Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/mmtp20

Effects of hedonic shopping motivations and

gender differences on compulsive online buyers

Xuhui Wang, Fayaz Ali, Muhammad Zubair Tauni, Qilin Zhang & Tanveer
Ahsan

To cite this article: Xuhui Wang, Fayaz Ali, Muhammad Zubair Tauni, Qilin Zhang & Tanveer
Ahsan (2021): Effects of hedonic shopping motivations and gender differences on compulsive
online buyers, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, DOI: 10.1080/10696679.2021.1894949

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.2021.1894949

Published online: 14 Apr 2021.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 69

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=mmtp20
JOURNAL OF MARKETING THEORY AND PRACTICE
https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.2021.1894949

Effects of hedonic shopping motivations and gender differences on compulsive

online buyers
Xuhui Wanga, Fayaz Alia, Muhammad Zubair Taunib, Qilin Zhanga, and Tanveer Ahsanc
a
School of Business Administration, Dongbei University of Finance and Economics, Dalian, China; bEM Normandie Business School, Métis Lab,
Le Havre, France; cDepartment of Finance and Accounting, Rennes School of Business, Rennes, France

ABSTRACT
Online shopping addiction has become a worsening problem in China for males and females. Based
on 904 shoppers, this study examines the relationship between hedonic shopping motivations and
compulsive online buying and investigates gender differences using gender theories. This study
finds that different hedonic motivations contribute to compulsive online buying. Gratification
seeking and idea shopping are key motivations for compulsive online buyers (females are mostly
gratification seekers, while males are mostly information seekers). Conversely, value and role-play
shopping reduce compulsive online buying, with a stronger effect on females; however, role-play
shopping was unrelated to compulsive online buying for males.

Introduction (Kukar-Kinney et al., 2016), whereas they may enjoy

Online shopping is considered a modern, vigorous, 24/7
available, and routine activity (Philip et al., 2019).
Consequently, consumers conveniently engage in online
shopping activities for immediate pleasure (Bhatia,
2019) or instant sensual inspiration (Horváth &
Adıgüzel, 2018). These shopping motivations could be
indispensable tendencies of compulsive online buyers
(Zheng et al., 2020), who are characterized by unabated
and repetitive buying needs (Japutra & Song, 2020). To
satisfy these irrepressible urges, compulsive buyers can
easily turn to online shopping to derive positive emo­
tions and pleasurable experiences (Kukar-Kinney et al.,
2016). Further, compulsive buyers seek sensual arousal
and inspiration (Müller et al., 2015), implying that their
shopping urge is mainly related to hedonic motivations;
these are likely to be more stimulated on the Internet
(To et al., 2007), a fast-growing substitute to conven­
tional shopping.
The recent rise in online shopping in China indicates
that about 710 million people have used online shopping
channels as of March 2020 (CNNIC, 2020). Unlike con­
ventional shoppers, compulsive online customers
mainly shop for enjoyable experiences (Kim, 2002;
Kukar-Kinney et al., 2016). The degree to which these
motivations occur across shopping channels may vary
for buyers. For example, owing to needless and frequent
buying, compulsive buyers tend to avoid socializing with
others in person during shopping in physical malls
interacting with other buyers online with or without
their identity being revealed. The Internet has overcome
space and time limitations and allows compulsive buyers
to enjoy shopping online with sufficient freedom and
choice compared to the need for allocating sufficient
time, energy, and money to travel to a physical store.
Similarly, online and offline shopping environments
provide different levels of adventure and gratification.
To et al. (2007) reported that consumers enjoy more
adventure in the online shopping atmosphere, while
they seek more gratification in the physical shopping
atmosphere. Exploration and value-seeking which are
encouraged by the rich source of product and price
information available on the Internet, are other hedonic
motivations of compulsive online buyers that reportedly
drive them to shop for experiential purpose instead of
task accomplishment (Chiu et al., 2019). Compulsive
buyers might also dislike bargaining in physical stores,
and prefer online discounts (Scarpi et al., 2014).
The difference between online and offline shopping is
mostly operative, particularly for compulsive buyers as
they have frequent shopping urges (Horváth & Adıgüzel,
2018). As the main reason for compulsive buyers to shop
is not product acquisition but the shopping experience,
the underlying sensual pleasure and excitement during
shopping process can be important determinants when
they shop online (Wu et al., 2016).
The Internet is a relatively new domain for quick
shopping for psychologically sensitive consumers such

CONTACT Qilin Zhang sdzhangqilin@126.com Dongbei University of Finance and Economics, Dalian, China.
© 2021 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2 X. WANG ET AL.
as compulsive buyers. With the advent of online shop­
ping, compulsive buying has started to rise both in devel­
oped and emerging societies (Horváth & Adıgüzel, 2018;
Zheng et al., 2020) for the following main reasons: first,
consumers can shop anytime; second, they can hide their
recurrent, unnecessary shopping behavior from others to
avoid guilt feelings of excessive buying; third, they have
a variety of choices; and fourth, they can buy products
instantly. These characteristics of online shopping have
raised different motivations for compulsive buyers.
Despite the potential differences between traditional and
online shopping channels (Hult et al., 2019; Liu et al.,
2017; Rodríguez-Torrico et al., 2019; X. Zhang et al.,
2014), previous studies focused on hedonic shopping
motivations in a traditional environment (Arnold &
Reynolds, 2003; Horváth & Adıgüzel, 2018), and the
extant literature does not explore hedonic motivations
such as adventure seeking, gratification seeking, idea
shopping, role-play shopping, social shopping, and value
shopping are important for compulsive online buyers.
Moreover, since previous studies acknowledge that
males and females have different concerns regarding online
shopping and show different shopping behavior on the
Internet (Zheng et al., 2020), examining gender differences
in various hedonic shopping motivations in relation to
compulsive online buying would be insightful. Females
are reportedly more prone to compulsive buying (Bighiu
et al., 2015; Mueller, Mitchell et al., 2011). Most studies have
focused on females than males (Horváth & Adıgüzel, 2018).
Recent studies have found that both males and females
show compulsive buying tendencies (e.g., Maraz et al.,
2016). For example, Koran et al. (2006) found almost
similar percentages for both males (5.5%) and females
(6.0%) in compulsive buying, corroborating seminal
research that indicated that females score slightly more in
compulsive buying than males (Magee, 1994) and show
higher avoidance coping tendencies (Ching et al., 2016).
This can lead them to shop mostly for pleasure, in contrast
to males (Horváth & Adıgüzel, 2018). The extant literature
has demonstrated gender differences in compulsive buying
in terms of psychological symptoms, coping styles, and
cognitive biases (Achtziger et al., 2015; Boujbel &
d’Astous, 2015; Brook et al., 2015; Dittmar, 2005; Mueller,
Mitchell et al., 2011). Males are found to have higher
psychological distress – which can potentially develop
into signs of compulsive online buying for temporary relief
(Ching et al., 2016); they tend to buy impulsively and be
attracted to the functional attributes of products (Mueller,
Claes et al., 2011). As both males and females tend to
indulge in compulsive buying with varying intensities,
this study aims to investigate the factors that can lead
these consumers to develop compulsive buying behavior
on the Internet (Table 1).
Table 1. Studies on gender difference in compulsive buying.
Author/s Examined Belief/Behavior
Kim et al. (2018). Gender Differences in Compulsive
Buying Disorder: Assessment of
Demographics and Psychiatric Co-
Morbidities.
Ching et al. (2016). Gender Differences in Pathways to
Compulsive Buying: Mood
Compensation and Irrational
Cognitions.
Granero et al. (2016). Compulsive Buying Disorder:
Demographics and Personality Traits.
James A. Roberts, Camille Understanding of Compulsive Buying
Roberts, (2012). as a Coping Mechanism.
Dongjin Li, Ying Jiang, Shenghui Money Attitudes Influence on
An, Zhe Shen, Wenji Jin, Compulsive Buying and Gender
(2009). Difference.
Hye-Young Kim, Youn-Kyung Shopping Enjoyment and Store
Kim, (2008). Shopping Modes
Dittmar (2005). Endorsement of Materialistic Values
Thus, we focus on what hedonic shopping motiva­
tions can contribute to the development of compulsive
buying on the Internet and how male and female con­
sumers differ in these motivations in an emerging coun­
try, China, which has one of the largest e-commerce
platforms (Kukar-Kinney et al., 2016) (Figure 1).
Hedonic shopping motivations capture a wide variety
of hedonic feelings that compulsive buyers want to
experience during shopping. The Internet is a fast-
growing and convenient platform for compulsive online
buyers because it offers a broad range of transaction
opportunities. Given the importance of feelings and
emotions experienced in the online shopping process
by this sensitive consumer segment, which can influence
their shopping choices and preferences (Arnold &
Reynolds, 2003), there is a need to research this issue.
Thus, this study contributes to the literature of com­
pulsive buying behavior by, first, extending previous
knowledge through our findings from an online shop­
ping channel. Second, we contribute to gender theories
by investigating gender differences in compulsive buy­
ing in this new context. Finally, we discuss several
insights of our findings in the discussion section. These
findings may provide marketers with the touchpoints of
compulsive buyers forming a rising consumer segment
on the Internet (Zheng et al., 2020) and being found to
respond to online marketing stimuli differently from
other general shoppers (Horváth & Birgelen, 2015).
Literature review and hypotheses
The literature identifies six hedonic motivations for
shopping that may be linked to compulsive buying on
the Internet (Arnold & Reynolds, 2003; Horváth &
Adıgüzel, 2018). These motivating factors can be
grouped into personal (i.e., sensory stimulation, self-

