Who is in control? The role of self-perception, knowledge, and income in explaining consumer financial behavior.
Failure to manage personal finances can have serious long-term, negative social and societal consequences. Financial service providers including credit card companies and other lending institutions as well as social marketers claim that the high incidence of bankruptcies, credit problems, poor savings rates, and impulse buying are largely a result of a lack of financial knowledge on the part of consumers. Chang and Hanna (1992) argue that this lack of understanding is due to the fact that many sources of financial information are complex and inaccessible to the average consumer. Several studies conclude that both poor financial information and unrealistic expectations (Taylor and Overbey 1999) as well as a complete lack of information (O'Neill, Bristow, and Brennan 1999; Schuchardt 1998) contribute to a future economic picture that "could be a maze of conflict, debt delinquencies and unpaid bills unless efforts to educate and counsel students about money matters are increased" (Taylor and Overbey 1999, 41). A number of government regulatory agencies, consumer groups, and financial institutions have developed consumer education and outreach programs designed to increase consumers' financial literacy, with a particular focus on minority consumers. As a result, there are a wide variety of approaches to teaching consumers about financial matters currently in use, the majority of which focus on increasing financial knowledge as a means of changing or improving financial management behavior. There has been little empirical study of the relationship between knowledge and behavior, which is important to know in order to assess whether the current strategies are even addressing the fight issue.
The current research examines consumer financial knowledge along with individual differences in income and perceived control over outcomes, measured as locus of control (LOC), and their relationship with reported financial management behavior. Specifically, we examine the effects of income, self-assessed financial knowledge, and LOC as well as the interaction between these variables on responsible financial management behavior. We define responsible financial behavior as the respondent's self-assessed propensity to budget, save money, and control spending. Additionally, consumer ethnicity is included as a potential moderator of these relationships.
Locus of Control
The LOC construct is defined as a general, relatively stable propensity to see the world in a particular way, capturing general beliefs about the causes of rewards and punishments (Rotter 1966). Individuals with an internal LOC generally expect that their actions will produce predictable outcomes and thus are more action oriented or motivated than externals (Hoffman, Novak and Schlosser 2000). Individuals with an external LOC perceive events as being under the control of luck, chance, or powerful others, and as such are less likely than internals to master the skills necessary to accomplish their goals or demonstrate goal-directed arousal (Zimmerman 1995).
Research shows that individuals' self-concept/self-perception influences both financial and nonfinancial preferences and behavior (Hira and Mugenda 1999; Onkivisit and Shaw 1987; Prince 1993). Rubenstein (1981) concludes that how people feel about money depends on how they feel about their lives. More specifically, Tokunaga (1993) and Davies and Lea (1995) find positive relationships between external LOC and the accumulation of credit card debt. Given these findings, Hira and Mugenda (1999) call for financial advisors and educators to recognize that financial beliefs and behaviors meet and are driven by sociopsychological needs as well as practical and financial ones.
The above theory describes internals as more action oriented, motivated, and likely to perform difficult tasks than externals. Given these findings, we predict that externals will be less likely to expend the effort necessary to demonstrate more responsible financial management behavior. This prediction is reflected in Hypothesis 1.
H1: There is a negative relationship between external LOC and responsible financial management behavior.
There are a variety of sources through which knowledge can be acquired, all at varying levels of quality or reliability. These include formal education, such as high school or college courses, seminars and training classes outside of school, as well as informal sources, such as from parents, friends, and work (Keller and Staelin 1987; Lee and Hogarth 1999). In addition to these sources of information, many consumers learn about financial matters through negative personal experiences, i.e., the "school of hard knocks." While the general belief is that people learn best from experience (Hoch and Ha 1986), most research also suggests that learning from experience is difficult (Brehmer 1980; Einhorn and Hogarth 1978; Hogarth and Hilgert 2002).
