The Bergen Shopping Addiction Scale: reliability and validity of a brief screening test

Abstract

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 self-esteem 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.

Too many swipes for today: The development of the Problematic Tinder Use Scale (PTUS)

“…The wording of the items is compatible with the wording of other questionnaires (Bergen Facebook Addiction Scale – Andreassen, Torsheim, Brunborg, & Pallesen, 2012; Bergen Work Addiction Scale – Andreassen, Griffiths, Hetland, & Pallesen, 2012; Bergen Shopping Addiction Scale – Andreassen et al., 2015) which are similarly based on the six-component model. In the present study, this new scale measures the six core elements of problematic Tinder use in terms of (a) salience, (b) tolerance, (c) mood modification, (d) relapse, (e) withdrawal, and (f) conflict.…”

Spanish validation of the Internet Gaming Disorder-20 (IGD-20) Test

“…As has been noted previously (Griffiths, King, & Demetrovics, 2014), the nine IGD criteria correspond to the six components proposed in Griffiths' addiction model (2005). Support for the model comes from a number of studies that have developed and validated behavioral addiction scales and instruments using the six components for behaviors such as exercise addiction (Terry et al, 2004), shopping (Andreassen et al, 2015), gaming addiction (Lemmens et al, 2009), work addiction (Andreassen et al, 2012a), internet addiction (Kuss et al, 2014), and social networking addiction (Andreassen et al, 2012b). Disorder Test (IGD-20 Test), a 20-item scale designed to assess IGD.…”

Compulsive buying behavior: Re‐evaluating its dimensions and screening

“…More recent studies have been critical of Ridgway et al's () research. Müller, Trotzke, Mitchell, de Zwaan, & Brand () argue that it neglects the financial aspect of CBB, and Andreassen et al () assert that it ignores the addictive dimensions of CBB, which their Bergen Shopping Addiction Scale directly addresses: salience, mood swing, tolerance, withdrawal, conflicts, relapse, and consequences. However, it is interesting to note the similarity between Andreassen et al's () addiction‐oriented scale items and those included in the seminal works of Valence et al () and Faber & O'Guinn ().…”

“…For example, I shop/buy things in order to change my mood (Andreassen et al, ) and For me shopping is a way of facing the stress of my daily life and of relaxing (Valence et al, ). Further, I feel bad if for I some reason are prevented from shopping/buying things (Andreassen et al, ) and Felt anxious or nervous on days I didn't go shopping (Faber & O'Guinn, ).…”