Figure 1. Research framework.
gratification, looking for new fashions and trends, and
role-play shopping) and social (i.e., communicating with
others, group attractions, and social experiences). In
a personal context, activation theory explains how an
individual’s traits such as compulsiveness can occur
upon stimulation from personal (inner-directed) and
contextual (i.e., attractive visuals, and sounds) factors
(Tett et al., 2013); affiliation theory explains how social
triggers, such as communicating or affiliating with refer­
ence groups during online shopping can influence pur­
chase behavior (McGuire, 1974). Based on this
theoretical rationale, we build our research framework
by focusing on motivations that are hedonic and non-
product related in nature.
Further, we use sociological theories in our study to
test gender differences in these shopping motivations
driving compulsive online buying. Multifactorial gender
identity theory suggests that males and females differ not
only because of gender identity differences but also owing
to attitudinal and behavioral differences (Spence, 1984);
the research findings on these topics are often contra­
dictory owing to biological and social stereotypes (Gentry
et al., 2003; Kramarae & Kramer, 1995; Otnes & Mcgrath,
2001). Gender differences in the online setting are no
exception (Bae & Lee, 2011; Sangran et al., 2009; Seock
& Bailey, 2008; Van Slyke et al., 2010). Recent literature
on information explorations highlights the differences
between males and females in how they undertake infor­
mation search and shopping on the Internet (Hou &
JOURNAL OF MARKETING THEORY AND PRACTICE 3
Elliott, 2016; Lin & Lu, 2011). Van Slyke et al. (2002)
highlighted that males tend to explore new shopping
channels more than females, which is supported by
a finding of Hasan (2010), who found that males generally
like to shop online more than females. Furthermore,
males have more optimistic discernments concerning
compatibility, intricacy, and relative advantage and
show more trust than females do in an online shopping
setting (Zheng et al., 2020), which means that they accept
online shopping more than females. Similar results were
also reported by Wu (2003), who found that that males
have a relatively more positive inclination toward online
shopping, contrary to females, who associate it with
higher risks and may, therefore, become apprehensive
while shopping online, as Garbarino and Strahilevitz
(2004) reported. In contrast, Okazaki and Hirose (2009)
found that females show a stronger attitude toward and
perceive more satisfaction from online shopping and also
use more mobile Internet than males. Fan and Miao
(2012) studied the effects of electronic word-of-mouth
and concluded that males and females exhibit different
shopping behaviors online. Additionally, they show inter­
ests in different online products (Nirmala & Dewi, 2011;
Sebastianelli et al., 2008). Similarly, the gender gap in the
online shopping context also exists across different coun­
tries, cultures, activities, and buying behaviors (Lian &
Yen, 2014; Stafford et al., 2004). Compulsive buying
behavior is a different and complex buying behavior,
and gender theories developed from shopping
4 X. WANG ET AL.
motivations have been inadequately tested in the online
context. In this study, we discuss six hedonic motivations
of male and female buyers to buy online compulsively.
In this section, we develop 12 hypotheses about how
each of the six motivation factors – taken from the
established studies of Arnold and Reynolds (2003) and
Horváth and Adıgüzel (2018) – is related to compulsive
online buying (Hypotheses 1–6) and how males and
females differ in these motivations (Hypotheses 1a–6a).
Figure 1 depicts a conceptual framework for our
research and the hypotheses.
Adventure seeking
Adventure shopping is described as shopping for excite­
ment, wonder, and amusement (Arnold & Reynolds,
2003). Compulsive buyers, compared with non-
compulsive ones, are likely to be more sensitive to fan­
tasy, adventure, and playfulness and can be triggered by
graphical vividness, sounds, and interactivity in the
online shopping context (Guadagno et al., 2011; Suresh
& Biswas, 2019). The Internet offers modernized ways of
shopping and the arousal produced by the website envir­
onment can actuate buyers to visit frequently and spend
more money (Kotzé et al., 2012) which can ultimately
signal compulsive buying. Considering the prior find­
ings that indicate that compulsive consumers often look
for ways to bask in pleasure and stimulation (Horváth &
Adıgüzel, 2018; Yu & Bastin, 2010), we can postulate
that the Internet can act as a strong pull for compulsive
buyers who have a tendency to shop for adventure.
The degree to which compulsive buyers are attracted
to online adventure may differ between male and female
shoppers. Using the multifactorial gender identity the­
ory, Spence (1984) showed that males and females differ
in personality, attitude, identity, and behavior. For
example, Maccoby and Jacklin (1974) reported that
males have higher self-confidence in achievement situa­
tions than females. In contrast, females scored higher on
sensory stimulation (Kotzé et al., 2012) and excitement
tendencies (Melnyk et al., 2009), which could be trans­
lated into a shopping behavior for females to satisfy
compulsive urges – as females face stronger compulsive
urges than males (Pirog & Roberts, 2007). Besides,
female shoppers tend to be cognizant of design cues
(Raajpoot et al., 2008), which may influence their emo­
tions and shopping experience on the Internet.
Moreover, these traits and shopping attractions would
possibly be more intensive for females than for males in
developing and emerging societies, in which females
have comparatively limited means of entertainment
and leisure activities (Horváth & Adıgüzel, 2018).
Hence, if females experience more routine and boring
tasks in daily life, then we should expect to see greater
desire to seek out exciting experiences compared to men,
as a way to cope with boredom. We can thus infer that
females tend to be more influenced by adventure than
males and would likely rejoice the sense of shopping in
another universe replete with inspiring graphics and
visuals on the Internet. Therefore, we hypothesize as
follows:
H1. Adventure seeking has a positive relationship with
compulsive online buying.
H1a. The impact of adventure seeking on compulsive
online buying will be higher for females than for males.
Gratification seeking
Gratification is one of the most critical characteristics of
hedonic shopping motivations (Eren et al., 2012). It is
the most immediate desire of compulsive buyers to
relieve stress, improve bad moods, and treat themselves
special through shopping (Kukar-Kinney et al., 2016).
This need may be more obvious in the online shopping
context because of the accessibility of the Internet where
consumers spend more time on various shopping appli­
cations (Suresh & Biswas, 2019). Psychologically sensi­
tive consumers such as compulsive buyers experience
recurrent shopping urge, which can easily be satisfied by
frequently visiting shopping websites on smartphones or
laptops without boundary and time limitations.
Gratification seeking has a strong connection to
mood repair and anxiety release (Horváth & Adıgüzel,
2018). Moreover, the sense of gratification would be
enhanced when compulsive buyers – who do not want
to be observed by others due to the repetitive and unne­
cessary buying habits (Palan et al., 2014) – can hide their
unusual shopping behavior from others using the
Internet. For example, Zheng et al. (2020) reported
that compulsive buyers secretly seek gratification and
consider shopping as a private pleasure. As compulsive
buyers are characterized by low emotional stability, they
avoid interaction with people during shopping.
Shopping can dispel such worry. Thus, online shopping
could be used as an antidote to abate stress and anxiety.
Various studies collectively support that females gen­
erally engage more in shopping and shop for a longer
time than males (He et al., 2018), which can be indicative
of females’ sense of pleasure from shopping activity.
Similarly, Reynolds and Beatty (1999) revealed that
females enjoy shopping especially for apparel items
while males consider shopping as a waste of time and
show little interest therein (Bellenger, 1980; Hou &
Elliott, 2016; Rook & Hoch, 1985). Moreover, since