A number of accounts in the popular press as well as in the economic psychology literature speak to the importance and use of consumers' financial information and knowledge. Recent consumer finance trends underscore this importance and have sparked a renewed interest in and concern for the financial future of consumers. According to the Jump Start Coalition for Personal Financial Literacy, America's young people are leaving school without any basic skills in personal finance, putting them at high risk of becoming adults who end up over their heads in debt, in bankruptcy court, or without adequate savings to retire. In a survey of 1,500 high school students, on average, students answered just 57.3% of the 31-question financial management quiz correctly. Only 10.2% scored a "C" or better (Mandell 1997). As a proposed solution to this growing problem, many researchers have concluded that providing consumers with formal sources of financial information and education may help them achieve more appropriate levels of debt, spending, and saving. In a series of studies, Hogarth and Hilgert (2002) and Hilgert, Hogarth, and Beverly (2003) found that consumers who are financially knowledgeable are more likely to behave in financially responsible ways. Thus, existing research, as well as applied findings, leads to the second hypothesis regarding the effects of ability on consumers' responsible financial management behavior.
H2: There is a positive relationship between financial knowledge and responsible financial management behavior.
It would seem most likely that individuals with more available resources would demonstrate more responsible financial management behavior, given that their available funds give them the opportunity to act responsibly. Hilgert, Hogarth, and Beverly (2003) report that according to the 2001 SCF, respondents with lower incomes were less likely to report paying their bills on time than those with higher incomes. In addition, Aizcorbe, Kennickell, and Moore (2003) found that families with lower incomes are less likely to report saving behavior. While this seems like a somewhat obvious prediction, a model of financial behavior would be incomplete without its inclusion.
H3: There is a positive relationship between income and responsible financial management behavior.
In addition to these main effects, we predict that indirect effects between these variables exist. Indirect or mediation effects occur when an independent variable influences the dependent through its effects on or as a result of a mediator variable (Baron and Kenny 1986). In this case, financial knowledge is the independent variable and LOC serves as the mediator variable. Specifically, we predict that financial knowledge affects LOC, a non-situation specific individual characteristic, which in turn affects behavior. That is, the ways in which individuals apply their knowledge will depend on whether they believe that they have control over outcomes. Following this reasoning, we predict that the relationship between financial knowledge and behavior is mediated by LOC.
H4: The relationship between financial knowledge and responsible financial management behavior is mediated by LOC.
In addition to the relationship between financial resources and responsible financial management behavior suggested in Hypothesis 3, we test for indirect effects of financial resources, i.e., income on responsible financial behavior. To examine these effects, we look to research on self-efficacy, a construct closely related to LOC. Self-efficacy refers to an individual's belief in a particular context or situation that he/she has the resources, options, and ability to successfully execute the behavior required to produce an outcome (Lazarus and Folkman 1984). It has been argued (Bandura 1986) that whether or not people will undertake particular actions, attempt to perform particular tasks, or meet certain goals depends on whether they believe that they will be successful in performing these actions. The stronger this perceived self-efficacy, the more one will exert effort and persist at a task (Fiske and Taylor 1991). Thus, along with having the literal resources (income) to demonstrate responsible financial management behavior, individuals must also feel that the information is important and relevant to them and will enable them to make a difference in the outcome.
H5: The relationship between income and responsible financial management behavior is mediated by external LOC.
The Role of Ethnicity
The working belief in the fields of financial services and social marketing is that there is a relationship between race and financial behavior. This belief is exemplified by the fact that many of the programs currently in place to address financial management behavior are targeted at subpopulations based on ethnicity, focusing primarily on minority (i.e., black and Hispanic) populations. While this relationship between ethnicity and financial behavior may exist, it is likely that these differences result not simply from racial or ethnic variations but from social, economic, and psychological factors such as the ones examined in the current research. While past research has shown mixed and inconclusive findings regarding the correlation between race and LOC, some studies point to a correlation between the two such that minorities (particularly African Americans) are believed to be more likely than whites to report an external LOC (Porter and Washington 1979). However, the relationship between minority status and LOC is found to be complex and not as yet completely understood (Mickelson 1990). Ethnicity and income are correlated such that incomes for African Americans and Hispanics in the United States are significantly lower than that for whites (Aizcorbe, Kennickell, and Moore 2003). In addition, minority group members on average have fewer assets and less experience with financial markets and financial services. These correlations lead to the following three hypotheses regarding the role of ethnicity in the relationship between LOC, income, and knowledge and responsible financial management behavior:
H6: Race/ethnicity moderates the relationship between LOC and responsible financial management behavior.
