University of Rhode Island

DigitalCommons@URI

Human Development and Family Science Human Development and Family Science
Faculty Publications

2021

Antecedents and consequences of Personal Financial

Management Behavior: a systematic literature review and future
research agenda
Kirti Goyal

Satish Kumar

Jing Jian Xiao

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/hdf_facpubs

The University of Rhode Island Faculty have made this article openly available.
Please let us know how Open Access to this research benefits you.
This is a pre-publication author manuscript of the final, published article.
Terms of Use
This article is made available under the terms and conditions applicable towards Open Access
Policy Articles, as set forth in our Terms of Use.
 Accepted for Publication

International Journal of Bank Marketing

(ABDC-A, ABS-2, SSCI Indexed, IF=2.8)

Antecedents and Consequences of Personal Financial Management

Behavior: A Systematic Literature Review and Future Research Agenda

Kirti Goyal, Satish Kumar* and Jing Jian Xiao

1. Kirti Goyal, Research Scholar, Department of Management Studies, Malaviya

National Institute of Technology Jaipur, Rajasthan, 302017, India. Email:

[email protected]

2. Corresponding Author*: Satish Kumar, Associate Professor of Finance, Department

of Management Studies, Malaviya National Institute of Technology Jaipur, Rajasthan,

302017, India Email: [email protected]

Adjunct Associate Professor, Swinburne University of Technology, Swinburne

Business School, Jalan Simpang Tiga, 93350 Kuching, Sarawak, MALAYSIA

3. Jing Jian Xiao, Professor, Department of Human Development and Family Science,

University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI 02881, USA. Email: [email protected]

 Antecedents and Consequences of Personal Financial Management
Behavior: A Systematic Literature Review and Future Research Agenda

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the current state of research on Personal
Financial Management Behavior (PFMB), with a prime focus on its antecedents and the
consequences. By analyzing the research trends, methods, determinants, and outcomes, the
PFMB literature is synthesized, and agenda for future research is suggested. A framework is
presented that portrays PFMB's antecedents and consequences and further specification of the
mediation and moderation linkages.

Design/Methodology/approach – The review is based on 160 articles published during 1970-

2020. It follows a systematic approach and presents the definitions and theories of PFMB,
publication trends based on time, region, sample population, research designs, data collection
and analysis techniques, along with antecedents and outcomes through content analysis.

Findings - The synthesis draws upon various factors affecting PFMB, such as demographics,
socio-economic, psychological, social, cultural, financial experience, financial literacy (FL),
and technological factors. The prominent outcomes of PFMB include financial satisfaction,
relationship satisfaction, quality of life, financial success, happiness, financial
vulnerability/resilience, and financial well-being. The future research agenda sums up the
recommendations in the form of research questions on variables and their linkages, followed
by methodological advancements.

Originality/value – This paper covers the scholarly work done in this area in the past 51 years.
To the best of authors’ knowledge, this is the first attempt to offer a most comprehensive and
collective scholarship of this subject. It further gives an extensive future research agenda.

Keywords Systematic literature review, Personal financial management behavior, Financial

management behavior, Financial behavior

Paper type: Literature review

1
1. Introduction
In today's modernized age with all facets of development, people own much more money than
in the past. Robust financial health and overall well-being lead to the objectives of an
individual's life (Boon et al., 2011). Furthermore, with an upsurge in cost of living,
complexities in making financial choices, liberal credit, and social security reforms, it is
imperative that people take charge of planning and managing their finances in their own best
interest (Xu and Zia, 2012). "Personal Financial Management Behavior (PFMB) is a process
which assimilates all components of individuals' financial interest. These include cash flow
management, investments, risk management, retirement planning, tax planning, and estate
planning" (Altfest, 2004, p.54). Robust PFMB would make individuals sense security and,
eventually, financial freedom (Hilgert et al., 2003). Missteps in managing personal finances
can have a profound long-term impact (Estelami, 2014). Recently, unsuccessful PFMB has
been avidly concerned (Lusardi et al., 2020). Individuals lack knowledge of financial concepts
due to which economic decisions made by them influence their current financial well-being
and future saving goals (Schuchardt et al., 2007). Building from consumer financial narratives,
perceived financial well-being is conceptualized as stress over current finances and a sense of
security about achieving future financial goals (Netemeyer et al., 2018).
Taking charge of finances does not only mean establishing a daily household budget but also
saving and investing in building a shield for future expenses, either predictable (buying a house,
car, or education) or unpredictable (loss of a job or health issues) along with assuring stress-
free post-retirement years through a blanket financial plan (Kidwell and Turrisi, 2004; Copur
and Gutter, 2019). In this study, PFMB is defined as a set of multi-dimensional behavioral
indicators concerning the planning, implementation, and evaluation comprised in the areas of
cash flow, credit, savings and investments, insurance, retirement and estate planning as well as
income and money management within a household.
The pursuit of personal finance is interdisciplinary, having omnipresence in psychology,
sociology, finance, economics, information technology, and family studies (Schuchartdt et al.,
2007). Each discipline has diversified theories that offer diverse perspectives on individuals’
and households' financial behavior and money management (Copur and Gutter, 2019).
Furthermore, professionals, educators, government, and policymakers aim at developing
programs that focus on providing knowledge and preparing "rational human beings" handle
their finances in a better way. Nevertheless, in reality, behavioral economics, a blend of
psychology and economics, endorses the part that psychological attributes play in personal
financial decisions (Hilgert et al., 2003). Certain irrational behaviors such as carrying too much
debt, not saving enough, and aggressive trading lead to "sub-optimal" decisions. There are
significant other factors that connect to individual financial behavior such as demographics
(Allgood and Walstad, 2013), socio-economic factors (Gorniak, 1999; Grable et al., 2009),
social factors (shim et al., 2009), FL (Lusardi and Mitchell, 2007) and technological factors
(Panos and Wilson, 2020). According to Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD), FL is defined as the “knowledge and understanding of financial
concepts and risks, and the skills, motivation, and confidence to apply such knowledge and
understanding in order to make effective decisions across a range of financial contexts, to
improve the financial well-being of individuals and society, and to enable participation in
economic life.” (OECD, 2014). The voluminous prior evidence on PFMB has also concentered
on its potential lifetime consequences in the form of financial well-being, security, or ultimate
satisfaction (Mugenda et al., 1990; Vogler et al., 2008; Miotto and Parente, 2015; Dew et al.,
2020). Such a multiplicity of literature from diverse fields has surfaced the need for a composite
and systematic summarization of the existing body of knowledge on the subject. Hence, an
under-researched yet significant area of PFMB interests an attempt to delve into the domain's
collective scholarship. Continued research on financial behavior is needed to gain insights to