most of the compulsive buyers are reportedly females –
experiencing anxiety, depression, and negative feelings –
we argue that females are more likely to seek gratifica­
tion in private regarding shopping on the Internet.
Therefore, we hypothesize as follows:
H2. Gratification seeking has a positive relationship with
compulsive online buying.
H2a. The impact of gratification seeking on compulsive
online buying will be higher for females than for males.
Idea shopping
Idea shopping refers to new fashions, trends, and experi­
ences that consumers desire to keep themselves up-to-date
(Arnold & Reynolds, 2003). It relates to consumers’ pro­
clivity toward novelty and individuality (Horváth &
Adıgüzel, 2018). Generally, compulsive buyers are more
concerned about their self-esteem and self-identities and
are easily motivated by factors, such as exploring new
products, that can help improve their self- and social-
image (Dittmar et al., 2007; Kukar-Kinney et al., 2012).
Moreover, since compulsive buyers are experienced shop­
pers with substantial market and product knowledge (He
et al., 2018), they are likely to take pleasure in exploring
online stores or pages that are rich in product information
and variety. These consumers tend to get pleasure from
seeing online information and trends without any pur­
chases. This motive of conducting online search is inde­
pendent of a specific purchase decision, providing only
recreation and fun as the consumer’s goal is to attain
pleasure from shopping experience (Davis & Hodges,
2012; Japutra & song, 2020). Also, idea shopping is highly
correlated with identity, uniqueness, and image concerns
(Horváth & Adıgüzel, 2018), which are the main motiva­
tions for compulsive buyers (He et al., 2018; Horváth &
Adıgüzel, 2018). As compulsive buyers lack control over
their shopping impulses, they are likely to purchase inad­
vertently during their online window shopping. Therefore,
we can posit a positive relationship between idea shopping
and compulsive buying in the online context.
However, the previous literature shows contradictory
findings on gender differences, indicating that females are
more inclined to search for information (Cleveland et al.,
2003; Fischer & Arnold, 1990), whereas males possess more
confidence while processing information (i.e., Kempf et al.,
1997; Zheng et al., 2020). Deriving the insights from gender
schema theory that suggests that male schemas are linked
with achievement to a greater extent (Kilbourne, 1998),
and self-construal theory which indicates that males have
more individualistic goals than females (Otnes & Mcgrath,
2001), manifesting the men’s need for uniqueness and
JOURNAL OF MARKETING THEORY AND PRACTICE 5
independence, we may assume that males are more likely
to enjoy browsing for new products, styles, and brands
online than females do. Therefore, we hypothesize as
follows:
H3. Idea shopping has a positive relationship with com­
pulsive online buying.
H3a. The impact of idea shopping on compulsive online
buying will be higher for males than for females.
Role-play shopping
Role-play shopping refers to the joy that drives
a consumer to buy products for friends or family
(Arnold & Reynolds, 2003). Compulsive buyers often
shop for gifts to please their close friends or relatives
(Horváth & Adıgüzel, 2018). However, we find mixed
results in the literature. For example, Arnold and
Reynolds (2003) indicated that compulsive buyers feel
happy when they buy a surprise gift for their dear ones,
while another study reported that compulsive buyers are
less likely to enjoy shopping for others in emerging coun­
tries such as Russia and Turkey (Horváth & Adıgüzel,
2018). Research shows that societies in China are collecti­
vistic and emerging (Lu et al., 2006), where consumers are
traditionally bound to follow a gift exchange tradition
according to guanxi norms (Cai et al., 2020), and consider
complex rules of gift-giving such as when, how much, and
whom to gift (Green & Alden, 1988). Role-play shopping
may, therefore, be more of a utilitarian than hedonic
motivation in such societies, and, thus, less likely to con­
tribute to compulsive online buying.
According to self-construal theory, females possess
interdependent self-construal, which means that they con­
strue themselves as connected with other people, while
males show independent self-construal which means that
they tend to be less concerned with affiliations (Cross &
Madson, 1997). Therefore, we assume that females are
more bound by such gift exchange relationships and are
thus less likely to receive hedonic value from online buying
for others. Therefore, we hypothesize as follows:
H4. Role-play shopping has a negative relationship with
compulsive online buying.
H4a. The impact of role-play shopping on compulsive
online buying will be lower for females than for males.
Social shopping
Enjoying shopping with family members, friends, or
relatives can be described as social shopping (Arnold &
6 X. WANG ET AL.
Reynolds, 2003). General consumers often desire to look
for social interaction with people having similar inter­
ests and consort with them as a reference group (Tauber,
1972; Tauni et al., 2019). This may not be a motivating
factor for compulsive buyers because of their complex
buying behavior. Affiliation theories of human motiva­
tion insinuate that compulsive buyers are less interested
in social shopping (McGuire, 1974), such that 74% of
compulsive buyers preferred shopping alone (Horváth &
Adıgüzel, 2018). This finding is further supported by
earlier researchers who reported that frequent shoppers
tend to be less interested in shopping with others
because of the guilt feeling due to excessive buying
habits (Jones et al., 2006). Thus, we may posit that
compulsive buyers seek shopping pleasure in private
and may thus avoid buying with family or friends on
the Internet due to uncontrollable shopping impulses.
Similarly, compulsive buyers in developing countries
with limited income are more likely to feel embarrassed
about their excessive online buying (Kukar-Kinney et al.,
2016). We argue that this effect will be higher for females
due to their strong compulsive tendencies and limited
disposable income as compared to males (Bighiu et al.,
2015). Moreover, under gender schema and socializa­
tion theory, females are characterized as more expressive
and sensitive; they may take more adverse effects of
unnecessary online shopping before family, friends, or
relatives than males who are more time-conscious (Bem,
1974; Grewal et al., 2003). Therefore, we hypothesize as
follows:
H5. Social shopping has a negative relationship with
compulsive online buying.
H5a. The impact of social shopping on compulsive
online buying will be lower for females than for males.
Value shopping
Value shopping entails buying on sales and discounts
(Arnold & Reynolds, 2003). Prior research study sug­
gests that compulsive buyers are more likely to seek
protection from misleading product promotions and
thus prefer quality products without worrying much
about price and discounts (He et al., 2018). Due to
impulsive purchases where less time is spent on looking
for product information, compulsive buyers are at
a higher risk of purchasing products which might not
be genuine (Erguncu & Yildirim, 2015), they may associ­
ate price as a mark for quality (D’Andrea et al., 2010),
and may therefore avoid buying cheap or discounted
products online. Moreover, having less disposable
income, buyers in developing societies tend to make
sensible buying decisions to exploit value on their
spent money and avoid subsequent upsets (Pandey &
Devasagayam, 2015). This concern may increase the
mental effort for these buyers to search for quality pro­
ducts at a reasonable price discount, which may reduce
the hedonic value of shopping online for compulsive
buyers, who shop spontaneously and mainly for relief
from stress and worry instead of merely acquiring
products.
Gender schema and self-construal theories indicate
that males are more likely to focus on success by win­
ning a good deal of discount during their shopping
because they have more success and individualistic
goals compared to females (Kilbourne, 1998; Otnes &
Mcgrath, 2001). On the same note, Otnes and Mcgrath
(2001) also posited that males perceive shopping as
a competition to defeat a retailer who reaps high profits
as an achievement. In contrast, females are less involved
in shopping for discounts; instead, they seek more plea­
surable experience during shopping activity (Hasan,
2010). Therefore, we hypothesize as follows:
H6. Value shopping has a negative relationship with
compulsive online buying.
H6a. The impact of value shopping on compulsive
online buying will be lower for females than for males.
Research methods
Survey method and data collection
In selecting an emerging country, we followed the cri­
teria used by IMF, BRICS & Next Eleven, FTSE, MSCI,
S & P, EM Bond Index, Dow Jones, Russell, and
Columbia University EMGP and chose China as it
stands 86th with the 0.72 human development index
(HDI) value in the year 2018. We created a well-
structured online questionnaire on a popular portal
“www.sojump.com” and collected data from respon­
dents who had previous online shopping experiences
on platforms such as Taobao and Jingdong virtual
stores. We sent the questionnaire link to approximately
3000 respondents using WeChat and QQ social media
platforms. In total, we received 1079 responses, 904 of
which were selected as valid responses (nearly 36%
response rate, with female amounting to 54% and
21 years of mean age). We omitted the responses with
neutrality to increase the quality of data before analyses.
Table 2 recaps the descriptive figures of respondents.
We employed Smart-PLS (version 3.2.7) to analyze
the structural equation modeling (SEM) and multigroup
analysis (MGA) for hypotheses assessment. Partial least
 JOURNAL OF MARKETING THEORY AND PRACTICE 7

Table 2. Demographic profile of respondents. Table 3. Items’ reliability and validity.

