Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35465462›Full record

ArticlePsychology & marketing2022

Has the COVID-19 pandemic made us more materialistic? The effect of COVID-19 and lockdown restrictions on the endorsement of materialism.

Olaya Moldes, Denitsa Dineva, Lisbeth Ku

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Psychology & marketing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Hypocrisy in ethical consumption.Frontiers in psychology · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Olaya MoldesDepartment of Marketing and Strategy, Cardiff Business School Cardiff University Cardiff UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5790-6634
Denitsa DinevaDepartment of Marketing and Strategy, Cardiff Business School Cardiff University Cardiff UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0451-9021
Lisbeth KuSchool of Applied Social Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences De Montfort University Leicester UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7334-5910

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an increase in the factors that typically facilitate the endorsement of materialistic values (e.g., higher media consumption, stress and anxiety, loneliness, death anxiety, and lower moods). In this paper, we examine how contextual changes affecting the antecedents of materialism influence its advocacy with a mixed-method approach. First, a correlational study (Study 1) suggests that increases in media consumption and stress and anxiety during the pandemic predicted current levels of materialism, however, these effects were limited. Second, contrary to our expectations, a longitudinal study (Study 2) shows that people's focus on money decreased during the pandemic. Last, a social media content analysis (Study 3) reveals a downward trend in users' online discourses about consumption-related behaviors, but an upward trend in brands promoting spending as a way to attain well-being. The observed effects could fuel deeper societal change in the labor market and in consumer behavior, and have further implications for individual and societal well-being in a post-pandemic world. We recommend future interventions aimed at diminishing materialistic attitudes to examine the effects of decreasing media consumption and to explore how other factors introduced by the pandemic (e.g., a health or well-being focus) might moderate its advocacy.

Indexed as

attitude changeconsumptioncontextual effectsCOVID‐19materialismmedia consumptionmoney

Identifiers

PMID35465462
PMCPMC9015585

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.