2
inform future financial counseling and education efforts. Further, the topic is crucial for
financial service professionals to take benefits of understanding financial management
behavior in catering to the needs of their clients. Policymakers may use the information to
advocate effective financial education programs to improve consumer financial well-being.

The leading aim of this paper is to compile the scholarly work on PFMB under one umbrella,
fielding five principal inquiries:
RQ1: What are the existing definitions and theories of PFMB in the extant literature?
RQ2: What are the research trends in PFMB in terms of time, sample country, sample
population, and structure (contents) of PFMB?
RQ3: What are the research methodologies, research designs, data collection techniques, and
methods of data analysis that have been employed in PFMB research?
RQ4: What are the antecedents and consequences of PFMB?
RQ5: What are the gaps in the existing research on PFMB and scope for future research?

2. Rationale of the study

PFMB is a complex construct (Xiao and Tao, 2020), and for a considerable discernment of this
construct, the subject was investigated broadly, following which the literature synthesis was
unveiled. Based on the delineation that PFMB literature revolves around a plethora of its
diverse antecedents and observable consequences, the scope of the review – the antecedents
and consequences of PFMB – was decided. The extant reviews on PFMB (see Table I) focused
on a single aspect of PFMB, with the majority embracing FL as a significant construct or varied
widely in their review approach. In fact, the topic of PFMB is greatly overlapped with the
literatures of FL (Boon et al., 2011). Huston (2010) conceptualized financial literacy as the
knowledge of personal finance as well as the application of that knowledge. Mere knowledge
of basic concepts of finance is futile unless it is reflected in financial behaviour (Atkinson and
Messy, 2012). In fact, OECD measured FL as a combination of three constructs: financial
knowledge, financial attitude, and financial behavior (OECD, 2011). Financial literacy and
financial capability are used as synonyms (Kempson et al., 2006). People can be financially
literate when they have knowledge, understanding, and skills to take care of their personal
finances, but they cannot be called financially capable unless reflected in their actual behavior.
There are several studies that provide evidence of financial behavior as an outcome of financial
literacy (Lusardi and Mitchell, 2011a; Van Rooij et al., 2011; Kaiser and Menkhoff, 2017). For
the purpose of this study, we considered PFMB construct as the outcome of financial literacy.
Further, we failed to track any paper putting forth a comprehensive synthesis of the PFMB
literature to date. Figuring such deficiencies, this is the first attempt to provide a detailed review
on PFMB, putting forth significant developments and trends in the field with antecedents and
consequences as its prime focus. The review also suggests a future research agenda in this
domain. This study will serve as a pool of up-to-date knowledge on PFMB for academicians.
It would also help policymakers and financial educators design programs on PFM that would
benefit society and the real economy.
(Insert Table I about here)
Primarily, the research methodology employed in the review has been delineated in the next
section. The following section explicates the results relating to the existing definitions and
theories of PFMB and research trends. Subsequently, a conceptual framework furnishes a
detailed inquiry into the antecedents and consequences of PFMB. The gaps in the extant
research and directions for future research are discussed in the next section. The later section
expounds implications of the study, followed by wrapping up the study in the conclusion
section.