H7: Race/ethnicity moderates the relationship between income and responsible financial management behavior.
H8: Race/ethnicity moderates the relationship between financial knowledge and responsible financial management behavior.
We use data from the 1999 Freddie Mac Consumer Credit Survey to test our hypotheses. The purpose of the Consumer Credit Survey was to better understand consumer attitudes, behaviors, knowledge, and experiences with credit and financial management in order to find ways to help more consumers become homeowners. This survey collects detailed information on individual and household characteristics of consumers drawn from mail panels from two independent research firms. Approximately 23,000 surveys were mailed to individuals between 20 and 40 years of age with incomes below $75,000 per year since this segment represents the most likely pool of first-time homebuyers. The response rate was approximately 51%. The analysis reported here is based on 10,997 usable observations. The questions asked on the survey instrument were largely based upon earlier focus group findings, other surveys, and studies related to credit.
Because the sample in this data set was drawn from a voluntary consumer survey respondent pool, there may be certain biases due to nonresponse. In addition, these findings may not be generalizable to individuals with moderate and high incomes because the sample was restricted to families with incomes at or below $75,000. This exclusion may disproportionately affect white and Asian American respondents who have higher average incomes than African American and Hispanic respondents.
The main explanatory constructs in our model of financial management behavior include LOC, financial knowledge, and income. We also include race or ethnic background as interactions between race/ethnicity and each of the main constructs.
Financial management behavior is a 5-item measure of the respondent's self-assessed ability to budget, save money, and control spending. These responsible financial behaviors include controlling spending, paying bills on time, planning for one's financial future, saving money, and providing for one's self and family. Scores on this scale are a summation of the ratings on each of the five scale items ranging from 5 to 25. Higher scores correspond to higher levels of responsible financial behavior. These items, as well as those for other model constructs, are listed in Appendix 1. One limitation of this study is that reported financial behavior may not be equivalent to actual financial behavior.
External LOC is composed of the 7-item version of Rotter's LOC scale (Rotter 1975).
There are three distinct but related ways in which consumer knowledge is conceptualized and measured: objective knowledge, subjective knowledge, and experience (Flynn and Goldsmith 1999). Here our financial knowledge construct is a multiple-item scale that measures an individual's self-assessed ratings of knowledge about financial matters related to borrowing and investing. Scores on this scale are a summation of the ratings on each of the five scale items. This subjective measure of financial knowledge is significantly and positively correlated (r = .3570; p < .0001), with an objective measure of financial knowledge also collected in this questionnaire (Perry and Ards 2002).
Income is a self-reported measure of annual household income on a 9-point scale, ranging from less than $15,000 to over $100,000. We have used this to create a dummy variable coded 1 for incomes over $35,000 and zero otherwise.
Finally, race/ethnicity is captured by a series of binary variables for African American, Hispanic/Latino, Asian American, or white respondents. These categories are based on the 2000 Census definitions, although recategorized so that Hispanic or Latino individuals, regardless of their race, are included in the Hispanic/Latino category. Thus, members of the African American and white categories are non-Hispanic.
Table 1 shows correlations between all constructs in the proposed model of financial management behavior. All variable pairs are significantly correlated at the 0.01 level due to the large sample size. Results of this correlation analysis show a negative relationship to exist between external LOC and financial knowledge, and a negative relationship between external LOC and responsible financial management behavior. This suggests that externals have less financial knowledge, and externals are less likely to engage in responsible financial behavior. We also find a positive relationship between income and responsible financial management behavior. That is, individuals with higher incomes are more likely to engage in responsible financial behaviors. The size of the correlation between external LOC and responsible financial management behavior is -0.0983, and the correlation between financial knowledge and responsible financial management behavior is 0.2760. These findings suggest that externals and people with lower levels of financial knowledge are less likely to engage in responsible financial management behaviors, while people with low incomes are more likely to engage in these behaviors. We test these relationships again in a regression model (reported in Table 2) that controls for the effects of other individual difference variables.
