-term esteem. Perfectionism, particularly unrelenting standards schemas, contributes by fostering dissatisfaction with possessions and driving persistent buying to achieve idealized outcomes, despite mounting evidence of harm. strategies predominate, including problem avoidance and , where shopping displaces proactive problem-solving and reinforces cycles through short-term mood elevation followed by reinforced dependency. Materialism acts as a trait-level in compulsive buying, correlating positively with buying frequency beyond mere consumer interest, as higher materialistic orientations predict maladaptive persistence—continued acquisition heedless of financial or interpersonal consequences, distinguishing it from goal-directed ambition. This trait-driven perpetuates the disorder by framing possessions as central to identity validation, overriding rational restraint.

Biological and Neuroscientific Evidence

Compulsive buying disorder (CBD) exhibits neurobiological overlaps with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) and behavioral addictions, particularly involving dysregulation in reward-processing circuits. (fMRI) studies have demonstrated heightened activity in the ventral and dorsal , including the , during exposure to shopping-related cues, mirroring patterns observed in substance use disorders where anticipation of reward elicits strong neural responses. This striatal hyperactivation is linked to dopamine-mediated reinforcement, with compulsive buyers showing stronger ventral striatal engagement compared to controls, suggesting impaired impulse control and exaggerated reward salience to purchasing stimuli. Genetic factors contribute to vulnerability, evidenced by familial aggregation and twin studies on related impulsive behaviors indicating moderate . For instance, investigations into impulsive buying, a core component of CBD, reveal genetic influences overlapping with traits like novelty-seeking, with estimates for dimensions ranging from 40% to 50% in behavioral genetic models. These findings align with broader from OCD-spectrum conditions, where twin studies consistently estimate around 50% genetic variance, implying shared polygenic risks that may amplify susceptibility when comorbid with mood disorders. Neurotransmitter imbalances, particularly in serotonergic and systems, underpin these circuits, with hypotheses of serotonergic deficits supported by partial therapeutic responses to selective serotonin inhibitors (SSRIs) in clinical trials, akin to OCD treatments. hyperactivity in mesolimbic pathways drives the compulsive of buying, as shopping cues elicit reward surges similar to addictive stimuli, potentially exacerbating risk in those with underlying comorbidities that modulate these systems. Noradrenergic involvement remains less substantiated, though hypothesized in impulse dysregulation models from anxiety-related overlaps. Overall, these biological markers highlight endogenous drivers distinct from environmental triggers, emphasizing reward hypersensitivity over purely volitional deficits.

Sociocultural Influences

The proliferation of consumer credit and platforms has reduced financial and logistical barriers to impulsive purchases, enabling more frequent buying episodes among those predisposed to . During the , accessibility surged, with studies documenting a gradual increase in compulsive buying tendencies over the first six months of lockdowns in U.S. samples, attributed in part to heightened digital stimuli and homebound routines. Similarly, global growth post-2020 correlated with elevated reports of digital compulsive buying, though these trends reflect facilitated access rather than deterministic causation, as individual restraint remains viable despite lowered thresholds. Advertising and exposure cultivate materialistic aspirations and social comparison, empirically linked to heightened buying urges through mechanisms like knowledge and . Positive attitudes toward predict compulsive buying by diminishing skepticism toward promotional cues, while social media addiction exacerbates this via constant visibility of idealized lifestyles, with surveys indicating up to 72% of users reporting impulse purchases triggered by platform content. However, compulsive buying predates dominance, with clinical descriptions emerging in the mid-20th century amid traditional eras, underscoring that while modern channels amplify vulnerabilities, they do not originate the disorder's core drivers. Cultural emphases on materialism in high-income societies promote acquisition as a pathway to status and fulfillment, correlating with higher compulsive buying rates in consumer-oriented environments. Yet, empirical data reveal the disorder's presence across diverse contexts, including non-Western settings like Poland, where materialism similarly mediates buying tendencies akin to U.S. patterns, challenging claims of unique capitalist etiology. This cross-cultural persistence highlights innate human susceptibilities to overconsumption, rather than systemic forces alone, as prevalence estimates of 2-5% hold in varied socioeconomic samples without excusing personal accountability for maladaptive patterns.