3
3. Review method
This study pursues a systematic literature review method as a reliable, replicable, and scientific
way of producing a stock of knowledge that is not subject to bias (Tranfield et al., 2003). To
delve into the literature, a comprehensive review equipped with content analysis canvasses the
state-of-the-art literature concerning the theories, concepts, factors, and outcomes of PFMB
(Goyal and Kumar, 2021). To conduct the study, we have used the two largest databases of
indexed articles: Web of Science by Clarivate Analytics and Scopus. These two
multidisciplinary databases are acknowledged to provide extensive results and allow for
advanced search options (Rebouças and Soares, 2020). The search was conducted in August
2020. We avoided limiting the search to a specific period to retrieve all relevant papers to date.
Personal finance is the subject of how individuals, households, consumers, and families
procure, develop, and allocate financial resources to achieve their present and future financial
goals (Hira and Mugenda, 1999). With an intent to not skip any crucial publication for
consideration in this review, a comprehensive long string of appropriate search terms was used
to run the search in title, abstract, and keywords. Table II shows the search string used for data
retrieval. The search in two databases Scopus and Web of Science, yielded 1137 and 523
results, respectively. Limiting the search results to the English language resulted in 1063 and
515 items, totaling 1578. Subsequently, duplicates (n= 440) were removed, which derived 1138
items. Upon reading the abstracts, 245 articles were retained for full paper consideration based
on the relevance to the subject of PFMB. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were put to limit the
articles according to the scope of the review. Out of 245 papers on PFMB, 133 studies accorded
with the theme of antecedents and consequences of PFMB. Further, the references of the full
papers were also scanned, and 27 relevant records were identified, which were added manually
to the list after reading abstracts. The complementary search is helpful in identifying the studies
that might have been missed in the primary database search (Harari et al., 2020). Finally, 160
papers corresponded to the scope of the review and were included for analysis. The study
constitutes all the relevant book chapters, peer-reviewed journal articles, and reviews. The
approach of Rashman (2009) was followed for the selection strategy. Figure 1 illustrates the
mechanism of retrieval and selection of articles.
(Insert Table II and Figure 1 about here)

4. Results
This section recapitulates the diverse definitions of PFMB that various researchers have
adopted. It intends to provide the readers with a bird's eye view of the concept of PFMB. The
extant theories that have been conceived, tested, or applied during PFMB research are also
encapsulated. Further, the review was methodized, and content analyzed in a way that sketches
a map of current PFMB literature in the form of yearly publication trends, sample country
trends, sample population, PFMB components, trends in research design, the conceptual
framework, antecedents, and consequences of PFMB.

4.1 Definitions
PFMB has been construed and measured disparately in the extant literature, specifically
variegated by the sample. For instance, research focusing on the determinants and outcomes of
individuals' PFMB defines it as a set of behavioral components, such as budgeting, cash flow
management, consumption, savings, investment, borrowing, or insurance (Joo and Grable,
2000; Dew and Xiao, 2011). On the other hand, studies focusing on the family financial
management among couples have defined PFMB as income allocation within the household:
pooled income or separate income or household allowance (Pahl, 1989). Similar studies also
define PFMB as the division of labor and breadwinning role in a family (Vogler et al., 2006;

4
Kulic et al., 2020). The measures used in these studies, in terms of behavioral components,
differ significantly by researchers. Therefore, the incongruity in the findings has cropped up.
Such inconsistencies make our knowledge and understanding of PFMB blurry.
The concept of PFMB is also closely related to FL (Kebede et al., 2015). Classical
economists implicitly assume that increases in financial knowledge will result in changes in
financial management behaviors (Hilgert et al., 2003). However, empirical shreds of evidence
pertinent to the impact of FL on financial behaviors are not irrefutable (Xu and Zia, 2012).
Thus, it is necessary to understand the behavioral biases that go against the standard economic
theory, moving individuals from rational agents to behavioral agents. Table III has been formed
to provide the readers with a glimpse of the diverse definitions of PFMB figured out in the
extant literature.
(Insert Table III about here)

4.2 Extant Theories Employed

Plenty of theories have been impelled by the authors to predicate their research on PFMB and
to set the background for empirical investigations on factors influencing it. Figure 2 shows the
evolution of theories related to PFMB from the period 1930-2010. The concept of PFMB is
primarily based on behavioral finance theories, out of which Theory of Planned Behavior
(TPB) is the most prominent one (Ajzen, 1991). It recognizes the psychological aspects by
examining the attitude-behavior relationship. According to the TPB, amid other factors,
attitude frames behavior, which in turn shapes behavior. The TPB has been endorsed in a wide
range of behaviors, including saving (Copur and Gutter, 2019). Another theory, which is the
Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA), proposes that the behavior is regulated by an individual's
intent to perform the behavior. Intention is determined by attitudes and subjective norms (Ajzen
and Fishbein, 1975).
Another intermittent theory that has been ingeniously applied in the literature is the Theory
of Consumer Socialization (TCS), especially concerning youth financial learning (Shim et al.,
2009, 2010). The TCS provides a framework that delineates the financial socialization agents
(teachers, parents, peers, and the media) determining an individual's financial behavior
(Moschis, 1987). Shim et al. (2010) contemplated two learning modalities: observational
learning and formal learning. Social Learning Theory (SLT) highlights observational learning's
role in determining financial behavior (Bandura and Walters, 1977). Observational learning is
also explained by the Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1989). The theory proposes that
observation of others interacts with one’s own behavior and one’s cognitive process to
influence that individual’s behavior.
Further, the life cycle hypothesis of savings explains the PFMB by assuming that individuals
consume a uniform portion of their income over the life cycle and are not born with inheritance
and die without leaving a bequest (Ando and Modigliani, 1963). Thus, individuals at a young
age tend to borrow to acquire education. Individuals in their middle age are expected to pay off
debts and save for the future. During their retirement years, they are expected to utilize their
accumulated assets. However, many retired people still save and intend to transfer their
accumulated wealth to the next generation. A study by Mugenda et al. (1990) focused on the
Family Resource Management System Model proposed by Deacon and Firebaugh (1988). The
Family Resource Management System Model was conceptualized as composed of inputs,
throughputs, and outputs. The input component of the family managerial system was composed
of material resources (income, savings, and net worth) and human resources (education and
knowledge). The throughput component was comprised of transformation processes which
included money management practices and communication. The output component was
characterized by satisfaction with financial status and quality of life.