Table 1 also reports Cronbach's alpha reliability estimates for each of the multiple-item scale in the model. In general, Cronbach's alpha coefficient measures the extent to which individual items that constitute a multiple-item scale correlate with one another or the total for all items in that measure. This coefficient is a widely used index of internal consistency or reliability of a scale. A coefficient alpha of 0.70 or higher is generally considered to be evidence of acceptable reliability (DeVellis 1991).
Table 2 shows the results of a multiple regression model in which responsible financial behavior is regressed on external LOC, financial knowledge, and income as well as dummy variables for African American, Hispanic/ Latino, and Asian American persons. The omitted category in this regression comprises white respondents. This model also includes interactions between LOC, knowledge, a dummy for incomes greater than $35,000 per year, and each racial/ethnic dummy. The overall F value for this model is 202.55, which is significant at the 0.01 level, and the [R.sup.2] is 0.22. However, it is important to exercise caution when interpreting statistical significance in this study because of the large sample size.
Our findings support Hypotheses 1 through 3. According to H1, we should find a negative relationship between external LOC and financial management behavior. That is, externals will be less likely to engage in responsible financial management behavior. The coefficient on the external LOC variable is significant and negative, in support of ill, although the size of this standardized coefficient suggests that the effect of this variable is small. H2 proposed that individuals with higher levels of financial knowledge are more likely to engage in responsible financial management behavior. The coefficient on financial knowledge is significant and positive. Thus, H2 is supported. According to H3, there is a positive relationship between income and responsible financial management behavior. That is, people with higher incomes should be more likely to engage in responsible financial management behaviors. The coefficient on the income dummy variable is positive, which supports H3. Overall, these findings suggest that our proposed framework can be used to explain financial management behavior. However, financial knowledge has a larger direct effect on behavior than the other constructs. Knowledge has a standardized coefficient of 0.23, while the coefficient on the income dummy is only 0.14 and on LOC is -0.13.
H4 posits that LOC mediates the relationship between financial knowledge and responsible financial management behavior. Table 3 shows the results of a series of regression models used to conduct a Sobel test of mediation (Baron and Kenny 1986). We use this test to determine whether the relationship between knowledge and responsible financial management behavior is mediated by LOC. Thus, our independent variable is financial knowledge, the mediating variable is LOC, and the dependent variable is financial management behavior. First, the mediating variable is regressed on the independent variable (Model 1), the dependent variable is regressed on the independent variable (Model 2), the dependent variable is regressed on the mediator (Model 3), and the dependent variable is regressed on both the mediator and the independent variable (Model 4). The equation for the Sobel test suggested in Baron and Kenny (1986) is as follows:
Z value = ab/SQRT([b.sup.2][s.sup.2.sub.a] + [a.sup.2][s.sup.2.sub.b])
where a = the coefficient of the regression of the independent variable on the mediator, [s.sub.a] = the standard error of a, b = the coefficient of the regression of the mediator and the independent variables on the dependent variable, and [s.sub.b] = the standard error of b. The coefficients on the independent variables in each of these models must be significant in order for mediation to occur. In addition, the coefficient on the independent variable is smaller when paired with the mediator than when it is the sole independent variable. Results of the Sobel test suggest that the indirect effect of knowledge on behavior via LOC is significantly different from zero (F = 21.65, p < .01). Thus, H4 is supported.
H5 proposes that LOC also mediates the relationship between income and financial management behavior. A similar mediation analysis is reported in Table 4. Here we test whether LOC mediates the relationship between income and financial management behavior. In this case, financial management behavior is the dependent variable and mediating variables remain the same. The independent variable is income. Following the procedure described above, the model results presented in Table 4 show that all coefficients are significant, and the coefficient on income is smaller when paired with LOC than it is otherwise. Results of the formal Sobel test suggest that the indirect effect of income on behavior via LOC is significantly different from zero (F = 19.706, p = .01). These findings support H5.