Clinical Features

Symptoms and Behavioral Patterns

Individuals with compulsive buying disorder engage in repetitive buying sprees, acquiring unneeded or unwanted items in excessive quantities that exceed their financial means, with clinical reports indicating average expenditures of approximately $110 per episode. These episodes reflect diminished control over purchasing impulses, where individuals buy more than intended or affordable, often without subsequent use of the items. The maladaptive persistence is evident in attempts to resist urges occurring in 92% of cases, yet yielding to purchases in 74% of instances, distinguishing the disorder from occasional overspending by the chronic impairment to financial and daily functioning. Observable patterns include of unused purchases, frequently with original packaging retained or items eventually discarded or given away, alongside secretive conducted alone to avoid detection and . accompanies these behaviors, such as hiding receipts, concealing items, or lying about expenditures to family or financial institutions. Escalation results in tangible financial repercussions, with 85% of affected individuals reporting significant debt accumulation from credit overuse or loans, often culminating in or asset . The core behavioral sequence features pre-purchase tension mounting to an irresistible urge, relieved transiently by the purchase itself, followed by regret without behavioral cessation, perpetuating the cycle. In modern contexts, these patterns manifest digitally through compulsive online browsing, app-facilitated impulse buys, and one-click transactions, enabling rapid escalation while rooted in enduring failures of self-regulatory control over acquisition drives.

Cognitive and Emotional Aspects

Individuals with compulsive buying disorder frequently report intrusive thoughts about shopping and acquiring possessions, which function as obsessive preoccupations that dominate mental focus and precede buying episodes. These cognitions often involve anticipatory , with distorted beliefs such as purchases providing emotional fulfillment or resolving dissatisfaction, despite empirical patterns of subsequent and dissatisfaction. Such irrational beliefs, including absolutistic demands for happiness through material goods, contribute to maladaptive , where short-term hedonic expectations override of financial depletion. Emotionally, compulsive buying serves as a dysregulated response to negative affective states, with perceived stress emerging as a primary trigger; a 2024 scoping review of 23 studies found consistently elevated stress levels among those with compulsive buying-shopping disorder compared to controls, correlating with symptom severity and acting as a precipitant for episodes. and low mood similarly provoke buying as avoidance behaviors, offering transient relief from internal discomfort rather than genuine need satisfaction or problem resolution. This pattern reflects impaired emotional , where buying temporarily mitigates anxiety or depressive despair but exacerbates cycles of guilt post-purchase. A key cognitive feature enabling persistence is the compartmentalization of consequences, wherein individuals mentally segregate the immediate gratification of buying from foreseeable harms like debt accumulation, sustaining the behavior until acute crises force reckoning. Systematic reviews of cognitive functions highlight associated deficits in executive control and impulse inhibition, which underpin this disconnect between anticipation and reality.

Differential Diagnosis and Comorbidities

Compulsive buying disorder (CBD) differs from in that the former involves monetary transactions for acquired goods, often resulting in financial distress, whereas kleptomania entails theft without payment or economic rationale, driven by tension relief through stealing unrelated to personal use or need. In distinction from , CBD primarily manifests through irresistible urges to purchase items via legitimate means, with subsequent use or consumption intent, rather than the core difficulty in discarding possessions irrespective of acquisition method, leading to clutter and functional impairment from retention. CBD is differentiated from bipolar disorder's manic phases by the absence of accompanying grandiosity, sustained euphoric mood, or other expansive symptoms outside the buying episodes; manic spending typically remits with mood stabilization, whereas CBD buying persists chronically without episodic resolution tied to broader affective dysregulation. Although sharing features like intrusive thoughts and repetitive behaviors with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), CBD lacks the ego-dystonic rituals and harm-avoidance obsessions characteristic of OCD, exhibiting instead higher and reward-seeking traits; a 2025 study on and compulsivity profiles in CBD confirmed elevated non-planning and urgency dimensions relative to OCD's predominant compulsive restraint. CBD behaviors are also not induced by substances, excluding intoxication or withdrawal as causal factors unlike substance-related impulsive buying.