Demographic Variable Category Frequency Percent Constructs and Items Loadings AVE CR CA
Gender Male 416 46 Adventure Seeking 0.6 0.8 0.6
Female 488 54 I find online shopping stimulating 0.7
Age Below 18 63 7 To me, online shopping is an adventure 0.8
18–22 588 65 Online shopping makes me feel like I am in my 0.8
23–27 172 19 own universe
Above 27 81 9 Compulsive Online Buying 0.7 0.9 0.8
Education Bachelors 588 65 I consider myself as a compulsive online buyer 0.6
Masters 190 21 My online closet has unopened shopping bags 0.8
PhD 45 5 in it.
Other 81 9 Others might consider me as an online 0.8
Income/month (RMB) Below 3000 624 69 shopaholic.
3000–6000 163 18 Much of my time centers around buying things 0.8
6001–9000 54 6 online
Above 9000 63 7 Gratification Seeking 0.7 0.9 0.8
When I am in bad mood, I go online shopping 0.9
to make me feel better
To me online shopping is a way to relieve stress 0.9
square structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) is more I go online shopping when I want to treat 0.7
flexible in constructing complex research models that myself to something special
Idea Shopping 0.8 0.9 0.8
include both formative and reflective variables (J. F. Hair I go online shopping to keep up with the trends 0.9
et al., 2017; Lowry & Gaskin, 2014). Considering the use I go online shopping to keep up with the new 0.9
fashions
of the PLS form of SEM, it was applied as an appropriate I go online shopping to see what new products 0.5
measurement tool in the study. are available
Role-play Shopping 0.8 0.9 0.9
I enjoy online shopping around to find the 0.9
perfect gift for someone
Measures I enjoy online shopping for my friends and 0.9
family
We used a six-item compulsive buying index and modified I feel good when I buy things online for the 0.8
to measure compulsive online buying according to the special people in my life
Social Shopping 0.8 0.9 0.9
context (Bridges & Florsheim, 2008). Hedonic shopping I go online shopping with my friends or family 0.9
motivations were measured with six constructs taken from to socialize
Online shopping with others is a bonding 0.9
previous studies of Arnold and Reynolds (2003) and experience
Horváth and Adıgüzel (2018): adventure seeking (AS), To me, online shopping with friends or family is 0.9
a social occasion
gratification seeking (GS), idea shopping (IS), role-play Value Shopping 0.8 0.9 0.8
shopping (RS), social shopping (SS), and value shopping For the most part, I go online shopping when 0.9
(VS). We made little changes to these six constructs to there are sales
I enjoy looking for discounts when I shop 0.9
measure hedonic shopping motivations on the Internet online
(Ali et al., 2020) and used the five-point Likert scale to I go online shopping to take advantage of sales 0.9
measure all variables: 5 representing “strongly agree” to 1
representing “strongly disagree”. Moreover, we included
variance extracted (AVE). Second, the AVE values ver­
socio-demographic questions such as age, gender, income,
ified the convergent validity (CV) and confirmed the
and education in the questionnaire for a thorough descrip­
correlation of the indicators, showing how indicators
tion of the samples. First, we developed the questionnaire
fitted best under a specific construct. The value of each
in English, then got it translated into Chinese and back-
construct exceeds the required 0.50, thus confirming the
translated into the original language by two native Chinese
CV (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). All the items are reliable
professionals with good command of English to ensure the
and relate closely to their given constructs. Lastly, dis­
content validity (Brislin, 1970).
criminant validity (DV) confirmed the high loading of
the measurement items onto theoretically positioned
Results factors (Ryu et al., 2014). Table 4 shows the DV values
and verified that the square root of AVE was higher than
Measurement model
the correlations across constructs.
First, we reviewed Cronbach’s alpha (CA) and compo­ There were no missing values found in the study. To
site reliability (CR) to confirm internal consistency with avoid common method bias (CMB), we designed the
the values of all constructs above 0.70 (Table 3) except questionnaires according to the guidance of Podsakoff
for the values of AS on CA. We considered AS owing to et al. (2003). Variance inflation factor (VIF) values show
an acceptable CR value; it is doable because the CR no multicollinearity and CMB issues in our model as the
values of all six constructs were larger than the average VIF value of each independent variable resulted in less
8 X. WANG ET AL.

Table 4. Discriminant validity. The p-value below 0.05 and above 0.95 determines
Constructs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a significant group difference (Henseler et al., 2009; J.F.
1 Adventure Seeking 0.8 Hair et al., 2013; Sarstedt et al., 2011), while the p-value
2 Compulsive Online Buying 0.5 0.8
3 Gratification Seeking 0.7 0.4 0.8 of up to 0.09 can be acceptable (J. F. Hair et al., 2017),
4 Idea Shopping 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.9 which we considered for VS for gender difference
5 Role-play Shopping 0.4 −0.2 0.3 0.3 0.9
6 Social Shopping 0.4 −0.2 0.4 0.3 0.8 0.9 (Table 6).
7 Value Shopping 0.3 −0.2 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.7 0.9 Prior to gender differences, AS, GS, and IS were
positively significant to online compulsive buying,
thus, supporting H1 (β = 0.50, p < .01), H2 (β = 0.09,
than 2, which is less than 3.3, the proposed indicative of p < .01), and H3 (β = 0.33, p < .01) respectively.
common method bias (Petter et al., 2007). For further Conversely, RS, SS, and VS dampen compulsive online
verification according to Kock (2015), as all the items buying as hypothesized. Therefore, H4 (β = −0.25, p <
used in our study were reflective, we tested all the con­ .01), H5 (β = −0.09, p < .05), and H6 (β = −0.23, p < .01)
structs with each other on Smart-PLS and found the VIF are accepted.
value of each construct below 3.3 as desired, suggesting
that common method bias was not an issue. Hence, this
Multigroup analyses (MGA)
study paved the way for further analyses.
Measurement invariance of the constructs across male
and female groups before running the multigroup ana­
Path analyses lysis to ensure that “the loadings and weights of the
Next, Table 5 shows the results of 12 hypotheses tested constructs’ measurement model do not differ signifi­
and analyzed. A bootstrapping method was used to cantly within the model” (Eberl, 2010, p. 504). Because
confirm the accuracy of the path coefficients generated the true differences in the hypothesized relationships
from the PLS analysis. We reviewed R-square statistics could be overshadowed by the variations stemming
for the dependent variable to check the substantive effect from different meanings that group respondents
and weight relations derived from the connected vari­ ascribed to the phenomenon being examined in the
ables (Wang et al., 2020). The research model explains structural relationships between the latent variables
52.4% of the variance in compulsive buying for complete (J. F. Hair et al., 2017), performing measurement invar­
data (males 46%, females 54%). For gender difference, iance of the constructs becomes imperative. To this
a multigroup analysis was run on Smart-PLS software by effect, Henseler et al. (2016) has recommended the
using the MGA test approach to ensure the significance three-step MICOM procedure, which we applied
of gender difference in the hypothesized relationships. sequentially for configural invariance in Step 1; compo­
sitional invariance in Step 2; and equality of means and
variances in Step 3. The identical items for the con­
Table 5. Hypotheses assessment (without gender difference). structs were ensured across the groups to establish con­
Hypothesized Path b-value p-value Decision
figural invariance. Smart-PLS automatically provides the
H1 Adventure Seeking → COB 0.50 0.00 Supported
H2 Gratification Seeking → COB 0.09 0.01 Supported identical settings and optimization criteria for the PLS
H3 Idea Shopping → COB 0.33 0.00 Supported algorithm to use in both groups, ensuring identical indi­
H4 Role-play Shopping → COB −0.25 0.00 Supported
H5 Social Shopping → COB −0.09 0.03 Supported
cators and data treatments for configural invariance.
H6 Value Shopping → COB −0.23 0.00 Supported To ensure that each construct’s scores are equal
COB = Compulsive Online Buying across the groups, we calculated compositional

Table 6. Structural model and multigroup results by gender difference.

Relationship Male Female Difference MGA Decision
Adventure Seeking → COB 0.30*** 0.37*** 0.07 0.85 Rejected
Gratification Seeking → COB 0.08* 0.19*** 0.11 0.97 Supported
Idea Shopping → COB 0.41*** 0.24*** 0.17 0.00 Supported
Role-play Shopping → COB 0.15 −0.25*** 0.10 0.00 Supported
Social Shopping → COB −0.14** −0.14*** 0.00 0.50 Rejected
Value Shopping → COB −0.12** −0.22*** 0.10 0.08 Supported
R2 0.52 0.52
Q2 0.31 0.34
COB = Compulsive Online Buying
p < 0.1; p < 0.05; p < 0.01.
Note: MGA values (p < 0.05 and p > 0.95) are significant differences

