Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36743248›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2023

Consumer loneliness: A systematic review and research agenda.

Shanshan Huang, Mingfei Li

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shanshan HuangSchool of Economics and Management, Hubei Minzu University, Enshi, Hubei, China.
Mingfei LiSchool of Economics and Management, Hubei Minzu University, Enshi, Hubei, China.
Minzu University of China · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Treading on the heels of the spread of the coronavirus, the "loneliness virus" has been capturing territories globally. Consumers are not immune to loneliness. Although academics and the general public have recognized the devastating effects of loneliness, the academic attention given to consumer loneliness (CL) is scattered and fragmentary. The purpose of this article is to systematically review the antecedents (predictors and alleviators) and consequences (consumer behaviors, emotions, preferences, attitudes, and cognition) of CL in various consumption contexts. This review also presents findings on CL as a mediator and moderator in consumer studies. This work adds to the growing body of CL literature by synthesizing the existing findings and knowledge. More importantly, we present a future research agenda by linking CL to significant research lines and detailed implications for practitioners in the marketplace.

Indexed as

consumer behaviorsconsumer lonelinessempirical researchlonely consumersquality of life

Identifiers

PMID36743248
PMCPMC9895855
OpenAlexW4317521289

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.