Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
058
002
059
003
060
004
061
005
062
006
063
007
064
008
065
009
066
010
067
011
012
013
014
015
016
017
018
019
020
068
075
Department of Psychosocial Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway, 2 The Competence Centre, Bergen Clinics
Foundation, Bergen, Norway, 3 International Gaming Research Unit, Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK,
4
Norwegian Competence Center for Sleep Disorders, Bergen, Norway, 5 Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human
Behavior, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, USA, 6 OCD Clinic, Department of Psychiatry and
Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
1
021
022
023
024
025
026
027
028
029
030
031
032
033
034
035
036
037
038
039
040
041
042
043
044
045
046
047
048
049
050
051
052
053
054
055
056
057
069
070
071
072
073
074
076
077
078
079
080
081
082
Edited by:
Pietro Cipresso,
IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano,
Italy
Reviewed by:
Donald Sharpe,
University of Regina, Canada
Lucia Romo,
Universit Paris Ouest Nanterre La
Dfense, France
*Correspondence:
Cecilie S. Andreassen,
Department of Psychosocial Science,
University of Bergen, Christies
gate 12, NO-5015 Bergen, Norway
cecilie.andreassen@uib.no
Specialty section:
This article was submitted to
Quantitative Psychology
and Measurement,
a section of the journal
Frontiers in Psychology
Received: 19 June 2015
Accepted: 26 August 2015
Published: xx September 2015
Citation:
Andreassen CS, Griffiths MD,
Pallesen S, Bilder RM, Torsheim T
and Aboujaoude E (2015) The Bergen
Shopping Addiction Scale: reliability
and validity of a brief screening test.
Front. Psychol. 6:1374.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01374
Although excessive and compulsive shopping has been increasingly placed within
the behavioral addiction paradigm in recent years, items in existing screens arguably
do not assess the core criteria and components of addiction. To date, assessment
screens for shopping disorders have primarily been rooted within the impulse-control
or obsessive-compulsive disorder paradigms. Furthermore, existing screens use the
terms shopping, buying, and spending interchangeably, and do not necessarily
reflect contemporary shopping habits. Consequently, a new screening tool for assessing
shopping addiction was developed. Initially, 28 items, four for each of seven addiction
criteria (salience, mood modification, conflict, tolerance, withdrawal, relapse, and
problems), were constructed. These items and validated scales (i.e., Compulsive Buying
Measurement Scale, Mini-International Personality Item Pool, Hospital Anxiety and
Depression Scale, Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale) were then administered to 23,537
participants (Mage = 35.8 years, SDage = 13.3). The highest loading item from each set
of four pooled items reflecting the seven addiction criteria were retained in the final scale,
The Bergen Shopping Addiction Scale (BSAS). The factor structure of the BSAS was
good (RMSEA = 0.064, CFI = 0.983, TLI = 0.973) and coefficient alpha was 0.87. The
scores on the BSAS converged with scores on the Compulsive Buying Measurement
Scale (CBMS; 0.80), and were positively correlated with extroversion and neuroticism,
and negatively with conscientiousness, agreeableness, and intellect/imagination. The
scores of the BSAS were positively associated with anxiety, depression, and low selfesteem and inversely related to age. Females scored higher than males on the BSAS.
The BSAS is the first scale to fully embed shopping addiction within an addiction
paradigm. A recommended cutoff score for the new scale and future research directions
are discussed.
Keywords: assessment, compulsive buying, personality, psychological distress, psychometrics, scale,
self-esteem, shopping addiction
083
084
085
086
087
088
089
090
091
092
093
094
095
096
097
098
099
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
Andreassen et al.
115
Introduction
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
Andreassen et al.
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
304
305
Sample
The sample comprised 23,537 participants (15,301 females and
8,236 males). The mean age was 35.8 years (SD = 13.3). Twothirds (65.3%) were married or partnered, and 34.7% were single.