5
 A plethora of other theories forms the ground for various antecedents (discussed later in the
paper) of PFMB. Table IV features the theories that have been applied in the extant literature
on PFMB, but in no way is the number exhaustive. Therefore, it aims to present the capsulation
of theories (in chronological order) that have been traced from the existing studies.
(Insert Table IV and Figure 2 about here)

4.3 Trend of publication in time

Figure 3 illustrates the progression of publications in PFMB research. Although the research
on PFMB exists since the 1970s, it is notable that the gigantic emergence of PFMB research
can be seen only during the last decade (2011-2020). Personal finance, a topic of consideration
from institutional and consumers' viewpoints, is rather a recent trend (Schuchardt et al., 2007).
The concept of PFMB can be traced back around two centuries in the name of home economics
(Gross et al., 1980), with barely any attention from economists and business faculty
predominantly. The setting up of Financial Counseling and Planning (FCP) offers a ground for
personal finance researchers to "generate knowledge, publish information, educate
professionals, and provide research programs" (Reynolds and Abdel-Ghany, 2001, p.382).
Another event that changed the scenario was introducing the phrase "household finance" by
Campbell (2006), who emphasized the fusion of this crucial topic into the vast finance area.
Also, a scholar from a consumer science background viewed this topic from consumers’
perspective and used the term “consumer finance” (Xiao, 2008). Professor Tufano viewed this
term from a business perspective (Tufano, 2009). In current years, household finance, family
finance, consumer finance, personal finance, and individual finance promote research on this
topic (Xiao and Tao, 2020). The increasing interest in PFMB and its significant visibility in the
research recently can be attributed to the increasing power of money with the individuals,
liberal credit policies, shift from defined benefit to defined contribution plans, and lack of
money management skills among the individuals (Lusardi et al., 2010; Xu and Zia, 2012). The
global financial crisis of 2008, characterized by high consumer debt and inadequate savings,
expressed a "teachable moment" for the society at large and called for a policy focus on
efficient conventions in FL and consumer protection (OECD, 2009). The government and
financial educators are working hand in hand to increase the awareness of the vitality of PFMB.
The continued research pieces of evidence pertinent to discerning personal financial behavior
are indeed required.
(Insert Figure 3 about here)

4.4 Sample country and population

The analysis reveals that out of the total number of studies under review (n=160), 144 studies
derived their samples from single countries. Five studies were based on the data collected from
multiple countries, and eleven studies are not country-specific (see table V). By "Not country-
specific," the authors mean that the studies are either purely conceptual or review. After further
delving into the geographical location of the sample taken into each study (n=144), it was found
that most of the PFMB studies have been conducted in the American region (n=62). However,
this finding may partly be because just 47% of the US adults report maintaining a budget and
tracking their expenses (Consumer Financial Literacy Survey, 2020). According to the
National Financial Educators Council (NFCC), the average debt of the US college graduating
students increased from $18550 (in 2004) to $28950 (in 2014). Alarmingly, 54% of Americans
say that they have not set aside three months' worth of living expenses in case of an emergency
(Yakoboski et al., 2020). Next, the studies took place in the Europe region (n=26) and the Asia
region (n=22). The finding also remarks that the research on PFMB is skewed towards
developed countries like the US and the UK. Less attention has been paid to the regions like

6
Asia, Australia, and Africa. The results recommend a need to study PFMB in developed as well
as developing economies as the subject holds importance across the globe.
Upon manually scrutinizing the sample population in the studies (Figure 4), it was
discovered that the adult population (irrespective of a particular age group or a population
cohort) was used as a sample in most of the studies (n=52). Further, 26 studies were conducted
on young adults, including college students. The effect of various factors on young adults'
financial practices has been extensively studied as they enter adulthood with bad experience
managing their finances (Lusardi et al., 2010). Personal finance is a sub-discipline of household
finance (Schuchartdt et al., 2007), and therefore, studies on couples (n=20) and households are
manifold (n=14). On similar grounds, the low-income population is the most vulnerable when
it comes to financial management as they have to deal with the scarcity of financial resources.
Thus, PFMB studies on a low income are noticeable (n=16). "No specific sample" means that
the studies are either purely conceptual or review and thus do not include any sample. Results
reveal that far fewer studies have been performed on women, older adolescents, professionals,
and government employees, signaling a research gap.
(Insert Table V and Figure 4 about here)