invariance. Henseler et al. (2016) showed that the
scores of a construct along with weights estimated in
one group should completely correlate with the scores
of the construct in the other group. In Step 2, by
running MICOM in Smart-PLS 3.2.7 with 5000 sam­
ples, we performed multiple permutations of the obser­
vations between the male and female groups to
calculate the correlations of the construct scores. The
correlations between the scores of bifurcated group
constructs were not significantly different from 1,
with two exceptions: RS (p-value = 0.002) and SS
(p-value = 0.008). Although we rerun the procedure
by removing the indicators with significant outer load­
ing as suggested by Henseler et al. (2016), we failed to
meet the criteria for RS and SS constructs in Step 2 and
did not consider these two constructs in Step 3, while
establishing compositional invariance for the rest of the
constructs across groups.
In Step 3, we checked composite equality for the
degree of invariance. If mean and variance original dif­
ferences fall between the 2.5% and 97.5% boundaries,
they denote “full invariance” and if only one of the above
conditions is met, then it is “partial invariance”. If none
of the conditions is met, then there is “no invariance.”
We found partial invariance for all the constructs except
for RS and SS (Appendix A). A permutation routine was
used to calculate the scores of constructs with weights
measured from samples in two disparate groups with
observations randomly permuted between them without
considering replacements. No differences were detected
in the constructs between male and females groups in
Step 3, indicating structural model differences between
these two groups and thereby requiring multigroup
analysis (MGA) further.
First, we estimated the model separately for male
and female groups and found that GS has a weak
relationship with compulsive buying at a 10% signifi­
cance level, and RS turned out to be non-significant
for males. For females, all the hypothesized relation­
ships were significant at a 1% significance level.
Using multigroup analysis, we found gender differ­
ence for GS, IS, and VS. Females were found to be
more gratification seekers than males (M = 0.08*, F =
0.19***, p > .95) (p values below 0.05 and above 0.95
are considered significant in PLS-MGA) (King et al.,
2017). In contrast, males enjoyed online shopping for
product information, new trends, and fashions (M =
0.41***, F = 0.24***, p < .01). Although RS showed
a significant negative relationship with compulsive
online buying, its path coefficient turned out to be
insignificantly positive for males, while females were
found to have a significant negative association with
RS on the Internet after MGA analysis (M = 0.15,
JOURNAL OF MARKETING THEORY AND PRACTICE 9
F = −0.25***, p < .01). Finally, females showed less
interest in discounts than males (M = −0.12**, F =
−0.22***, p < .10). Thus, our hypotheses H2a, H3a,
H4a, and H6a are accepted.
Discussion and conclusion
The results show that different hedonic shopping moti­
vations and gender significantly contribute to compul­
sive buying on the Internet in an emerging country such
as China. In addition to gender differences, AS, GS, and
IS contribute to compulsive online buying, while RS, SS,
and VS significantly reduce compulsive online buying.
The results of GS and IS contradict the findings of
Horváth and Adıgüzel (2018), where both motivations
were found to be unrelated in emerging countries
(Turkey and Russia). This could have been owing to
the traditional context (offline shopping) in which pre­
vious research studies were conducted, contrary to our
context (online shopping), which is an entirely new
shopping environment with rich graphics and discovery
and may allow compulsive buyers to achieve pleasure
from exploring product information online.
Moreover, in China, consumers’ financial status is
improving and their focus on social image is increasing
(He et al., 2018). Here compulsive buyers comprise the
most vulnerable consumer segment as they seek unique­
ness by identifying themselves with the latest products to
enhance their social image. Regarding AS, our study
confirms the findings of Horváth and Adıgüzel (2018)
and Yu and Bastin (2010), suggesting that compulsive
buyers in emerging societies are keen on pursuing joy
and stimulation while shopping, which is also found to
be true in the current online context.
The significant negative result of RS is consistent with
the findings of Japutra and Song (2020) in that the long-
established tradition of gift exchange with complex rules
in collectivistic societies such as that of China – which is
an act of obligation rather than joy (Green & Alden,
1988) – reduces hedonic motivation for compulsive
buyers to buy gifts, keepsakes, or souvenirs for others
on the Internet. Similarly, SS and VS are also found to
have a significant negative effect on compulsive online
buying. These outcomes are in line with the established
findings that compulsive buyers prefer shopping pri­
vately to repair their mood and stress (McGuire, 1974)
and focus on shopping experience for pleasure instead of
searching for discounts (Horváth & Adıgüzel, 2018).
Therefore, compulsive buyers tend to avoid buying on
the Internet with family, friends, or relatives and are less
motivated by online sales and markdowns in the pursuit
of self-enhancement.
10 X. WANG ET AL.
In analyzing the gender difference in the above-
mentioned motivations, the findings of GS and IS
show that females seek more pleasure in online shop­
ping, whereas males take a greater interest in online
information search. These results of compulsive buyers
are in line with socialization theory, which states that
males are more time-conscious (Grewal et al., 2003), and
are thus less likely to enjoy online shopping for hours
compared to females. Instead, males are goal-oriented
and focus on relevant information which is consistent
with self-construal theory and multifactorial gender
identity theories, suggesting their masculine gender
roles (Cross et al., 2011). Moreover, the psychological
makeup of females is deficient in coping with stress and
anxiety (Zheng et al., 2020), explaining why females,
turn to shop mainly for enjoyment purposes to relieve
these negative feelings more than males do. In contrast,
males with relatively stronger psychological stability and
cognitive capacity tend to enjoy shopping for explora­
tion such as for new information and ideas more than
females do (Muscanell & Guadagno, 2012).
Buying for others does not affect compulsive buying
in male shoppers, while females tend not to enjoy buying
for others online. Generally, males enjoy excessive shop­
ping to a lesser extent compared with females; however,
with high compulsive tendencies, males tend to enjoy
shopping experience for self-focused goals such as fun
and discovery (Hou & Elliott, 2016). According to
Fischer and Arnold (1990), general male buyers who
hold egalitarian gender-role attitudes spend more time
shopping for others, while RS turns out to be unrelated
to compulsive male buyers. This may explain the anti­
thetical connection of male compulsive buyers concern­
ing RS.
Females are more obliged to buy for others in socie­
ties where gift-giving is a social norm, which is binding
and may lead to little pleasure for females, because it
requires more information search and effort to choose
a perfect gift for important others (Fischer & Arnold,
1990). In China, such a tradition is very strong especially
for females who are more concerned about their image
before gift-recipients (Japutra & Song, 2020), which
could explain the negative relationship between RS and
compulsive buying for females.
VS has a significant negative effect on compulsive
online buying as hypothesized. As expected, compulsive
females show much less interest in discounts and bar­
gains than their male counterparts do. From this finding,
we may derive that consumers especially females in
emerging economies tend to be price-sensitive due to
the general perception associated with cheaper products
as low quality (Horváth & Adıgüzel, 2018). Moreover,
online markets in developing countries are rated lower
on regulations with respect to consumer protection
(Erguncu & Yildirim, 2015), which may consequently
prompt consumers to prefer product quality and func­
tionality and take price as a proxy for quality (D’Andrea
et al., 2010).
Owing to less disposable income, female consumers
may need to make a wiser purchase decision and to
maximize returns on money spent (Pandey &
Devasagayam, 2015); therefore, they should put more
cognitive effort, which reduces hedonic value for buy­
ing products online on discount or sale. In line with
this, because of higher anxiety and compulsive tenden­
cies than males (Zheng et al., 2020), females require
more joy and less cognitive burden such as searching
for discounts or looking for sales online. This finding
indicates consistency with and applicability of multi­
factorial gender identity and self-construal theory,
which explains females’s lower power of information
processing and goal accomplishment than males in
availing discounts and other success situations (Cross
& Madson, 1997).
We do not find any gender differences in AS and SS,
indicating that compulsive buyers – irrespective of gen­
der – are strongly related to shopping excitement.
However, this finding contradicts Kotzé et al. (2012),
where females showed more sensory stimulation while
shopping on the Internet. Hence, it confirms that the
different types of buying behaviors, such as compulsive
buying in the current study produced different results,
and as such more investigation should be conducted in
the future for the generalizability of gender theories in this
context. We have already hypothesized a weaker relation­
ship under self-construal theory in which males with
independent self-construals demonstrate a lack of will­
ingness to associate with others (Cross & Madson, 1997).
This effect may amplify for both males and females, in
a way that females may tend to avoid interaction on social
online platforms due to their sense of associated guilt of
excessive buying. Men, characterized by weaker affiliation
tendencies, are less inclined to social interactions during
online shopping. Such similarities between males and
females in this regard may nullify gender differences.
Although a great deal of research has been rendered
to exploring the compulsive buying phenomenon, con­
sumer demographics and their compulsive buying beha­
vior on the Internet have not been explored as yet. This
study shows that gender plays a significant role in online
shopping motives for compulsive buyers. In particular,
our findings indicate that males are more prone to
online information seeking (which is consistent with
multifactorial gender identity theory), whereas females
show greater interest in online GS (which is supported
by socialization theory).