Educational level ranged from primary school (10.0%), to high
school (25.3%), vocational school (17.0%), bachelors degree
(32.4%), masters degree (14.2%), and Ph.D. (1.2%). In terms of
occupational status, 4,962 were students, 12,967 worked full-time,
3,515 worked part-time, 651 were retired, 390 were homemakers,
1,113 were on permanent disability pension, 1,147 were receiving
temporary rehabilitation benefits 541 were unemployed, and 407
reported other. Some students/workers ticked boxes for being
both a student as well as employed.
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
Procedure
320
303
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
Andreassen et al.
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
Instruments
Demographics
365
366
367
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
368
No.
Dimension
Item text
369
Salience
426
370
Salience
427
371
Salience
428
372
Salience
429
373
Mood modification
430
425
374
Mood modification
375
Mood modification
376
Mood modification
I shop/buy things in order to reduce feelings of guilt, anxiety, helplessness, loneliness, and/or depression
431
mood2
432
433
377
Conflict
I shop/buy so much that it negatively affects my daily obligations (e.g., school and
378
10
Conflict
I give less priority to hobbies, leisure activities, job/studies, or exercise because of shopping/buying
435
379
11
Conflict
436
380
12
Conflict
437
381
13
Tolerance
438
382
14
Tolerance
439
383
15
Tolerance
I feel I have to shop/buy more and more to obtain the same satisfactions as before2
440
384
16
Tolerance
441
385
17
Relapse
442
386
18
Relapse
443
387
19
Relapse
I have decided to shop/buy less, but have not been able to do so2
444
388
20
Relapse
I have managed to limit shopping/buying for periods, and the experienced relapse
445
389
21
Withdrawal
446
390
22
Withdrawal
I become sour and grumpy if I for some reasons cannot shop/buy things when I feel like it
447
391
23
Withdrawal
I feel bad if I for some reason are prevented from shopping/buying things2
448
392
24
Withdrawal
I there has been a while since I last shopped I feel a strong urge to shop/buy tings
449
393
25
Problems
450
394
26
Problems
451
395
27
Problems
I have worried so much about my shopping problems that it sometimes has made me sleepless
452
396
28
Problems
453
397
398
399
work)2
1 The
instruction was: for each item tick the response alternative (ranging from completely disagree to completely agree) that best describes you. The statements
relate to your thoughts, feelings and actions the last 12 months.
2 Item retained in the final scale.
434
454
455
456
Andreassen et al.
457
458
TABLE 2 | Descriptive data and correlation coefficients between study variables (N = 23,53523,537).
Variables
460
461
0.80
462
(3) Extroversion
0.03
0.05
463
(4) Agreeableness
0.04
0.07
0.30
464
(5) Conscientiousness
0.13
(6) Neuroticism
0.18
0.09
465
0.11
466
(7) Intellect/imagination
0.16
(8) Anxiety
0.01
0.09
467
0.03
0.10
0.03
468
(9) Depression
0.12
0.23
469
(10) Self-esteem
459
0.30
0.34
10
0.31
0.34
0.18
0.26
0.27
0.16
0.12
0.12
0.23
23.90
13.47
16.32
14.90
0.32
0.06
0.26
0.30
521
0.00
522
0.64
0.03
0.42
0.08
0.53
0.11
523
0.55
524
0.56
0.55
526
4.10
29.23
527
14.26
3.22
3.54
3.14
3.92
3.20
5.34
528
416
416
416
416
021
021
1040
529
0.81
0.76
0.70
0.73
0.69
0.82
0.75
0.89
530
10
531
4.32
10.23
3.65
2.95
472
Range
028
1890
416
473
Alpha
0.87
0.91
474
Items
13
6.64
525
11.81
SD
532
< 0.01.
476
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
533
498
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
497
499
516
520
0.30
471
477
515
519
518
470
475
517
0.19
3.01
514
536
537
538
539
541
535
540
Statistics
534
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
Andreassen et al.