Common Co-occurring Disorders

Compulsive buying disorder (CBD) exhibits high rates of with other psychiatric conditions, with clinical studies reporting that over two-thirds of affected individuals meet criteria for at least one additional Axis I disorder. Lifetime of mood disorders among those with CBD ranges from 21% to 100%, while anxiety disorders occur in 41% to 80% of cases, often exacerbating the overall functional impairment without establishing causal links between the conditions. Substance use disorders co-occur at rates of 21% to 26%, and impulse control disorders affect nearly 60% of individuals, contributing to compounded patterns of maladaptive behavior. OCD-spectrum disorders show notable symptom overlap with CBD, including intrusive buying cognitions and ritualistic behaviors, though diagnostic co-occurrence rates vary across cohorts. Personality disorders, particularly , are frequent companions, with studies indicating strong associations driven by shared and emotional dysregulation traits. Eating disorders, such as , parallel CBD in facets, with empirical links suggesting heightened risk for both in vulnerable populations, independent of direct causation. Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) similarly aligns through elevated and executive function deficits observed in neuropsychological assessments of CBD patients. Longitudinal data from clinical follow-ups describe CBD as a with fluctuating severity, where multiple comorbidities correlate with poorer symptomatic control and greater additive burden, as evidenced by persistent buying episodes spanning decades in comorbid cases. These co-occurrences amplify impairment in daily functioning but do not imply unidirectional , highlighting the need for comprehensive in affected individuals.

Consequences and Impacts

Personal and Financial Repercussions

Compulsive buying disorder frequently results in substantial financial distress, with affected individuals accumulating significant debts that impair their . In a clinical sample of 38 patients, 58% reported large debts, 42% were unable to meet monthly payments, and eight individuals had debts exceeding $10,000. These debts often stem from repeated impulsive purchases financed through credit cards or loans, leading to depleted savings and reliance on high-interest borrowing. Empirical data indicate that up to 85% of those with the disorder face debt-related problems, underscoring the causal link between unchecked buying episodes and fiscal . Such financial burdens commonly precipitate filings and , as individuals exhaust resources to sustain purchasing cycles. Studies document instances where compulsive buyers liquidate personal assets, including vehicles and homes, to offset mounting liabilities, thereby entrenching patterns of economic vulnerability. Interference with professional life arises when debt pressures manifest as or diminished focus, with some cases resulting in job loss due to inability to maintain financial obligations tied to . This personal accountability for expenditure decisions, despite underlying compulsions, amplifies the risk of prolonged financial hardship. On the personal health front, the disorder exacerbates stress-related conditions, including heightened anxiety and depression, as individuals grapple with the psychological toll of unrelieved . Research shows strong correlations between compulsive buying severity and perceived stress levels, with buying often serving as a maladaptive mechanism that intensifies emotional distress post-purchase. Mood disorders, prevalent in up to 95% of cases, worsen due to guilt and from financial mismanagement, eroding self-efficacy and fostering cycles of low . Over time, these dynamics contribute to sustained traps, where chronic hinders wealth accumulation and perpetuates vulnerability to further impulsive behaviors.

Social and Relational Effects

Compulsive buying disorder frequently results in strained interpersonal relationships, with individuals concealing purchases and accumulating secret debts to avoid , thereby eroding trust within families and partnerships. Approximately 68% of affected individuals report negative impacts on their relationships, often manifesting as conflicts over undisclosed spending and financial secrecy. These dynamics commonly lead to marital discord, including separations and divorces, as partners grapple with the repercussions of unchecked buying behaviors. Social withdrawal is prevalent among those with the disorder, who typically shop in isolation to minimize detection of their habits, which exacerbates feelings of and detachment from social networks. This pattern of avoidance hinders open communication with and friends, fostering chronic even as material possessions accumulate, underscoring the paradoxical relational void created by the compulsion. counseling has been noted as a potential intervention for addressing these disruptions, highlighting the interpersonal toll that demands individual accountability rather than external mitigation.

