Valuing money and possessions goes with lower well-being across 259 samples, a 2014 meta-analysis finds
Dittmar, Bond, Hurst and Kasser pooled 753 effect sizes. Materialist values correlated with lower well-being (r about minus 0.19). Strongest for risky health behaviour and harsh self-judgement, weakest for life satisfaction.
Suggestive but preliminary. Not settled. how we score evidence
Caveat on this rating: A meta-analysis of correlational studies led by authors who have long argued materialism is harmful; the pooled correlation is small and cause is not established in either direction.
The largest pooled analysis of the link between extrinsic goals, meaning money, possessions and image, and how people feel.
Significant findings
Dittmar and colleagues examined 753 effect sizes from 259 independent samples. Materialism was associated with "significantly lower well-being" on the most widely used measures: materialist values and beliefs r = -0.19 (corrected -0.24), and relative importance of materialist goals r = -0.16 (-0.21). Measures of emphasis on money alone showed weaker links (r = -0.08 to -0.11). The relationship depended on the outcome: largest for "risky health and consumer behaviors and for negative self-appraisals" (r = -0.28 to -0.44), weakest for life satisfaction and negative affect (r = -0.13 to -0.15). The strength varied with gender and age, with whether study or work settings supported materialist values, with cultures that emphasise affective autonomy, and with economic growth and wealth differentials. Mediation analyses suggested the negative link "may be explained by poor psychological need satisfaction".
The other direction
Almost all of the evidence is correlational, and the authors say progress "likely will require more experimental, longitudinal, and developmental research". A correlation of -0.19 is small: most of the variation in well-being has nothing to do with materialism. Cause could run either way, from feeling bad to wanting more, or both could come from a third factor. One author, Tim Kasser, is a long-standing critic of materialism, and the analysis was theory-led. Funding is not stated in the abstract.
What this does not show
It does not show that giving up goals about money would make a given person happier, and it says nothing about treatment.
Worth asking
Which of my goals are about how I look to others, and how do I feel after reaching one?
Source
The relationship between materialism and personal well-being: A meta-analysis — Dittmar H, Bond R, Hurst M, Kasser T (2014)
Reputable peer-reviewed journal
Read the source: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037409
DOI: 10.1037/a0037409
How this was scored
- Study design
- Systematic review of observational studies
- Funding
- Funding not disclosed
- Published in
- Reputable peer-reviewed journal
- Sample size
- not recorded
- Preregistered
- not recorded
- Conflicts disclosed
- not recorded
- Independent of proponent
- not recorded
- Retracted
- No
Read the full scoring rubric, including what it can't tell you.
Published October 7, 2026.
Questions
How strong is the evidence behind this?
veisund rates this source "early signal". Suggestive but preliminary. Not settled. It scores 52 out of 100 on our published rubric. One caveat travels with that badge: A meta-analysis of correlational studies led by authors who have long argued materialism is harmful; the pooled correlation is small and cause is not established in either direction. The score is calculated from recorded facts about the source — study design, funding, publication venue, sample size, preregistration — not typed in by an editor.
What is the source for this?
The relationship between materialism and personal well-being: A meta-analysis — Dittmar H, Bond R, Hurst M, Kasser T (2014). Published in: Reputable peer-reviewed journal. DOI: 10.1037/a0037409. The full source is linked on this page so you can read it yourself.
Who paid for this research, and does that matter?
Study design: Systematic review of observational studies. Funding: Funding not disclosed. Independence from the proponent is not recorded. Industry sponsorship is one of the most reliably measured biases in medicine, which is why funding carries real weight in the score rather than sitting in a footnote.
Is this medical advice?
This is information to bring to your prescriber, not medical advice and not a reason to change anything on your own. Nothing here is an instruction to stop or reduce a medication. If you are in crisis, call or text 988.
This is information to bring to your prescriber, not medical advice and not a reason to change anything on your own. Nothing here is an instruction to stop or reduce a medication. If you are in crisis, call or text 988.