571
572
573
574
the first step were gender, age, and marital status. In the second
and final step, symptoms of depression, anxiety, and self-esteem
were included, as well as the measures of the five-factor model of
personality.
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
Results
Scale Construction
The second-order factor structure is shown in Figure 1. The
standardized second-order factor loadings ranged from 0.793
(mood modification) to 0.946 (tolerance). The highest first
order loading for each of the seven factors ranged from 0.830
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
584
641
585
642
586
643
587
644
588
645
589
646
590
647
591
648
592
649
593
650
594
651
595
652
596
653
597
654
598
655
599
656
600
657
601
658
602
659
603
660
604
661
605
662
606
663
607
664
608
665
609
666
610
667
611
668
612
669
613
670
614
671
615
672
616
673
617
674
618
675
619
676
620
677
621
678
622
679
623
680
624
681
682
625
Q1
628
626
627
FIGURE 1 | Second-order factor structure of the 28 shopping addiction items (n = 11,768) showing standardized factor loadings.
683
684
Andreassen et al.
685
686
687
688
689
690
Gender (1 = !, 2 = )
693
Marital statusa
694
Gender (1 = !, 2 = )
697
Marital
698
statusa
Extroversion
699
Agreeableness
700
Conscientiousness
701
Neuroticism
Intellect/imagination
Anxiety
704
Depression
705
Self-esteem
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
0.052
0.002
2.202
0.057
0.012
0.058
0.159
0.243
0.001
0.002
1.851
0.061
0.067
0.056
0.113
0.008
0.068
0.010
0.064
0.009
0.104
0.010
0.036
0.009
0.217
0.010
0.090
0.007
1.198
0.046
6.871
0.204
0.096
30.529
14.456
745
746
747
748
751
752
753
754
755
756
7.339
757
0.026
4.232
759
761
0.048
0.085
0.197
10.377
22.425
0.048
0.011
0.036
4.410
0.040
0.007
0.049
5.825
758
760
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
Discussion
776
777
Cronbachs alpha of the BSAS was 0.867. The mean interitem correlation coecient was 0.43. The corrected item-total
correlation coecients for BSAS2, BSAS6, BSAS9, BSAS15,
BSAS19, BSAS23, and BSAS26 (comprising the final scale) were
0.692, 0.622, 0.615, 0.742, 0.658, 0.692, and 0.661, respectively.
0.029
744
750
0.207
14.378
743
749
38.826
0.099
Age
696
"R2
24.813
Step 2
695
706
0.082
Age
692
703
Step 1
691
702
SE
742
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
Andreassen et al.
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
Andreassen et al.
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
Conclusion
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
1018
1019
1020
1021
Author Contributions
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
Andreassen et al.
1027
1028
1029
1030
(CA, MG, SP, RB, TT, EA), and agreed to be accountable for all
aspects of the work in ensuring that questions to the accuracy of
any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved
(CA, MG, SP, RB, TT, EA).
1031
1032
1033
1034
1035
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
1068
1069
1070
1071
1072
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
1079
1080
1081
1082
1083
1084
1085
1086
1087
1088
References
10
1089
1090
1091
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1097
1098
1099
1100
1101
1102
1103
1104
1105
1106
1107
1108
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115
1116
1117
1118
1119
1120
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1126
1127
1128
1129
1130
1131
1132
1133
1134
1135
1136
1137
1138
1139
1140
Andreassen et al.
1141
1142
1143
1144
1145
1146
1147
1148
1149
1150
1151
1152
1153
1154
1155
1156
1157
1158
1159
1160
1161
1162
1163
1164
1165
1166
1167
1168
1169
1170
1171
1172
1173
1174
1175
1176
1177
1178
1179
1180
1181
1182
1183
McQueen, P., Moulding, R., and Kyrios, M. (2014). Experimental evidence for the
influence of cognitions on compulsive buying. J. Behav. Ther. Exp. Psychiatry
45, 496501. doi: 10.1016/j.jbtep.2014.07.003
Mikolajczak-Degrauwe, K., Brengman, M., Wauters, B., and Rossi, G. (2012). Does
personality aect compulsive buying? An application of the big five personality
model, in Psychology: Selected Papers, ed. G. Rossi (Rijeka: InTech), 131144.