Assessment and Diagnosis

Diagnostic Tools

The primary diagnostic tools for compulsive buying disorder (CBD) consist of self-report questionnaires designed to capture core features such as preoccupation with buying, irresistible urges, and post-purchase distress, with established psychometric properties for screening and severity assessment. The (), a 7-item self-report measure developed by Faber and O'Guinn in 1989, serves as a foundational instrument; respondents rate statements on a 9-point , yielding a composite score where values at or below -1.34 indicate probable CBD, based on validation against clinical interviews showing 91% sensitivity and 95% specificity. (Cronbach's α ≈ 0.87-0.95) and test-retest reliability (r ≈ 0.80) have been consistently demonstrated across studies, though cultural adaptations may require revalidation due to potential response biases in non-Western samples. The Richmond Compulsive Buying Scale (RCBS), introduced by Ridgway, Kukar-Kinney, and Monroe in 2008, offers a 6-item alternative that emphasizes cognitive and affective components without relying on income-relative spending thresholds, addressing limitations in the for diverse socioeconomic groups. Scores range from 6 to 42, with a cutoff above 36 signaling high risk of compulsive buying; validation studies report strong internal reliability (α = 0.88-0.92) and with the (r = 0.70-0.80), including cross-cultural applications in Brazilian and Chinese populations confirming factorial invariance. For more nuanced evaluation, structured clinical interviews can supplement scales, such as adaptations of the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale modified for shopping urges and rituals, which probe frequency and interference over the past week on a 0-40 scale. These tools integrate with objective financial audits—reviewing statements, reports, and expenditure logs over 6-12 months—to quantify behavioral impairment, such as exceeding 10-20% of annual or uncontrolled purchases averaging $500+ monthly, providing verifiable evidence beyond self-reports. Emerging scales like the Bergen Shopping Addiction Scale (BSAS), a 7-item measure aligned with criteria, show promising reliability (α = 0.84) and correlation with CBS scores (r = 0.80), aiding research differentiation from mere . Clinical use prioritizes multi-method approaches to mitigate self-report inflation, with tools selected based on context-specific validation data.

Challenges in Identification

Individuals affected by compulsive buying disorder often minimize or deny their symptoms due to associated , guilt, and regret, which hinders self-identification and seeking professional help. This denial is exacerbated by the secretive nature of the behavior, as sufferers may hide purchases or financial consequences from others, delaying recognition until severe distress or debt accumulates. Clinicians may underrecognize compulsive buying as a distinct psychiatric disorder, frequently dismissing it as a mere choice or quirk rather than a maladaptive warranting intervention. This misattribution stems partly from the absence of compulsive buying in major diagnostic manuals like the as a standalone disorder, leading to inconsistent screening and potential with impulse control issues. Diagnosis relies heavily on self-reported measures, such as the Compulsive Buying Scale, due to the lack of established biomarkers or objective physiological indicators, introducing risks of subjective bias or exaggeration in self-assessments. In consumer-driven societies, where spending is culturally normalized, this reliance amplifies challenges, as individuals may inflate reports of "normal" shopping urges amid pervasive influences. The behavioral overlap between compulsive buying and routine further complicates establishing diagnostic thresholds, fueling debates over reported rates of 5-6% in adult populations, which some researchers question as potentially overstated without rigorous, culture-independent criteria. These ambiguities underscore the need for refined, empirically grounded distinctions to avoid pathologizing adaptive behaviors while identifying true .

Treatment and Management

Psychotherapeutic Interventions

Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) constitutes the foremost evidence-based psychotherapeutic intervention for compulsive buying disorder, targeting underlying cognitive distortions, impulse dyscontrol, and behavioral reinforcements that perpetuate excessive purchasing. Protocols typically span 12 sessions over 10-12 weeks, incorporating on buying triggers, to reframe maladaptive beliefs (e.g., equating purchases with emotional relief), and behavioral strategies such as exposure-response prevention to build tolerance for unmet buying urges. Key modules emphasize urge surfing—mindful observation and riding out impulses without acting—and tools like daily expenditure tracking, budgeting, and pre-purchase evaluation criteria to foster deliberate decision-making over automatic acquisition. Group-based CBT, involving 8-12 participants per cohort, has shown superior retention and peer-mediated accountability compared to individual formats, with high-quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting statistically significant pre-to-post reductions in buying severity (p < 0.001) on validated measures such as the Compulsive Buying Scale () and Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale for Shopping (YBOCS-SV). Among completers in a 12-session group CBT trial (N=21 effective sample), 57% achieved full remission from compulsive buying episodes immediately post-treatment, with 59% sustaining remission at six-month follow-up; reliable symptom change exceeded 50% across similar studies, yielding large effect sizes (Cohen's d = 1.51). These gains persisted in follow-ups, underscoring CBT's capacity to disrupt habitual cycles through skill acquisition rather than mere symptom suppression. Dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) components, focused on emotion regulation and distress tolerance, have been incorporated into eclectic group programs for cases with comorbid affective disorders, where unregulated moods precipitate buying binges; however, standalone RCTs evaluating DBT for compulsive buying disorder are absent, limiting claims of specificity. Despite only four identified psychotherapy RCTs to date—primarily group CBT versus waitlist or controls—the collective evidence indicates consistent symptom attenuation, though high attrition (up to 28%) and small samples (N=22-60) necessitate cautious interpretation and further replication. Group formats particularly aid adherence by normalizing experiences and reinforcing self-control via shared accountability.