4.5 PFMB structure (Contents and measures)

Each of the components of PFMB is vital for overall financial well-being (Xiao, 2008; Riitsalu
and Murakas, 2019). Upon manual segregation of the extant literature on PFMB, it was
discerned that different researchers measured PFMB through the inclusion of different
components as a financial management behavior scale. This shows a non-consensus on the
measurement and a lack of a comprehensive measure of PFMB (Dew and Xiao, 2011).
Extending the analysis of studies further exposits that there are too many "conceptualizations"
of PFMB. For instance, in couples' or household finances, PFMB is conceptualized as the
income organization or money management method among couples (pooled income,
independent income, or allowance). Contrarily, in the case of an individual's finances, PFMB
manages finances in the multiple domains of savings, investment, credit, insurance, retirement,
etc. Another interesting finding is that there are some studies ("Not specific") (n=37) in which
the researchers have not specified the specific domain in which the PFMB is assessed. Notably,
consumption, asset management, wealth accumulation, mortgage repayment, tax planning,
estate planning, fintech, and charitable giving are distinct themes found in the literature. Such
an exploration could help researchers and policymakers give an eye view on measures related
to PFMB, which are not much paid attention to. It should be noted that the studies might have
included more than one PFMB component. Figure 5 exhibits the number of studies published
on various themes (contents) of PFMB.
Few validated financial management behavior scales exist in the literature. A snapshot of
the most popular existing PFMB scales is shown in Table VI. Most of the scales lack
psychometric validation except the one developed by Dew and Xiao (2011) and are based on
selective financial management behaviors. The OECD measure includes a thorough instrument
for measuring financial behaviours. It has been validated and used in many countries around
the world. While the inclusion of all the domains of financial management is important to be
included in the scale, the development of generalized sample measure is crucial.
(Insert Figure 5 and Table VI about here)

4.6 Trends in research designs

In this section, we manually segregated the studies based on the research method, research
design, data collection technique, and data analysis approach (see table VII):
1) empirical studies include research articles that are based on observation, experiments,
and measurement of phenomena;

7
 2) conceptual studies include research articles that comprise of the development of some
concept, framework or are theoretical;
3) quantitative studies include research articles that are based on statistical, numerical, or
mathematical analysis of survey or secondary data;
4) qualitative studies include research articles that are based on the collection and analysis
of non-numerical data through focus groups, interviews, first- hand information, etc.;
5) modeling and analytical methodology - based articles rest only on mathematical
derivations or simulated/created datasets.
Of 160 studies, 145 are empirical, six are conceptual, five are literature reviews, three are
modeling based and analytical, and one is a mixed study (empirical + conceptual). Of the 145
empirical studies, 121 studies used quantitative research design, 18 studies used qualitative
methods, and six were based on a mixed-method approach (both qualitative and quantitative
methods). There exists a dearth of conceptual studies on the subject.
Further comprehensive analysis shows that most empirical studies are based on surveys
(n=113); just one study was based on archival data. Seven studies were based on laboratory
experimentation. As identified in the previous section, research on PFMB is in an emerging
phase, and that the majority of the publications have taken place in the last few years. Despite
this, the focus is on quantitative empirical research methods compared to qualitative methods.
This might result in biased, inconsistent, and ambiguous research findings. More qualitative
studies are essential to delve deeply into the subject and identify the insightful determinants of
PFMB.
As we classify the articles based on data analysis approaches to identify the most prominent
techniques/tools, it was discerned that regression is the most frequently applied technique, and
OLS regression is the most popular type of regression used. Apart from regression, SEM has
been used by some researchers. SEM is a comprehensive approach based on the confirmatory
measurement used to assess the models related to psychological studies (Anderson and
Gerbing, 1988). Researchers have also applied correlation widely to analyze the relationships.
Other techniques applied include descriptives, ANOVA, Chi-Square test, t-test, factor analysis,
discriminant analysis, mathematical models, and MANOVA.
(Insert Table VII about here)

5. The conceptual framework

The research done on the subject revolves around the antecedents that are likely to influence
PFMB and its consequences, which are either positive, negative, or insignificant. It is an
absolute need of the hour to realize the vitality of the concept of PFMB and advance the
arguments on its determinants and terminal outcomes. This review proposes an integrated
framework that connects various disjointed theoretical fragments. The model (see figure 6)
calibrates the peculiar findings and gives a direction to future research.
(Insert Figure 6 about here)

5.1 Antecedents of PFMB

Over the past few decades, PFMB has stemmed as a process, which is of paramount concern
for an individual. Therefore, it is crucial to know the various expediting factors of PFMB. On
an extensive inquiry of the literature, it was identified that myriads of factors impact financial
behavior. Such factors are demographic and socio-economic characteristics, psychological and
personality factors, social factors, FL, professional financial advice, environmental factors,
technological factors, circumstantial factors, cultural factors, and financial experience, among
others (Table VIII).

8
 PFMB can differ between population sub-groups according to marital status, income,
occupation, gender, education, and family structure (Perry and Morris, 2005; Grable et al.,
2009; Loke 2017a; Sachitra et al., 2019; Bapat, 2020). In comparison to the work done on
demographics and socio-economic factors, research on psychological factors underlying
personal financial planning behavior is in an elementary stage (Joo and Grable, 2004; Xiao and
Porto, 2019). Based on the existing body of literature, various psychological factors have been
accounted for. Behavioral finance theories have acknowledged psychological disposition in
determining PFMB (Copur and Gutter, 2019). In the last decade, various researchers have
investigated the relationship between financial socialization and financial behavior (Shim et
al., 2009; Bamforth et al., 2018; Antoni et al., 2019). Parents are essential socialization agents
in how children learn about money and develop financial management behavior, often
incidentally (by observation and participation) and through lessons delivered intentionally by
parents (Moschis, 1987).
Another most critical factor of PFMB is FL. Academic work has concluded that FL is an
antecedent to various healthy financial behaviors such as saving (Pak and Chatterjee, 2016),
borrowing (Allgood and Walstad, 2013), investment (Hastings and Mitchell, 2020), and overall
personal financial planning (Boon et al., 2011). As with many areas of personal finance, there
is little appreciation of precisely how individuals rearrange their portfolios around and during
major life events. These are often difficult to plan (West and Worthington, 2019), such as loss
of a job, major disability, or long-term illness, divorce/remarriage, starting a family or sudden
inheritance. Regarding technological factors, information about financial products and services
digitally may also influence financial behavior (Bapat, 2019). Financial advisors are a critical
source for improving financial behaviors and well-being among clients and communities
(Moreland, 2018).
(Insert Table VIII about here)