The moderating effects of race and ethnic background are shown in the regression presented in Table 2. These results must be interpreted with caution because much of the statistical significance is driven by the large sample size, and the coefficients are small.
Interestingly, Hispanic/Latino was the only significant dummy variable measuring direct effects of race or ethnicity. However, there is some evidence that race/ethnicity can moderate the effects of LOC, financial knowledge, and income on responsible financial management behavior. For example, the interaction of African American with external LOC is significant and positive, as was the interaction of Hispanic/Latino with external LOC. This was not the case for the Asian interaction with LOC. Thus, we find that African American and Hispanic/Latino externals are more likely to engage in financial management behaviors than their white counterparts. Thus, H6 is partially supported.
In terms of interactions between race/ethnicity and low income, the coefficient on the African American/income interaction was marginally significant (p = .0067) and negative, suggesting that African Americans with low incomes are more likely to engage in responsible financial management behavior than their low-income white counterparts. The Asian and Hispanic/Latino interactions were not significant. Thus, H7 is partially supported.
In terms of financial knowledge, only the Hispanic/Latino interaction with financial knowledge was significant. This suggests that Hispanics with higher levels of financial knowledge are more likely than knowledgeable whites to engage in responsible financial management behaviors. The African American and Asian interactions with knowledge were not significant, which means that the effects of knowledge on behavior for these groups are no different than they are for whites. These findings partially support H8.
Given these results, we can conclude that LOC mediates the effects of both financial knowledge and income on responsible financial management behavior. Evidence of race and ethnicity as moderators is mixed, as these findings suggest that the effects of financial knowledge, LOC, and income may differ for African American and to a lesser extent Hispanic and Asian consumers. It is important to note that despite evidence of statistical significance, the regression coefficients and thus the magnitude of the effects reported here are small.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS
Our findings generally support the premise that consumers' propensity to save, budget, and control spending depends partly on their level of perceived control over outcomes as well as knowledge and financial resources. LOC appears to have a significant impact on responsible financial management behavior both directly and indirectly, although this impact is small in most cases. In particular, we find that an individual's LOC mediates the effects of financial knowledge and income on behavior. This suggests that individuals may not take full advantage of their knowledge or financial resources unless they feel that they control their own financial destiny. Although knowledge and income are important, those who believe that financial outcomes are due to chance or powerful others, i.e., externals, will be slightly less likely to take steps to manage their finances.
It is difficult, however, to draw conclusions about the direction of causality here, particularly in the relationship between self-assessed financial knowledge and reported financial behavior. For example, self-assessed financial knowledge and self-reported financial behavior may be similar in the minds of respondents.
These findings imply that financial management behavior may vary by race and ethnic background, and it also appears that LOC may have different effects for different groups. In particular, African American and Hispanic/ Latino externals were more likely to engage in responsible financial management behaviors than white or Asian externals, although these effects are small.
One possible explanation for these results could be differences in beliefs or expectations of unfair or discriminatory treatment. Because of historical discrimination against disadvantaged minorities in employment and financial markets, members of these groups may be more sensitive to negative and unforeseen events. For example, black Americans are more likely to report discrimination in a wide range of important life domains including housing, education, and employment (Schmitt and Branscombe 2002; Sigelman and Welch 1991). These minorities, when externals, may be more likely than nonminorities to control their spending and save money in order to protect themselves against bad luck or powerful others.
Clearly there are substantial negative costs to consumers and to society when consumers lack financial knowledge. When consumers are misinformed or make financial decisions that result in loan defaults, for example, these costs increase interest rates for other consumers and can trigger losses for private investors as well as for the federal government. Consumers who fail to understand the credit rating system may engage in behaviors that have both immediate and long-term negative effects on their ability to obtain mortgage or business loans and on wealth accumulation in general. In recent years, a number of federal regulators and state government agencies as well as private lending institutions have devoted resources toward consumer financial literacy programs. These results provide empirical evidence that financial knowledge has a significant effect on financial outcomes, suggesting that devoting resources to consumer financial education may be worthwhile.