Pharmacological Options

Pharmacological interventions for compulsive buying disorder (CBD) remain investigational, with no medications approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) specifically for this condition as of 2025. Treatments are typically employed off-label, drawing from similarities between CBD and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) or behavioral addictions, but evidence derives primarily from small open-label trials, case series, and reports rather than large randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This scarcity underscores their adjunctive role alongside , as standalone efficacy is limited and relapse rates post-discontinuation are high. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), such as , have been tested for CBD's OCD-like features, including intrusive urges and ritualistic purchasing. An involving 10 participants administered up to 300 mg/day over 10 weeks reported improvement in 9 subjects, with reduced preoccupation, shopping time, and expenditure. However, subsequent RCTs of SSRIs like and yielded mixed or null results, with effect sizes modest at best and often confounded by comorbid mood disorders. These findings suggest SSRIs may mitigate symptoms in subsets of patients, particularly those with co-occurring anxiety or depression, but lack robust causal evidence for CBD-specific mechanisms beyond serotonergic modulation. Opioid antagonists like target the addictive reinforcement aspects of CBD, posited to involve mesolimbic pathways akin to substance use disorders. Case reports indicate potential benefits; for instance, two 2024 cases described symptom remission with 50 mg/day, alongside reduced buying urges in prior series of three patients without comorbidities. Yet, these are anecdotal, with no RCTs confirming efficacy, and mechanisms remain speculative, potentially overlapping with disorder treatments where shows variable promise. Other agents, including mood stabilizers (e.g., topiramate) and atypical antipsychotics, appear in isolated case reports but lack systematic validation. Given CBD's frequent comorbidities—such as major depressive disorder (up to 60% prevalence) or bipolar spectrum conditions—polypharmacy risks adverse interactions and side effects, necessitating individualized assessment over empirical protocols. Overall, pharmacological options demand cautious application, prioritizing empirical monitoring due to heterogeneous responses and insufficient long-term data.

Lifestyle and Preventive Strategies

Practical lifestyle measures for managing compulsive buying disorder emphasize self-imposed financial discipline and behavioral barriers. Establishing a detailed spending budget, coupled with regular tracking of expenditures, enables individuals to identify patterns and enforce limits on discretionary purchases. Adopting delay tactics, such as a 48-hour waiting period for non-essential items, interrupts the immediacy of urges, allowing rational reassessment and often resulting in abandoned purchases. Environmental modifications further support control, including cash-only policies to restrict access to easy credit and deletion of shopping applications to minimize exposure to triggers. Mindfulness practices enhance impulse recognition by promoting awareness of emotional drivers, such as stress or , before they culminate in buying. Empirical data from a survey of 598 participants demonstrate that greater directly reduces online impulse buying (standardized coefficient β = -0.17, p < 0.001), partly by curbing problematic use as a mediator. Complementing this, self-education on concepts like hedonic adaptation—where material purchases yield fleeting pleasure followed by rapid return to baseline satisfaction—undermines the appeal of as a strategy, as evidenced in studies linking such pursuits to unsustainable compulsive cycles. Family involvement bolsters through shared oversight, such as delegating routine to relatives to avert solo temptations and curtailing enabling behaviors like co-signing debts. These volitional habits, when consistently applied, foster long-term agency by realigning spending with enduring needs over transient impulses, though adherence requires ongoing vigilance against .