5.1.1 Indirect effects (Mediators and moderators)

In figure 6 of the study, the potent insights from the literature review have been assembled to
provide the readers with an outline of the variables and relationships encompassing PFMB.
The direct influence of a determinant on behavior is reported in table VIII, but many factors
indirectly influence PFMB. Most of the allied literature on psychology proposes that the
relationship between attitude and behavior might be influenced by a third variable, FL (Eagly
and Chaiken, 1993). Barbic et al. (2019) found that FL moderates (interaction effect) the
relationship between financial attitude and behavior (=-0.0850, p<0.01). The attitude-
behavior relationship weakens as the FL increases. Moreover, in the study conducted by Topa
et al. (2018), Need for Cognitive Closure (NCC) is found to moderate the relationship between
Investment Literacy and financial management behavior where the effect was high at the high
level of NCC and weak at a low level of NCC. NCC is a socio-psychological term that refers
to an individual's inclination for a fixed answer to a question rather than ambiguity and
confusion (Webster and Kruglanski, 1994). The differences in NCC may influence an
individual's capacity to process information and their decision-making.
Further, upon exploring cross-cultural conceptualization of human behavior, a negative
interaction was found between Korean and financial knowledge (p=.055) on financial
management behavior (Grable et al., 2009). Although greater than p<.05 but less than p<.10,
it indicates a meaningful relationship. In a similar study, it was also found that the culture does
not exert an influence (no significant interactions) on the relationship of Locus of Control
(LOC) and income with financial behavior. LOC relates to the magnitude to which an
individual's success or failure results from their actions (Perry and Morris, 2005). Another
variable, excessive lifestyle, which is related to overspending habits, moderates the relationship
between PFMB and youth bankruptcy awareness (Azmi et al., 2019) in such a way that the

9
relationship is more substantial in case of a lower excessive lifestyle (= 0.109, p<0.05). Bapat
(2020) found that financial risk tolerance moderates the relationship between financial
knowledge, financial attitude, internal LOC, and financial management behavior. Another
psychological construct of perceived control is to moderate the budgeting intention (Kidwell
and Turrisi, 2004). Individual self-regulation would also moderate the relationship between
differences in future orientation and investment in a high-risk mutual fund, F(1,83)=10.03,
p<.01 (Howlett et al., 2008). This means that high future-oriented individuals had a less
favorable attitude towards risky investment when self-regulation was high. Materialism is
defined as "the importance ascribed to the ownership and acquisition of material goods in
achieving major life goals or desired states" (Richins, 2004, p.210). Higher materialism results
in higher money management-related stress, but time perspective is found to moderate this
relationship (Ponchio et al., 2019).
Besides moderating effects, mediation effects have also been hypothesized in the literature.
In the study by Bapat (2020), financial attitude fully mediates the relationship between
financial knowledge and financial management behavior (=0.372, 0.533, p<0.05). Barbic et
al. (2019) also affirm a significant indirect relationship between FL and financial management
behavior through financial attitude mediation. This finding focuses on the need to incorporate
psychological facets to transform financial knowledge into financial behavior through financial
attitude. A study by Ho and Lee (2020) has found that students who accredit power distance
still exhibit positive financial behavior if they have a positive financial attitude as a mediator
in the relationship (=0.12, p<0.01). Power distance is a cultural disposition in which less
powerful members of the society accept that power is unevenly distributed (Hofstede, 2001).
Higher power distance is likely to result in negative financial behavior (Ho and Lee, 2020).
Another psychological construct that completely mediates the relationship between
procrastination and financial behavior is financial self-efficacy (= -0.262, p<0.05) (Gamst-
Klaussen et al., 2019). Therefore, financial self-efficacy, which means an individual's abilities
to achieve a financial goal, is critical to financial health. The relationship between investment
literacy and financial management behavior is also mediated by investment advice use (Topa
et al., 2018). Studies by Perry and Morris (2005) and Grable et al. (2009) reveal that LOC
mediates the relationship between FL and financial management behavior. The indirect effect
of subjective financial knowledge also exists in the relationship between self-esteem and
financial behavior (Tang and Baker, 2016).

5.2 Consequences of PFMB

Table IX furnishes a detailed content analysis of the consequences of PFMB as explored in the
literature. It is noteworthy that the researchers' focus in the domain has primarily been on
figuring out the antecedents of PFMB. Most of the empirical investigations have considered
PFMB as an outcome, and the resultant variable outcomes of such behavior have not received
much attention. The existing work exposits that financial behavior can influence financial
satisfaction (Mugenda et al., 1990; Gunay et al., 2015). To examine the causal relationships of
factors that influence money management tasks, Mugenda et al. (1990) remarked upon the
finding that "net worth, savings, debt payments and lack of financial difficulties" are the main
predictors of financial satisfaction. Joo and Grable (2004) identified that financial behaviors
are closely associated with an individual's financial stress levels. Good financial behaviors are
also the predictors of happiness in life through relationship satisfaction mediation (Spuhlera
and Dew, 2019). The concept of FL, financial capability, and PFMB are greatly connected
(Xiao et al., 2014). Financial capability is having financial knowledge and performing financial
behaviors through financial access (Taylor, 2011). Financial capability through desirable
financial behaviors results in financial satisfaction (Xiao et al., 2014; Xiao and O’Neill,
2018b).