Several studies, including the one reported here, have found evidence of the relationship between individual differences and financial behavior. For example, this study finds that consumer knowledge and LOC significantly affect consumers' financial management behavior. What have yet to be explored are the antecedents of financial knowledge, and what are the most effective ways for consumers to acquire this knowledge. In addition, future research should explore underlying sources and influences that affect financially oriented values and beliefs, in an effort to understand how to better prepare consumers for responsible decision making.
Consumer Credit Survey Variables Responsible Financial Behavior How do you grade yourself in the following areas? Poor Fair Okay Good Excellent a. Controlling my spending      b. Paying my bills on time      c. Planning for my financial future      d. Providing for myself and my family      e. Saving money      Locus-of-Control How often do you feel ...? Almost Almost Never seldom sometimes often always a. There is really no way I can solve some of my problems      b. I am being pushed around in life      c. There is little I can do to change the important things in my life      d. I can do anything I set my mind to      e. What happens to me in the future depends on me      f. Helpless in dealing with the problems of life      g. I have little control over the things that happen to me      Financial Knowledge How much do you know about the following? Very A fair Nothing little Some amount A lot a. Interest rates, finance charges, and credit terms      b. Credit ratings and credit files      c. Managing finances      d. Investing money      e. What is on your credit report      Income * What is your (and your spouse's combined) total before-tax income? Please consider income from all sources, including work, alimony, child support, rental income, investment income and any other money you may receive. (MARK ONE ANSWER ONLY)  Under $15,000  $15,000 to $24,999  $25,000 to $34,999  $35,000 to $44,999  $45,000 to $54,999  $55,000 to $64,999  $65,000 to $74,999  $75,000 to $100,000  Over $100,000
Aizcorbe, Ana M., Arthur B. Kennickell, and Kevin B. Moore. 2003. Recent Changes in U.S. Family Finances: Evidence from the 1998 and 2001 Survey of Consumer Finances. Federal Reserve Bulletin, 89 (January): 1-32.
Bandura, Albert. 1986. Differential Engagement of Self-Reactive Influences in Cognitive Motivation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 38 (August): 92-114.
Baron, R.M. and D.A. Kenny. 1986. The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51 (6): 1173-1182.
Brehmer, Bemdt. 1980. In One Word: Not from Experience. Acta Psychologica, 45 (August): 223-241.
Brucks, Merrie. 1985. The Effects of Product Class Knowledge on Information Search Behavior. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 12 (June): 1-16.
Chang, Regina Y. and Sherman Hanna. 1992. Consumer Credit Search Behavior. Journal of Consumer Studies and Home Economics, 16: 207-227.
Davies, Emma and Stephen E. G. Lea. 1995. Student Attitudes to Student Debt. Journal of Economic Psychology, 16 (4): 663-679.
DeVellis, Robert F. 1991. Scale Development: Theory and Applications. New York: Sage Publications.
Einhorn, Hillel J. and Robin M. Hogarth. 1978. Confidence in Judgment: Persistence of the Illusion of Validity. Psychological Review, 85 (5): 395-416.
Fiske, Susan, T. and Shelley E. Taylor. 1991. Social Cognition. New York: McGraw Hill, Inc.
Flynn, Leisa, R. and Ronald E. Goldsmith. 1999. A Short, Reliable Measure of Subjective Knowledge. Journal of Business Research, 46 (September): 57-66.
Hilgert, Marianne A., Jeanne M. Hogarth, and Sondra Beverly. 2003. Household Financial Management: The Connection between Knowledge and Behavior. Federal Reserve Bulletin, 89 (7): 309-322.
Hira, Tahira, K. and Olive M. Mugenda. 1999. The Relationships between Self-Worth and Financial Beliefs, Behavior, and Satisfaction. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 91 (4): 76-82.