Historical Context

Early Descriptions

The earliest clinical recognition of compulsive buying behavior occurred in 1915, when German psychiatrist described "oniomania," or buying mania, as a pathological urge characterized by irresistible impulses to purchase items, often leading to financial ruin and emotional distress; he classified it within the spectrum of psychiatric syndromes associated with (now ). Kraepelin's account drew from observations of patients exhibiting compulsive acquisition as a manic-like symptom, distinguishing it from mere extravagance by its compulsive and self-destructive nature. In the same era, Swiss psychiatrist referenced compulsive buying in 1924, framing it as a form of "reactive impulse" or impulsive insanity, akin to and , and linking it to schizophrenic subtypes where patients displayed uncontrolled spending as a symptomatic outburst rather than a core delusional feature. Bleuler's descriptions refined Kraepelin's by emphasizing its impulsive rather than purely manic quality, though both viewed it through the lens of broader psychotic disorders, with later analyses noting these early links were overstated as diagnostic understanding evolved. By the mid-20th century, amid rising post-World War II in Western societies, sporadic case reports began portraying compulsive buying as an isolated impulse-control issue rather than strictly tied to , with clinicians documenting patterns of repetitive, tension-relieving purchases leading to debt and regret, often in non-psychotic individuals influenced by expanding retail availability. These accounts, though not systematically studied, highlighted behavioral parallels to other disorders, shifting focus from weakness or eccentricity—prevalent in non-clinical narratives—to emerging psychological maladaptations exacerbated by cultural . The marked a pivotal transition in literature toward a , with psychiatrists reconceptualizing compulsive buying as a distinct behavioral disorder warranting clinical intervention, detached from earlier moralistic or psychosis-centric views; this era saw initial empirical case series emphasizing its addictive-like features, such as craving and loss of control, prompting calls for standardized assessment over anecdotal dismissal.

Evolution of Research

Research on compulsive buying disorder experienced a notable surge in the , driven by systematic studies that quantified its scope in the general population. Donald Black's foundational work, including clinical surveys, established a lifetime estimate of 5.8% among U.S. adults, highlighting its commonality beyond anecdotal reports and linking it to impulse control issues. This era shifted focus toward empirical validation, with early instruments like the Compulsive Buying Scale enabling standardized assessments across samples. The 2000s marked integration of , revealing neural underpinnings such as altered activity in reward-related structures like the , insula, and during buying-related tasks, suggesting overlaps with addictive and obsessive-compulsive processes. These findings provided causal insights into deficits, though small sample sizes limited generalizability. In the 2010s, efforts to include compulsive buying in the failed due to insufficient evidence distinguishing it from other disorders, spurring meta-analyses that solidified core traits like elevated and materialistic tendencies. The 2020s have emphasized digital facilitation and pandemic effects, with studies documenting rises in compulsive tendencies during —up to significant increases in the first six months—and linking platforms to heightened and immediacy. Recent meta-analyses reinforce as a key predictor, supporting reconceptualization toward models while highlighting gaps in longitudinal data on treatment outcomes.

Controversies and Debates

Validity as a Distinct Disorder

The nosological status of compulsive buying disorder (CBD) remains debated, with supporting its recognition as a distinct clinical characterized by maladaptive preoccupations with buying, irresistible impulses, and repetitive purchasing leading to significant distress or impairment, yet challenged by overlaps with impulse control, obsessive-compulsive, and addictive disorders. The excluded CBD as a formal , citing insufficient peer-reviewed data on its , course, and response to treatment to justify standalone , particularly amid ongoing controversy over its addictive features. In contrast, the lists CBD (or buying-shopping disorder) as an exemplar within "other specified impulse control disorders" (code 6C7Y), affirming its clinical utility based on consistent reports of failure to resist short-term rewarding urges despite long-term harm, thereby facilitating in settings where behavioral specificity warrants intervention. Convergent validity is bolstered by standardized measures like the Compulsive Buying Scale and Shopping Addiction Scale, which demonstrate reliable , test-retest stability, and associations with markers of such as anxiety, depression, and low across diverse samples. Population-based surveys counter claims of triviality or confined to therapy-seekers, estimating point at 5.8% in U.S. adults (6.0% in women, 5.5% in men), with similar rates (around 5%) in international community samples, indicating non-ephemeral impairment rather than normative overspending. These figures derive from validated screening tools applied randomly, revealing ego-dystonic buying patterns distinct from hedonic consumption. Skepticism regarding financial "devastation" as mere anecdote is refuted by longitudinal data linking CBD to elevated accumulation, risk, and asset loss, with affected individuals reporting average monthly overspending exceeding $300 and comorbid deficits exacerbating credit deterioration. Cross-cultural consistency in symptom profiles and functional decrements—spanning , , and —further supports entity status, though evidential limits persist, including diagnostic heterogeneity and paucity of or genetic studies isolating CBD from broader spectra, underscoring the need for prospective cohort to refine boundaries.