10
 Borrowing and insurance behaviors positively influence relationship quality between
partners and their subjective financial well-being (Baryła-Matejczuk et al., 2020). These
dimensions are closely connected to the psychological aspects of satisfaction of routine basic
needs. The evidence of such life gains can help service providers motivate clients to perform
better financial behaviors. Such behaviors are also the predictors of making defaults in
payments and saving for the future (Miotto and parente, 2015).
(Insert Table IX about here)

6. Agenda for future research

Although emerging research on PFMB encompasses sizable contributions in the late years, the
literature's coalescence has brought to light profound gaps in understanding of the subject. Such
gaps build the momentum for future theory development and research on PFMB. Table X sums
up the recommended agenda for different propositions in the form of research questions on
variables and their linkages, followed by empirical advancements on methods and measures.

6.1 Theoretical development

This section describes how various theories can be applied to PFMB and how future research
can be developed to better comprehend financial behavior, which provides useful information
for policymakers. Due to its interdisciplinary nature, the profession of personal finance has
various theories to choose from (Schuchardt et al., 2007). The collective scholarship on the
behavioral complexities of PFMB happens to come from several interdisciplinary fields, such
as behavioral economics, economic psychology, behavioral finance, sociology, family studies,
technology, couples' finances, and consumer research. Future research should be focussed on
how theoretical approaches can be used in multiple disciplines can inform PFMB.
The traditional life-cycle hypothesis assumes that individuals are well-informed and behave
rationally by smoothing consumption and saving over their life-cycle (Ando and Modigliani,
1963). Notwithstanding, our analysis acknowledges that individuals confront many behavioral
biases that are not predicted by the standard theory. Such interplay of psychological attributes
must be backed up by the various theories specific to the personal finance domain. In addition
to this, the majority of the studies have focused on attitudinal, normative, controlling, and
experiential perceptions about financial decisions (Lee and Hanna, 2014; Barbic et al., 2019).
Triandis (1994) emphasizes the cultural dimensions that are often overlooked by others in the
field. There is a need to develop socio-psychological theories to support behavioral biases due
to culture and other social factors. The TTM assumes that self-efficacy plays a significant role
in behavior change (Prochaska and DiClemente, 1982). Hence, individuals who doubt their
capabilities to handle finances are more likely to reduce effort, making them more susceptible
to unhealthy financial behaviors like impulse purchases (Gamst-Klaussen et al., 2019).
Relevant theories must be used to identify the stage at which people are willing and able to
alter their behavior.
Further, as our review suggests, the TPB and the TTM have been tested on certain financial
behaviors (Xiao et al., 2004a; Xiao et al., 2004b) and certain groups of population (Kidwell
and Turrisi, 2004; Copur and Gutter, 2019; Bapat, 2020). Further, FL leads to desirable
financial behaviors (Hilgert et al., 2003; Lusardi and Mitchell, 2007), but there is some
evidence where financial education has been found to have weaker or insignificant effects on
financial behaviors (Fernandes et al., 2014). It is of great interest for financial educators to
know the influence of financial education on behavior change. While the work that financial
education is expected to do has been identified, the role of theory in aiding educators to perform
such a role has still not been established. The scholarly work to date creates a promising ground
for exploring financial education's theoretical fragments, financial behavior, and life
satisfaction.

11
 TCS has been applied to determine the influence of parent-child financial socialization
processes on adolescents' or young adults' money management practices (Shim et al., 2009).
The majority of the studies have focused on parental influence in general rather than specific
socialization practices (Sundarasen and Rahman, 2017; Fulk and White, 2018). Such specific
domains can be identified through specific realms in social learning theories (Xiao et al., 2011).
Other socialization agents, such as peers and media, need further exploration.
The behavior theories reviewed in this paper have been applied in various scientific research
studies. Researchers in consumer finance could make use of this line of research to inform
financial educators and consumers. Future research should also determine how financial
education, financial behavior, and quality of life are related.