Hoch, Stephen J. and Young-Won Ha. 1986. Consumer Learning: Advertising and the Ambiguity of Product Experience. Journal of Consumer Research, 13 (September): 221-233.
Hoffman, Donna, L., Thomas P. Novak, and Anne Schlosser, A. 2000. Consumer Control in Online Environments. Unpublished manuscript, eLab, Owen Graduate School of Management, Vanderbilt University, February 25.
Hogarth, Jeanne M. and Marianne A. Hilgert. 2002. Financial Knowledge, Experience and Learning Preferences: Preliminary Results from a New Survey on Financial Literacy. Consumer Interests Annual, 48.
Keller, Kevin Lane and Richard Staelin. 1987. Effects of Quality and Quantity of Information on Decision Effectiveness. Journal of Consumer Research, 21 (June): 1-31.
Lazarus, Richard S. and Susan Folkman. 1984. Coping and Adaptation. In The Handbook of Behavioral Medicine, edited by W.D. Gentry (282-325). New York: Guilford.
Lee, Jinkook and Jeanne M. Hogarth. 1999. The Price of Money: Consumers Understanding of APRs and Contract Interest Rates. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 18 (Spring): 66-76.
Mandell, Lewis. 1997. Out Vulnerable Youth: The Financial Literacy of American 12th Graders. Washington, DC: Jump Start Coalition for Financial Literacy.
Mickelson, Roslyn. 1990. The Attitude-Achievement Paradox among Black Adolescents. Sociology of Education, 63 (1): 44-61.
O'Neill, Barbara, Barbara Bristow, and Patricia Brennan. 1999. Changing Financial Behavior: Implications for Family and Consumer Sciences Professionals. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 91 (Fall): 43-48.
Onkivisit, S. and J. Shaw. 1987. Self-Concept, Self-Image Congruence: Some Research and Managerial Implications. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 4 (1): 13-23.
Perry, Vanessa G. and Sheila M. Ards. 2002. CreditSmart [c] Research: A Study of Consumer Financial Knowledge and Implications for Social Marketing. Social Marketing Quarterly, 8 (3): 3-16.
Porter, J.R. and R.E. Washington. 1979. Black Identity and Self-Esteem: A Review of Studies of Black Self-Concept. Annual Review of Sociology, 5: 53-74.
Prince, Melvin. 1993. Self-Concept, Money Beliefs, and Values. Journal of Economic Psychology, 14 (3): 161-173.
Rotter, Julian B. 1966. Generalized Expectancies for Internal versus External Control of Reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 80, 1 (whole no. 609).
--. 1975. Some Problems and Misconceptions Related to the Construct of Internal versus External Control of Reinforcement. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43 (2): 56-67.
Rubenstein, C. 1981. Money and Self-Esteem, Relationships, Secrecy, and Satisfaction. Psychology Today, 15 (5): 29-44.
Schmitt, Michael T. and Nyla R. Branscombe. 2002. The Meaning and Consequences of Perceived Discrimination in Disadvantaged and Privileged Social Groups. In European Review of Social Psychology, edited by W. Stroebe and M. Hewstone (167-199). Chichester, England: Wiley.
Schuchardt, Jane. 1998. Study Shows Teens Respond Well to Financial Education. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 90 (4): 69-70.
Sigelman, L. and S. Welch. 1991. Black Americans' Views of Racial Inequality: The Dream Deferred. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Taylor, D.S. and Gail Overbey. 1999. Financial Practices and Expectations of Student and Non-student Consumers. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 91 (4): 39-42.
Tokunaga, Howard. 1993. The Use and Abuse of Consumer Credit: Application of Psychological Theory and Research. Journal of Economic Psychology, 14 (3): 285-316.
Zimmerman, Marc A. 1995. Psychological Empowerment: Issues and Illustrations. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23 (October): 581-602.
Vanessa G. Perry is an assistant professor of marketing at George Washington University School of Business and Public Management, Washington, DC (firstname.lastname@example.org). Marlene D. Morris is a visiting assistant professor of marketing at the University of Southern California.