Practical implications
Overall, AS, GS, and IS are found to be the major
hedonic motivations contributing to compulsive buying
on the Internet in an emerging economy, China.
Although past literature shows compulsive buying to
be strongly associated with females, our findings from
online shopping suggest that males are equally vulner­
able to this behavior. Therefore, marketers should focus
on designing their websites, products’ displays, assort­
ments, and share of shelves in a way that provides some
touch of adventure, gratification, and up-to-date infor­
mation about products, trends, and fashion to both male
and female shoppers on the Internet. Females prefer
adventure and gratification compared to males. These
factors could be considered when creating online adver­
tisements, selecting the product range, and designing
website interior. Marketers should also consider the
customization of the online service and focus more on
sharing the latest information with these consumers,
particularly males. However, careful attention should
be paid to offer discounts as these consumers – espe­
cially females – are less likely to shop online for reduc­
tions, sales, and bargains.
Similarly, marketers should be cautious when recom­
mending gift shopping to both males and females
because they are less likely to accept the offer. The
main objective of their shopping is to enjoy the experi­
ence of shopping instead of making efforts to find
a suitable gift for others in societies where the gift is
a social obligation. Nevertheless, marketers should also
be proactive in empathizing with the social concern of
these types of consumers and should try to design
a relevant website layout or should possibly create an
online shopping environment that provides consumers
with privacy. This will give them the comfort of online
shopping as they will hide excessive, unnecessary buying
habits, and it may add to their satisfaction and pleasur­
able experience on the Internet.
Limitations and future research
Given the difference between coastal and inland China,
the convenience sample, mostly comprising university
students from the coastal city of Dalian, China, might
have limited the range of applicability of the results to
broader population characteristics, especially to those
living in inland cities. 76% of the respondents have
income below 3000 RMB/month, which might show
the tendency of a financially weak consumer segment
in our findings. Although young consumers are found to
have more compulsive tendencies than those in other
age groups (Flight et al., 2014), recent findings of
JOURNAL OF MARKETING THEORY AND PRACTICE 11
L. Zhang et al. (2019) argue that young consumers are
hardly affected by low income in their attitude to luxury
shopping. Nevertheless, future research should consider
a sample with different levels of income, age, and back­
ground to investigate this topic more thoroughly. It is
suggested that care should be taken when interpreting
the separate results of males and females for gender
differences, which were considered at 0.10 significance
level.
The current study evaluates and compares the rela­
tionship of hedonic shopping motivations to compul­
sive online buying in a developing country among
males and females. There could be additional compar­
isons that may produce different results, such as the
impact of culture on the relationship between hedonic
motivations and compulsive online buying. Future
research should also consider comparing whether the
relationship between hedonic shopping motivations
and compulsive online buying differs for tangible pro­
ducts such as electronic, beauty-care, or apparel pro­
ducts and intangible products such as consultation,
lodging, and entertainment services (Bhatia, 2019), as
well as for online and offline shopping channels (Choi
et al., 2019), to enrich our understanding of compulsive
buying in various contexts. Compulsive online buying
is increasingly becoming an international phenom­
enon; thus, research on gender differences among dif­
ferent shopping motivations is a rich area for future
research.
Funding
This work has been partially supported by the grants from the
National Natural Science Foundation of China (71672026,
71972030, 71902021), LiaoNing Revitalization Talents
Program (XLYC1804007) and the Humanity, Social Science
Foundation of Ministry of Education of China
(18YJC630247), and Doctoral Startup Fund Program of
Liaoning Province (2019-BS-082).
References
Achtziger, A., Hubert, M., Kenning, P., Raab, G., & Reisch, L.
(2015). Debt out of control: The links between self-control,
compulsive buying, and real debts. Journal of Economic
Psychology, 49, 141–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.
2015.04.003 ,,
Ali, F., Ashfaq, M., Begum, S., & Ali, A. (2020). How “Green”
thinking and altruism translate into purchasing intentions
for electronics products: The intrinsic-extrinsic motivation
mechanism. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 24,
281–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.07.013
,,
Arnold, M. J., & Reynolds, K. E. (2003). Hedonic shopping
motivations. Journal of Retailing, 79(2), 77–95. https://doi.
org/10.1016/s0022-4359(03)00007-1 ,,
12 X. WANG ET AL.
Bae, S., & Lee, T. (2011). Gender differences in consumers’
perception of online consumer reviews. Electronic
Commerce Research, 11(2), 201–214. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s10660-010-9072-y ,,
Bellenger, D. N. (1980). Profiling the recreational shopper.
Journal of Retailing, 56(3), 77–92.
Bem, S. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological
androgyny. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,
42(2), 155. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0036215 ,,
Bhatia, V. (2019). Impact of fashion interest, materialism and
internet addiction on e-compulsive buying behaviour of
apparel. Journal of Global Fashion Marketing, 10(1),
66–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/20932685.2018.1544502
Bighiu, G., Manolică, A., & Roman, C. T. (2015). Compulsive
buying behavior on the internet. Procedia Economics &
Finance, 20(Suppl.C), 72–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/
S2212-5671(15)00049-0 ,,
Boujbel, L., & d’Astous, A. (2015). Exploring the feelings and
thoughts that accompany the experience of consumption
desires. Psychology & Marketing, 32(2), 219–231. https://
doi.org/10.1002/mar.20774 ,,
Bridges, E., & Florsheim, R. (2008). Hedonic and utilitarian
shopping goals: The online experience. Journal of Business
Research, 61(4), 309–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.
2007.06.017 ,,
Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural
research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1(3),
185–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/135910457000100301
Brook, J. S., Zhang, C., Brook, D. W., & Leukefeld, C. G.
(2015). Compulsive buying: Earlier illicit drug use, impulse
buying, depression, and adult ADHD symptoms. Psychiatry
Research, 228(3), 312–317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psy
chres.2015.05.095 ,,
Cai, S., Jun, M., & Yang, Z. (2020). The joint effects of formal
institutions and business characteristics on interfirm guanxi
in China: A fuzzy set analysis. Journal of Business-to-
Business Marketing, 27(2), 151–174. https://doi.org/10.
1080/1051712X.2020.1748355 ,,
Ching, T. H., Tang, C. S., Wu, A., & Yan, E. (2016). Gender
differences in pathways to compulsive buying in Chinese
college students in Hong Kong and Macau. Journal of
Behavioral Addictions, 5(2), 342–350. https://doi.org/10.
1556/2006.5.2016.025 ,,
Chiu, Y.-P., Lo, S.-K., Hsieh, A.-Y., & Hwang, Y. (2019).
Exploring why people spend more time shopping online
than in offline stores. Computers in Human Behavior, 95,
24–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.029
Choi, T.-M., Chen, Y., & Chung, S. H. (2019). Online-offline
fashion franchising supply chains without channel conflicts:
Choices on postponement and contracts. International
Journal of Production Economics, 215, 174–184. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.05.006 ,,
Cleveland, M., Babin, B. J., Laroche, M., Ward, P., & Bergeron, J.
(2003). Information search patterns for gift purchases: A
cross-national examination of gender differences. Journal of
Consumer Behaviour: An International Research Review, 3(1),
20–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.120 ,,
CNNIC. (2020). Research Report on Chinese social application
user behavior. China Internet Network Information Center.
http://cnnic.cn/hlwfzyj/hlwxzbg/hlwtjbg/202004/
P020200428399188064169.pdf. ,,
Cross, S. E., Hardin, E. E., & Gercekswing, B. (2011). The what,
how, why, and where of self-construal. Personality & Social
Psychology Review an Official Journal of the Society for
Personality & Social Psychology Inc, 15(2), 142. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1088868310373752 ,,
Cross, S. E., & Madson, L. (1997). Models of the self:
Self-construals and gender. Psychological Bulletin, 122(1),
5–37. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.122.1.5 ,,
D’Andrea, G., Marcotte, D., & Morrison, G. D. (2010). Let
emerging market customers be your teachers. Harvard
Business Review, 88(12). https://hbr.org/2010/12/the-
globe-let-emerging-market-customers-be-your-teachers ,,
,, Davis, L., & Hodges, N. (2012). Consumer shopping value: An
investigation of shopping trip value, in-store shopping
value and retail format. Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, 19(2), 229–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretcon
ser.2012.01.004 ,,
Dittmar, H. (2005). Compulsive buying–a growing concern?
An examination of gender, age, and endorsement of mate­
rialistic values as predictors. British Journal of Psychology,
96(4), 467–491. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712605X53533 ,,
Dittmar, H., Long, K., & Bond, R. (2007). When a better self is
only a button click away: Associations between materialistic
values, emotional and identity–related buying motives, and
compulsive buying tendency online. Journal of Social and
Clinical Psychology, 26(3), 334–361. https://doi.org/10.1521/
jscp.2007.26.3.334 ,,
,, Eberl, M. (2010). An application of PLS in multi-group analy­
sis: The need for differentiated corporate-level marketing in
the mobile communications industry. Handbook of partial
least squares. Springer.
Eren, S. S., Eroğlu, F., & Hacioglu, G. (2012). Compulsive
buying tendencies through materialistic and hedonic values
among college students in Turkey. Procedia-Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 58, 1370–1377. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.1121 ,,
Erguncu, S., & Yildirim, G. (2015). How consumer mindset
response and long-term marketing effectiveness differ in
emerging vs. mature markets. In D. B. A. Mehdi
Khosrow-Pour (Ed.), Marketing and consumer behavior:
Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp.
738–758). IGI Global.
Fan, Y. W., & Miao, Y. F. (2012). Effect of electronic word-of-
mouth on consumer purchase intention: The perspective of
gender differences. International Journal of Electronic
Business Management, 10(3), 175. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.
,, edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.688.5221&rep=
rep1&type=pdf ,,
Fischer, E., & Arnold, S. J. (1990). More than a labor of love:
Gender roles and Christmas gift shopping. Journal of
Consumer Research, 17(3), 333–345. https://doi.org/10.
1086/208561 ,,
Flight, R. L., Rountree, M. M., & Beatty, S. E. (2014). Feeling
the urge: Affect in impulsive and compulsive buying.
Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 20(4), 453–466.
https://doi.org/10.2753/mtp1069-6679200407 ,,
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models
with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra
and statistics. Sage.
Garbarino, E., & Strahilevitz, M. (2004). Gender differences in the
perceived risk of buying online and the effects of receiving a site