Cultural and Societal Critiques

Critiques of compulsive buying disorder often frame it as a byproduct of consumerist societies, with some attributing its rise to pervasive advertising and material abundance eroding . However, underscores individual predispositions over systemic causation, as twin studies indicate moderate for impulsive buying tendencies, with genetic factors accounting for 35-50% of variance in related traits like and compulsivity. This genetic basis refutes claims that modern marketing invents the disorder, revealing it as an amplification of innate vulnerabilities rather than a novel induced by commercial stimuli. Debates persist on advertising's role, with research showing positive attitudes toward ads correlating with buying urges but not establishing causation for the disorder itself. Historical accounts, including early 20th-century psychiatric descriptions predating campaigns, demonstrate compulsive acquisition behaviors in eras of limited advertising, such as "oniomania" noted by in 1915. In affluent contexts, the disorder manifests as a deficit in personal restraint amid accessible and goods, prioritizing individual accountability over excusatory narratives that externalize blame to capitalist structures. Cultural norms emphasizing fiscal discipline correlate with lower prevalence, as seen in societies with high long-term orientation values, where future-focused planning reduces compulsive tendencies. comparisons reveal diminished rates in emerging economies with traditional anti-debt ethos compared to high-consumption Western settings, suggesting preventive efficacy of communal thrift norms over permissive . These patterns affirm that bolstering through disciplined habits mitigates risks, countering views that pathologize abundance without addressing volitional failures.