Mowen, J. C., and Spears, N. (1999). Understanding compulsive buying among
college students: a hierarchical approach. J. Consum. Psychol. 8, 407430. doi:
10.1207/s15327663jcp0804_03
Mller, A., Claes, L., Georgiadou, E., Mllenkamp, E. M. V., Faber, R. J., Mitchell,
J. E., et al. (2014). Is compulsive buying related to materialism, depression or
temperament? Findings from a sample of treatment-seeking patients with CB.
Psychiatry Res. 216, 103107. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2014.01.012
Nunnally, J. C., and Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric Theory, 3rd Edn.
New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
OBrien, T. B., and DeLongis, A. (1996). The interactional context of problem-,
emotion- and relationship-focused coping: the role of the Big Five personality
factors. J. Pers. 64, 775813. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.1996.tb00944.x
Otero-Lpez, J. M., and Villardefrancos, E. (2014). Prevalence, sociodemographic
factors, psychological distress, and coping strategies related to compulsive
buying: a cross sectional study in Galicia, Spain. BMC Psychiatry 14:101. doi:
10.1186/1471-244X-14-101
Pettit, F. A. (2002). A comparison of World-Wide Web and paper-and-pencil
personality questionnaires. Behav. Res. Methods Instrum. Comput. 34, 5054.
doi: 10.3758/BF03195423
Piquet-Pessa, M., Ferreira, G. M., Melca, I. A., and Fontenelle, L. F. (2014). DSM5 and the decision not to include sex, shopping or stealing as addictions. Curr.
Addict. Rep. 1, 172176. doi: 10.1007/s40429-014-0027-6
Podsako, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., and Podsako, N. P. (2003).
Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature
and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 88, 879903. doi: 10.1037/00219010.88.5.879
Potenza, M. N., and Hollander, E. (2002). Pathologic gambling and impulse
control disorders, in Neuropsychopharmacology: The 5th Generation of
Progress, eds K. Davis, D. Charney, J. Coyle, and C. Nemero (Maryland:
American College of Neuropsychopharmacology), 17251741.
Raab, G., Elger, C. E., Neuner, M., and Weber, B. (2011). A neurological
study of compulsive buying behaviour. J. Consum. Policy 34, 401413. doi:
10.1007/s10603-011-9168-3
Rick, S., Pereira, B., and Burson, K. A. (2014). The benefits of retail therapy: making
purchase decisions reduces residual sadness. J. Consum. Psychol. 24, 373380.
doi: 10.1016/j.jcps.2013.12.004
Ridgway, N., Kukar-Kinney, M., and Monroe, K. (2008). An expanded
conceptualization and a new measure of compulsive buying. J. Consum. Res.
35, 622639. doi: 10.1086/591108
Roberts, J. A. (1998). Compulsive buying among college students: an investigation
of its antecedents, consequences, and implications for public policy. J. Consum.
A. 32, 295319. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6606.1998.tb00411.x
Roberts, J. A., Manolis, C., and Pullig, C. (2014). Contigent self-esteem, selfpresentational concerns, and compulsive buying. Psychol. Marketing 31,
147160. doi: 10.1002/mar.20683
1198
Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was
conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could
be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
1231
1234
1199
1200
1201
1202
1203
1204
1205
1206
1207
1208
1209
1210
1211
1212
1213
1214
1215
1216
1217
1218
1219
1220
1221
1222
1223
1224
1225
1226
1227
1228
1229
1230
1232
1233
1235
1236
1237
1238
1239
1240
1184
1241
1185
1242
1186
1243
1187
1244
1188
1245
1189
1246
1190
1247
1191
1248
1192
1249
1193
1250
1194
1251
1195
1252
1196
1253
1197
1254
11