recommendation. Journal of Business Research, 57(7), 768–775.
https://doi.org/10.1016/s0148-2963(02)00363-6 ,,
Gentry, J. W., Commuri, S., & Jun, S. (2003). Review of
literature on gender in the family. Academy of Marketing
Science Review, 1(1), 1–18. https://www.researchgate.net/
profile/James-Gentry8/publication/237768303_Review_of_
Literature_on_Gender_in_the_Family/links/
00b495358428f50312000000 ,,
Granero, R., Fernández-Aranda, F., Steward, T., Mestre-Bach,
G., Baño, M., del Pino-Gutiérrez, A., & Jiménez-Murcia, S.
(2016). Compulsive buying behavior: Characteristics of
comorbidity with gambling disorder. Frontiers in psychol­
ogy, 7, 625. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00625
Green, R. T., & Alden, D. L. (1988). Functional equivalence in
cross-cultural consumer behavior: Gift giving in Japan and
the United States. Psychology & Marketing, 5(2), 155–168.
https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.4220050205 ,,
Grewal, D., Baker, J., Levy, M., & Voss, G. B. (2003). The
effects of wait expectations and store atmosphere evalua­
tions on patronage intentions in service-intensive retail
stores. Journal of Retailing, 79(4), 259–268. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jretai.2003.09.006 ,,
Guadagno, R. E., Muscanell, N. L., Okdie, B. M., Burk, N. M.,
& Ward, T. B. (2011). Even in virtual environments women
shop and men build: A social role perspective on second
life. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(1), 304–308. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.08.008 ,,
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2013).
A primer on partial least squares structural equation model­
ling (PLS-SEM). Sage.
Hair, J. F., Jr, Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Gudergan, S. P.
(2017). Advanced issues in partial least squares structural
equation modeling. Sage.
Hasan, B. (2010). Exploring gender differences in online shop­
ping attitude. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4),
597–601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.12.012 ,,
He, H., Kukar-Kinney, M., & Ridgway, N. M. (2018).
Compulsive buying in China: Measurement, prevalence,
and online drivers. Journal of Business Research, 91,
28–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.05.023
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2016). Testing
measurement invariance of composites using partial least
squares. International Marketing Review, 33(3), 405–431.
https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-09-2014-0304 ,,
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2009). The use of
partial least squares path modeling in international marketing.
Advances in International Marketing, 20, 277–319. https://doi.
org/10.1108/S1474-7979(2009)0000020014 ,,
Horváth, C., & Adıgüzel, F. (2018). Shopping enjoyment to the
extreme: Hedonic shopping motivations and compulsive
buying in developed and emerging markets. Journal of
Business Research, 86, 300–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jbusres.2017.07.013 ,,
Horváth, C., & Birgelen, M. V. (2015). The role of brands in
the behavior and purchase decisions of compulsive versus
noncompulsive buyers. European Journal of Marketing, 49
(1/2), 2–21. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-10-2012-0627
Hou, J., & Elliott, K. (2016). Gender differences in online
auctions. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications,
17, 123–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2016.04.004
Hult, G. T. M., Sharma, P. N., Morgeson, F. V., & Zhang, Y.
(2019). Antecedents and consequences of customer
JOURNAL OF MARKETING THEORY AND PRACTICE 13
satisfaction: Do they differ across online and offline
purchases? Journal of Retailing, 95(1), 10–23. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jretai.2018.10.003 ,,
Japutra, A., & Song, Z. (2020). Mindsets, shopping motiva­
tions and compulsive buying: Insights from China. Journal
of Consumer Behaviour, 19(5), 423–437. https://doi.org/10.
1002/cb.1821 ,,
Jones, M. A., Reynolds, K. E., & Arnold, M. J. (2006). Hedonic
and utilitarian shopping value: Investigating differential
effects on retail outcomes. Journal of Business Research, 59
(9), 974–981. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.03.006 ,,
Kempf, D. S., Palan, K. M., & Laczniak, R. N. (1997). Gender
,, differences in information processing confidence in an
advertising context: A preliminary study. ACR North
American Advances, 24, 443–449. https://www.acrwebsite.
org/volumes/8084/volumes/v24/NA-24 ,,
Kilbourne, W. E. (1998). Fuat Firat and Nikhilesh Dholakia:
Consuming people: From political economy to theaters of
consumption. Journal of Consumer Policy, 21(3), 339–344.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006979309822 ,,
Kim, H. S., Hodgins, D. C., Torres, A. R., Fontenelle, L. F., do
Rosário, M. C., de Mathis, M. A., ... & Tavares, H. (2018).
Dual diagnosis of obsessive compulsive and compulsive
buying disorders: Demographic, clinical, and psychiatric
correlates. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 86, 67–73. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2018.07.013 ,,
Kim, H. Y., & Kim, Y. K. (2008). Shopping enjoyment and
store shopping modes: The moderating influence of chronic
time pressure. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services,
15(5), 410–419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2007.
10.003 ,,
Kim, Y. K. (2002). Consumer value: An application to mall
and Internet shopping. International Journal of Retail &
Distribution Management, 30(12), 595–602. https://doi.
org/10.1108/09590550210453075 ,,
King, C., Murillo, E., & Lee, H. (2017). The effects of genera­
tional work values on employee brand attitude and beha­
vior: A multi-group analysis. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 66, 92–105. https://doi.org/10.
,, 1016/j.ijhm.2017.07.006 ,,
Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full
collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of
e-Collaboration, 11(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijec.
2015100101 ,,
Koran, L. M., Faber, R. J., Aboujaoude, E., Large, M. D., &
Serpe, R. T. (2006). Estimated prevalence of compulsive buying
behavior in the United States. American Journal of Psychiatry,
163(10), 1806–1812. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.2006.163.10.
1806,,
Kotzé, T., North, E., Stols, M., & Venter, L. (2012). Gender
differences in sources of shopping enjoyment. International
Journal of Consumer Studies, 36(4), 416–424. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2011.01060.x ,,
Kramarae, C., & Kramer, J. (1995). Legal snarls for women in
cyberspace. Internet Research, 5(2), 14–24. https://doi.org/
10.1108/10662249510094759 ,,
,, Kukar-Kinney, M., Ridgway, N. M., & Monroe, K. B. (2012).
The role of price in the behavior and purchase decisions of
compulsive buyers. Journal of Retailing, 88(1), 63–71.
,, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2011.02.004 ,,
Kukar-Kinney, M., Scheinbaum, A. C., & Schaefers, T. (2016).
Compulsive buying in online daily deal settings: An
14 X. WANG ET AL.
investigation of motivations and contextual elements.
Journal of Business Research, 69(2), 691–699. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.08.021 ,,
Li, D., Jiang, Y., An, S., Shen, Z., & Jin, W. (2009). The
influence of money attitudes on young Chinese consumers'
compulsive buying. Young Consumers, 10(2), 98–109.
https://doi.org/10.1108/17473610910964688 ,,
Lian, J.-W., & Yen, D. C. (2014). Online shopping drivers and
barriers for older adults: Age and gender differences.
Computers in Human Behavior, 37, 133–143. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.04.028 ,,
Lin, K.-Y., & Lu, H.-P. (2011). Why people use social net­
working sites: An empirical study integrating network
externalities and motivation theory. Computers in
Human Behavior, 27(3), 1152–1161. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.chb.2010.12.009 ,,
Liu, W., Batra, R., & Wang, H. (2017). Product touch and
consumers’ online and offline buying: The role of mental
representation. Journal Of Retailing, 93(3), 369–381. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2017.06.003 ,,
Lowry, P. B., & Gaskin, J. (2014). Partial least squares (PLS)
structural equation modeling (SEM) for building and test­
ing behavioral causal theory: When to choose it and how to
use it. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication,
57(2), 123–146. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2014.2312452
Lu, W., Zheng, B.-J., Xu, K., Schwarz, W., Du, L., Wong, C. K.,
Chen, J., Duan, S., Deubel, V., & Sun, B. (2006). Severe
acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus 3a pro­
tein forms an ion channel and modulates virus release.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(33),
12540–12545. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0605402103
Magee, A. (1994). Compulsive buying tendency as a predictor
of attitudes and perceptions. Advances in Consumer
Research, 21, 590–594. https://www.acrwebsite.org/
volumes/7656/volumes/v21/NA-21 ,,
Maraz, A., Griffiths, M. D., & Demetrovics, Z. (2016). The pre­
valence of compulsive buying: A meta-analysis. Addiction, 111
(3), 408–419. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.13223
McGuire, W. J. (1974). Psychological motives and communi­
cation gratification. In J. F. Blumler & H. Katz (Eds.), The
uses of mass commrinicatiotrs: Current perspectives on grat­
ification research. Sage. Pp. 106-167.
Melnyk, V., Van Osselaer, S. M., & Bijmolt, T. H. (2009). Are
women more loyal customers than men? Gender differences
in loyalty to firms and individual service providers. Journal
of Marketing, 73(4), 82–96. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.
73.4.082 ,,
Mueller, A., Claes, L., Mitchell, J. E., Faber, R. J., Fischer, J., &
De Zwaan, M. (2011). Does compulsive buying differ
between male and female students? Personality and
Individual Differences, 50(8), 1309–1312. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.paid.2011.02.026 ,,
Mueller, A., Mitchell, J. E., Peterson, L. A., Faber, R. J.,
Steffen, K. J., Crosby, R. D., & Claes, L. (2011). Depression,
materialism, and excessive Internet use in relation to compul­
sive buying. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 52(4), 420–424. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2010.09.001 ,,
Müller, A., Mitchell, J. E., & De Zwaan, M. (2015). Compulsive
buying. The American Journal on Addictions, 24(2),
132–137. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajad.12111 ,,
Muscanell, N. L., & Guadagno, R. E. (2012). Make new friends
or keep the old: Gender and personality differences in social
networking use. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(1),
107–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.016 ,,
Nirmala, R. P., & Dewi, I. J. (2011). The effects of shopping
orientations, consumer innovativeness, purchase experi­
ence, and gender on intention to shop for fashion products
online. Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business, 13
(1), 65–83. https://doi.org/10.22146/gamaijb.5495 ,,
Okazaki, S., & Hirose, M. (2009). Does gender affect media
choice in travel information search? On the use of mobile
Internet. Tourism Management, 30(6), 794–804. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.tourman.2008.12.012 ,,
Otnes, C., & Mcgrath, M. A. (2001). Perceptions and realities
of male shopping behavior. Journal of Retailing, 77(1),
111–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4359(00)00047-6 ,,
Palan, K. M., Morrow, P. C., Trapp, A., & Blackburn, V.
(2014). Compulsive buying behavior in college students:
The mediating role of credit card misuse. Journal of
Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(1), 81–96. https://doi.
org/10.2753/mtp1069-6679190105 ,,
Pandey, S., & Devasagayam, R. (2015). The effect of deals and
moods on compulsive buying in young adults:
A comparison of an indulgence culture and a restraint
culture. Journal of Customer Behaviour, 14(3), 257–270.
https://doi.org/10.1362/147539215X14441363630918 ,,
,, Petter, S., Straub, D., & Rai, A. (2007). Specifying formative
constructs in information systems research. MIS Quarterly,
31(4), 623–656. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148814 ,,
Philip, H. E., Ozanne, L. K., & Ballantine, P. W. (2019).
Exploring online peer-to-peer swapping: A social practice
theory of online swapping. Journal of Marketing Theory and
,, Practice, 27(4), 413–429. https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.
2019.1644955 ,,
Pirog, S. F., & Roberts, J. A. (2007). Personality and credit card
misuse among college students: The mediating role of
impulsiveness. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice,
15(1), 65–77. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-
6679150105 ,,
,, Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., &
Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in beha­
vioral research: A critical review of the literature and
recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88
(5), 879. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 ,,
Raajpoot, N. A., Sharma, A., & Chebat, J.-C. (2008). The role
of gender and work status in shopping center patronage.
Journal of Business Research, 61(8), 825–833. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.09.009 ,,
Reynolds, K. E., & Beatty, S. E. (1999). A relationship customer
typology. Journal of Retailing, 75(4), 509–523. https://doi.
org/10.1016/S0022-4359(99)00016-0 ,,
Roberts, J. A. & Roberts, C. (2012). Stress, gender and compul­
sive buying among early adolescents. Young Consumers, 13
(2), 113–123. https://doi.org/10.1108/17473611211233440 ,,
Rodríguez-Torrico, P., San-Martín, S., & San José-Cabezudo,
R. (2019). What drives M-shoppers to continue using
mobile devices to buy? Journal of Marketing Theory and
Practice, 27(1), 83–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.
2018.1534211 ,,
Rook, D. W., & Hoch, S. J. (1985). Consuming impulses.
Advances in Consumer Research, 12(1), 23–27. https://
www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/6351/volumes/v12/NA-12 ,,
Ryu, M. H., Kim, J., & Kim, S. (2014). Factors affecting appli­
cation developers’ loyalty to mobile platforms. Computers