Data were provided by the Freddie Mac Consumer Credit Survey. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of Freddie Mac, its management, shareholders, or board of directors.
TABLE 1 Means, Standard Deviations, Reliabilities, and Correlations Standard Cronbach's Construct Mean Deviation Alpha Financial 16.05 5.45 0.8281 management behavior External LOC 9.72 6.61 0.8653 Financial 15.42 7.40 0.9101 knowledge Income > $35,000 0.51 0.50 -- Pearson Correlation Coefficients (n = 11,862) Financial Management External Financial Construct Behavior LOC Knowledge Income Financial 1 management behavior External LOC -0.0983 1 Financial 0.2760 -0.0311 1 knowledge Income > $35,000 0.1926 -0.1253 0.1837 1 Note: All correlation coefficients are significant at p G .01 level. TABLE 2 Regression Model of Responsible Financial Management Behavior Parameter Standard Variable Estimate Error T Value Intercept 13.64788 0.24243 56.3 External LOC -0.1115 0.01299 -8.58 Financial knowledge 0.17097 0.01052 16.26 Income over $35,000 1.52942 0.15712 9.73 African American -0.75458 0.32093 -2.35 Asian American 1.32035 0.63045 2.09 Latino/Hispanic -1.50415 0.40098 -3.75 African American x external LOC 0.08648 0.01683 5.14 Latino x external LOC 0.06049 0.02143 2.82 Asian x external LOC -0.02891 0.03397 -0.85 African American x income >$35,000 -0.64577 0.23797 -2.71 Latino x income >$35,000 -0.06859 0.26824 -0.26 Asian x income >$35,000 0.59421 0.34926 1.70 African American x knowledge 0.00235 0.01503 0.16 Latino x knowledge 0.06296 0.01907 3.3 Asian x knowledge -0.01409 0.02497 -0.56 Standardized Variable Pr > |t| Estimate Intercept <0.0001 0 External LOC <0.0001 -0.13506 Financial knowledge <0.0001 0.23203 Income over $35,000 <0.0001 0.14016 African American 0.0187 -0.06375 Asian American 0.0363 0.07404 Latino/Hispanic 0.0002 -0.11109 African American x external LOC <0.0001 0.09763 Latino x external LOC 0.0048 0.05311 Asian x external LOC 0.3947 -0.01828 African American x income >$35,000 0.0067 -0.039 Latino x income >$35,000 0.7982 -0.00379 Asian x income >$35,000 0.0889 0.02739 African American x knowledge 0.8759 0.00356 Latino x knowledge 0.001 0.07807 Asian x knowledge 0.5726 -0.01409 Note: Overall F = 99.83; P = .0001; [R.sup.2] = 0.1122; adjusted [R.sup.2] = 0.1111; N = 11,862. TABLE 3 Regression Analysis of Financial Behavior as a Function of Knowledge and Control Independent Variables Dependent Variables Coefficients Model 1 Knowledge LOC -0.3849 Model 2 Knowledge Financial behavior 0.3927 Model 3 LOC Financial behavior -0.2907 Model 4 Knowledge Financial behavior 0.3215 LOC -0.2053 Note: All coefficients are significant at p < .0001 level. TABLE 4 Regression Analysis of Financial Behavior as a Function of Income and Control Independent Variables Dependent Variables Coefficients Model 1 Over 35 LOC -1.6556 Model 2 Over 35 Financial behavior 2.1013 Model 3 LOC Financial behavior -0.0811 Model 4 Over 35 Financial behavior 1.9984 LOC -0.0622 Note: All coefficients are significant at p < .0001 level.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Author:||Perry, Vanessa G.; Morris, Marlene D.|
|Publication:||Journal of Consumer Affairs|
|Date:||Dec 22, 2005|
|Previous Article:||Use of food pantries and food stamps in low-income households in the United States.|
|Next Article:||The emergence of biometrics and its effect on consumers.|