2012Journal of Experimental PsychopathologyOpen access

Are Compulsive Buyers Impulsive? Evidence of Poor Response Inhibition and Delay Discounting

Alishia D. Williams

Open full text 9 citations

Abstract

Compulsive buying (CB) is not formally classified in the diagnostic and statistical manual (DSM), but it is widely considered an impulse-control disorder not otherwise specified. However, relatively few studies have systematically examined impulsivity or inhibition-related functions in CB. The aim of the present study was therefore to examine impulsivity as indexed by a multidimensional self-report measure of impulsivity (BIS) and behavioural paradigms that assess impulsive responding in the form of delay discounting and response inhibition. In a sample of compulsive buyers (n = 26), pathological gamblers (n = 23), and healthy controls (n = 26) analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed that both self-report and behavioural responses of the CB group were comparable to that of pathological gamblers, reflecting elevated impulsivity in comparison to healthy controls. Results may be interpreted in the context of models of gambling pathology that underscore the failure of heavily discounted consequences to deter engagement in maladaptive behaviours and that highlight the role of poor response inhibition in disorder maintenance. Limitations and future directions are discussed.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Compulsive buying (CB) is not formally classified in the diagnostic and statistical manual (DSM), but it is widely considered an impulse-control disorder not otherwise specified. However, relatively few studies have systematically examined impulsivity or inhibition-related functions in CB. The aim of the present study was therefore to examine impulsivity as indexed by a multidimensional self-report measure of impulsivity (BIS) and behavioural paradigms that assess impulsive responding in the form of delay discounting and response inhibition. In a sample of compulsive buyers (n = 26), pathological gamblers (n = 23), and healthy controls (n = 26) analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed that both self-report and behavioural responses of the CB group were comparable to that of pathological gamblers, reflecting elevated impulsivity in comparison to healthy controls. Results may be interpreted in the context of models of gambling pathology that underscore the failure of heavily discounted consequences to deter engagement in maladaptive behaviours and that highlight the role of poor response inhibition in disorder maintenance. Limitations and future directions are discussed.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 9 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Compulsive buying (CB) is not formally classified in the diagnostic and statistical manual (DSM), but it is widely considered an impulse-control disorder not otherwise specified. However, relatively few studies have systematically examined impulsivity or inhibition-related functions in CB. The aim of the present study was therefore to examine impulsivity as indexed by a multidimensional self-report measure of impulsivity (BIS) and behavioural paradigms that assess impulsive responding in the form of delay discounting and response inhibition. In a sample of compulsive buyers (n = 26), pathological gamblers (n = 23), and healthy controls (n = 26) analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed that both self-report and behavioural responses of the CB group were comparable to that of pathological gamblers, reflecting elevated impulsivity in comparison to healthy controls. Results may be interpreted in the context of models of gambling pathology that underscore the failure of heavily discounted consequences to deter engagement in maladaptive behaviours and that highlight the role of poor response inhibition in disorder maintenance. Limitations and future directions are discussed.

Key concepts: Impulsivity, Delay discounting, Impulse control disorder, Temporal discounting, Psychology, Gambling disorder, Response inhibition, Pathological

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Are Compulsive Buyers Impulsive? Evidence of Poor Response Inhibition and Delay Discounting — Research Paper | ScholarLens