in Human Behavior, 40, 78–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
chb.2014.08.001 ,,
Sangran, S., Siguaw, J. A., & Guan, C. (2009). A comparative
study of motivational differences for online shopping. The
DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems, 40(4),
28–42. https://doi.org/10.1145/1644953.1644957 ,,
Sarstedt, M., Henseler, J., & Ringle, C. M. (2011). Multigroup
analysis in partial least squares (PLS) path modeling:
Alternative methods and empirical results. In M. Sarstedt,
M. Schwaiger, & C. T. Taylor (Eds.), Measurement and
research methods in international marketing (Advances in
international marketing) (Vol. 22, pp. 195–218). Emerald
Group Publishing Limited.
Scarpi, D., Pizzi, G., & Visentin, M. (2014). Shopping for fun
or shopping to buy: Is it different online and offline? Journal
of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21(3), 258–267. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2014.02.007 ,,
Sebastianelli, R., Tamimi, N., & Rajan, M. (2008). Perceived
quality of online shopping: Does gender make a difference?
Journal of Internet Commerce, 7(4), 445–469. https://doi.
org/10.1080/15332860802507164 ,,
Seock, Y. K., & Bailey, L. R. (2008). The influence of college
students’ shopping orientations and gender differences on
online shopping information searches and purchase beha­
viours. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 32(2),
13–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2007.00647.x ,,
Spence, J. T. (1984). Masculinity, femininity, and
gender-related traits: A conceptual analysis and critique of
current research. Progress in Experimental Personality
Research, 13, 1–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-
541413-5.50006-1 ,,
Stafford, T. F., Turan, A., & Raisinghani, M. S. (2004).
International and cross-cultural influences on online shop­
ping behavior. Journal of Global Information Technology
Management, 7(2), 70–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/
1097198X.2004.10856373 ,,
Suresh, A. S., & Biswas, A. (2019). A study of factors of
internet addiction and its impact on online compulsive
buying behaviour: Indian Millennial Perspective. Global
Business Review, 21(6), 097215091985701. https://doi.org/
10.1177%2F0972150919857011 ,,
Tauber, E. M. (1972). Why do people shop? Journal of
Marketing, 36(4), 46–49.
Tauni, M. Z., Memon, Z. A., Fang, H.-X., Jebran, K., &
Ahsan, T. (2019). Influence of investor and advisor big
five personality congruence on futures trading behavior.
Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 55(15), 1–16.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1540496X.2019.1672529 ,,
JOURNAL OF MARKETING THEORY AND PRACTICE 15
Tett, R. P., Simonet, D. V., Walser, B., & Brown, C. (2013).
Trait activation theory. In N. Christiansen & R. Tett (Eds.),
Handbook of Personality at Work (pp. 71–100). Routledge.
To, P.-L., Liao, C., & Lin, T.-H. (2007). Shopping motivations
on Internet: A study based on utilitarian and hedonic value.
Technovation, 27(12), 774–787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
technovation.2007.01.001 ,,
Van Slyke, C., Belanger, F., Johnson, R. D., & Hightower, R.
(2010). Gender-based differences in consumer e-commerce
adoption. Communications of the Association for
Information Systems, 26(2), 17–34. doi:10.17705/
1CAIS.02602
Van Slyke, C., Comunale, C. L., & Belanger, F. (2002). Gender
differences in perceptions of web-based shopping.
Communications of the ACM, 45(8), 82–86. https://doi.
org/10.1145/545151.545155 ,,
Wang, X., Tauni, M. Z., Zhang, Q., Ali, A., & Ali, F. (2020).
Does buyer-seller personality match enhance impulsive
buying? A green marketing context. The Journal of
Marketing Theory and Practice, 28(4), 1–11. https://doi.
org/10.1080/10696679.2020.1780137 ,,
Wu, J., Wu, Z., & Si, S. (2016). The influences of internet-
based collaboration and intimate interactions in buyer–
supplier relationship on product innovation. Journal of
Business Research, 69(9), 3780– 3787. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.070 ,,
Wu, S. I. (2003). The relationships between consumer char­
acteristics and attitude toward online shopping. Marketing
Intelligence & Planning, 21(1), 37–44. https://doi.org/10.
1108/02634500310458135 ,,
Yu, C., & Bastin, M. (2010). Hedonic shopping value and impulse
buying behavior in transitional economies: A symbiosis in the
Mainland China marketplace. Journal of Brand Management,
18(2), 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1057/bm.2010.32 ,,
Zhang, L., Cude, B. J., & Zhao, H. (2019). Determinants of
Chinese consumers’ purchase intentions for luxury goods.
International Journal of Market Research, 62(3), 369–385.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1470785319853674 ,,
Zhang, X., Prybutok, V. R., & Strutton, D. (2014). Modeling
influences on impulse purchasing behaviors during online
marketing transactions. Journal of Marketing Theory and
Practice, 15(1), 79–89. https://doi.org/10.2753/mtp1069-
6679150106 ,,
Zheng, Y., Yang, X., Liu, Q., Chu, X., Huang, Q., & Zhou, Z.
(2020). Perceived stress and online compulsive buying
among women: A moderated mediation model.
Computers in Human Behavior, 103, 13–20. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.09.012 ,,
16 X. WANG ET AL.

Appendix A.
Measurement invariance of composite models
3rd Step: Composite Equality
st nd
1 Step: Configural Invariance 2 Step: Compositional Invariance MOD VOD MICOM
Adventure Seeking Yes Yes No Yes Partial invariance
Gratification Seeking Yes Yes No Yes Partial invariance
Idea Shopping Yes Yes No Yes Partial invariance
Role-play Shopping Yes No No No No invariance
Social Shopping Yes No No No No invariance
Value Shopping Yes Yes No Yes Partial invariance
Compulsive Online Buying Yes Yes No Yes Partial invariance
MOD = Mean Original Difference, VOD = Variance Original Difference, MICOM = Measurement Invariance of Composite Models