References

  1. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1805733/
  2. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8996806/
  3. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/cns-spectrums/article/compulsive-buying-disorder-a-review-of-the-evidence/3EBE3FE3FB4D2DE3028F9E500D29B605
  4. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283447103_The_prevalence_of_compulsive_buying_A_meta-analysis
  5. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3665329/
  6. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00914/full
  7. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9669662/
  8. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychiatry/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1665182/full
  9. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8071278/
  10. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/15136336_Compulsive_buying_Demography_phenomenology_and_comorbidity_in_46_subjects
  11. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2014-11217-012
  12. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3181956/
  13. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/cns-spectrums/article/buyingshopping-disorderis-there-enough-evidence-to-support-its-inclusion-in-icd11/5ABDCCC3ABBDE71F44394A8D8A7F7DD3
  14. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30604662/
  15. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4908125/
  16. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17012693/
  17. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26517309/
  18. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165178115002024
  19. https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/34532/chapter/292952096
  20. https://akjournals.com/view/journals/2006/11/1/article-p88.xml
  21. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440231219589
  22. https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/ajp.2006.163.10.1806
  23. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5131966/
  24. https://www.tikvahlake.com/blog/shopping-addiction-statistics/
  25. https://www.jsr.org/hs/index.php/path/article/view/8210
  26. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10956761/
  27. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10603-020-09450-4
  28. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12441013/
  29. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1742-9536.2012.00055.x
  30. https://www.pbsciences.org/index.php?fulltxt=166263&fulltxtj=8&fulltxtp=8-1692623762.pdf
  31. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10362270/
  32. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7833433/
  33. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9622942/
  34. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9813889/
  35. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34156751/
  36. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/adb.13073
  37. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/compulsive-buying
  38. https://archivespsy.com/menu-script/index.php/ACF/article/view/2184
  39. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2013-05160-002
  40. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-71013-x
  41. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/2817090
  42. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9109632/
  43. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381949467_Digital_Compulsive_Buying_A_New_Sequel_of_The_Pandemic
  44. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4117277/
  45. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/cb.2115
  46. https://blog.caravanwellness.com/how-social-media-leads-to-impulse-shopping/
  47. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337614049_Influence_of_Materialism_on_Compulsive_Buying_Behavior_General_Similarities_and_Differences_Related_to_Studies_on_Young_Adult_Consumers_in_Poland_and_US
  48. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/391056906_Materialism_and_Compulsive_Buying_A_Systematic_Review_and_Meta-analysis
  49. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychiatry/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1681307/full
  50. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266852320_Compulsive_Buying_The_Role_of_Irrational_Beliefs_Materialism_and_Narcissism
  51. https://juniperpublishers.com/gjidd/GJIDD.MS.ID.555833.php
  52. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38603938/
  53. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010440X24000336
  54. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369376365_Cognitive_Functions_in_Compulsive_Buying-Shopping_Disorder_a_Systematic_Review
  55. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7713861/
  56. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9479812/
  57. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0005796798000564
  58. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22051076/
  59. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165032711005635
  60. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12144-023-05040-y
  61. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8063088/
  62. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.31887/DCNS.2010.12.2/dblack
  63. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/advances-in-psychiatric-treatment/article/shopping-addiction/F10AD81750294E96D87E771DD6248812
  64. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S277259872400045X
  65. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23514189/
  66. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JBSED-04-2021-0049/full/html
  67. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/compulsive-buying-disorder
  68. https://dusunenadamdergisi.org/article/1507/pdf
  69. https://doi.apa.org/doi/10.1037/t69488-000
  70. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6426376/
  71. https://scholarship.richmond.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1004&context=marketing-faculty-publications
  72. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychiatry/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.1047280/full
  73. https://akjournals.com/view/journals/2006/12/3/article-p631.xml
  74. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01374/full
  75. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7186342/
  76. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/44685466_Compulsive_Buying
  77. https://cdr.lib.unc.edu/downloads/x059c7486
  78. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5264404/
  79. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40501-014-0024-3
  80. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27067344/
  81. https://www.psychiatrist.com/jcp/fluvoxamine-treatment-compulsive-buying/
  82. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12197451/
  83. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/380637874_Naltrexone_in_Treatment_of_Compulsive_Buying-Shopping_Disorder_Report_of_Two_Cases
  84. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233585801_Three_cases_of_compulsive_buying_treated_with_naltrexone
  85. https://psychiatry-psychopharmacology.com/en/compulsive-buying-disorder-treatment-with-naltrexone-a-case-report-131162
  86. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/154273005.pdf
  87. https://newsroom.clevelandclinic.org/2024/06/24/how-to-stop-compulsive-shopping
  88. https://www.verywellmind.com/shopping-addiction-4157288
  89. https://www.betterhelp.com/advice/therapy/can-a-shopping-therapist-help-with-your-compulsive-spending-habits/
  90. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9763727/
  91. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/hedonic-treadmill
  92. https://www.becomingminimalist.com/scientific-studies/
  93. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/384133289_Prevention_Approaches_for_Compulsive_Buying-Shopping_Disorder
  94. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/0-387-23370-9_10
  95. https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/F10AD81750294E96D87E771DD6248812/S135551460001662Xa.pdf/shopping-addiction.pdf
  96. https://basicmedicalkey.com/compulsive-buying/
  97. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6464997_A_review_of_compulsive_buying_disorder
  98. https://www.scielo.br/j/rbp/a/N5BPgrCT3KyVMf8FLbRWyLd/?lang=en&format=pdf
  99. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2010-22944-005
  100. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40429-014-0027-6
  101. https://rgsa.openaccesspublications.org/rgsa/article/view/7820
  102. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26027442/
  103. https://akjournals.com/view/journals/2006/14/2/article-p679.xml
  104. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4493767/
  105. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/impulse-control-disorders/compulsive-buying-cultural-contributors-and-consequences/80202BC86941195CEB34E9FC0BC86CB9
  106. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.979908/full
  107. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259569787_Cultural_Aspects_of_Compulsive_Buying_in_Emerging_and_Developed_Economies_A_Cross_Cultural_Study_in_Compulsive_Buying
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.