6.2 Empirical advancement

6.2.1 Antecedents of PFMB
The empirical work done on the antecedents of PFMB is considerable. The research stream
stressed the importance of psychological factors in better comprehending the positive or
negative financial outcomes, either directly or indirectly (Hoffmann and Mcnair, 2019). Given
the established relationships, it is critical to understand the processes through which such
factors differentially relate to a set of financial outcomes, and for that, theoretical synthesis is
fundamental. For instance, saving is a financial decision made within a social context, is based
on life-cycle stages and the psychological attributes of the savers (Copur and Gutter, 2019).
However, there is a limited research using a comprehensive method to understand the multiple
factors that affect financial behavior. PFMB is undoubtedly one of the most prolific research
areas in personal finance, yet Copur and Gutter (2019) and Bapat (2020) state that not much is
known about the determinants of PFMB.
Notwithstanding the preponderance of studies on PFMB determinants, there are still some
issues that constitute entry points for new research in the area. First, there seems different
results on the same constructs (negative or positive or insignificant relationships) relating to
the impact of factors on various financial behaviors such as income level (Perry and Morris,
2005 vs. Grable et al., 2009), education (Gorniak, 1999 vs. Loke, 2017a), household size
(Mugenda et al., 1990 vs. Borda and Kowalczyk-Rólczyńska, 2016), perceived Control/self-
Control (Kidwell and Turrisi, 2004 vs. Zulfaris et al., 2020), LOC (Bapat, 2020 vs. Grable et
al., 2009), personality traits (Xu et al., 2015 vs. Harrison and Chudry, 2011), financial
education (Fulk and White, 2018 vs. Fernandes et al., 2014), and objective FL (Bapat, 2019
vs. Pak and Chatterjee, 2016). Such contradictions need re-investigations. Further, the tested
effects of demographics on financial outcomes are not unusual, but the research has discounted
how demographics indirectly affect financial outcomes via financial socialization processes
(Shim et al., 2009, 2010). The tenets of consumer socialization theory could advance
explanations for individual differences in FL and resulting financial behavior (Moschis, 1987,
Gudmunson and Danes, 2011). Additional research on hierarchical financial behavior needs
to be conducted with other financial behavior such as saving, investing, borrowing, and
retirement (Xiao and O’Neill, 2018a). More research is required to examine the relationship
between fintech and various consumer financial topics since fintech has changed the overall
ecological environment of consumer finance in many ways (Xiao and Tao, 2020). Lastly, as
with many areas of personal finance, there is little appreciation of precisely how individuals
rearrange their portfolios around and during major life events (West and Worthington, 2019),
such as loss of job, major disability or long-term illness, divorce/remarriage, starting a family
or sudden inheritance.
Future researchers can advance more work on: socio-demographic and economic factors
such as occupation, household size, homeownership, family structure, generational
complexity, and gender disparities within couples; psychological factors such as self-

12
regulation, negative emotions, distrust, cognitive style, motivation, perceived ability, planning
horizon, financial optimism, self-other orientation, framing effect, emotional intelligence, and
procrastination; social factors such as financial socialization through peers, colleagues, and
media; environmental factors; technological factors; financial experience; financial resources
and financial vulnerability. It is essential to know how financial socialization and education
vary by gender, life stage, race, socio-economic status, education, and ethnicity (Schuchardt et
al., 2009). Riitsalu and Murakas (2019) findings show that objective financial knowledge is
less related to financial well-being than subjective financial knowledge and financial behavior.
Additional research is required to explore antecedents of financial knowledge as such skills are
pivotal for good financial behavior (Grable et al., 2009). Future studies need to be careful when
getting insights from the perspective of personal, behavioral, and environmental factors and
may consider including specific individual behaviors (Bapat, 2019).

6.2.2 Mediators
The pathways between various factors and proper financial management behavior are major
research questions that need to be addressed. Financial attitude mediates the relationship
between FL and financial behavior (Barbic et al., 2019; Bapat, 2020). First, the mediating
relationship of financial attitude between financial socialization and financial behavior needs
to be tested as financial socialization influences FL (shim et al., 2010). Future research should
also consider additional psychological factors as mediators between demographics and
financial behavior. LOC plays a mediating role in the relationship between financial knowledge
and financial behavior (Perry and Morris, 2005), but such an effect may differ for different
groups of people. The interplay among various psychological factors is also an exciting
research area as they are interrelated (Bapat, 2020). Apart from gender and power in couples'
finances (Pepin, 2019; Cineli, 2020), the interactions of social categorizations such as
race/ethnicity or socioeconomic status may be useful to understand couples' financial systems
and relational outcomes.

6.2.3 Moderators
There are inconsistent results regarding the moderating effects of FL on the relationship
between financial attitude and financial behavior. In general, the relationship tends to be firm
with high FL and weak with low FL (Eagly and Chaiken, 1993). Nevertheless, in some cases,
the moderating effect is negative, i.e., when FL is high, the attitude-behavior relationship
weakens (Barbic et al., 2019). Such findings propel deeper inquiry. Research reveals that
financial advice influences financial management behavior (Topa et al., 2018; Moreland,
2018). The interaction effects of such advice with FL and financial behavior would be an
exciting research proposition. The moderating role of culture on FL and behavior has been
tested in Korea (Grable et al., 2009). Such a relationship needs to be explored in other countries
as well. The moderating role of additional psychological factors in changing the relationship
between demographics, FL, social factors, and financial behavior needs to be incorporated in
future studies. Findings suggest that electronic banking positively affects financial behavior
(Bapat, 2019). Information about financial products and services digitally may also influence
financial behavior. There is also a relationship between FL and fintech. Low FL leads to low
adoption of fintech (Morgan and Trinh, 2019). However, how fintech may influence FL is
another compelling future research area.

6.2.4 Consequences of PFMB

It is apparent from Figure 6 that a major chunk of PFMB literature has targeted antecedents,
and research on its consequences is minuscule. Further exploration is encouraged on the
psychological and sociological aspects of financial attitudes and behaviors and their

13
relationship with financial satisfaction (Xiao et al., 2014; Spuhlera and Dew, 2019). Such
studies will help consumer and family economists better understand the motives, drives, and
effects that determine individuals' quality of life. Not many studies have empirically confirmed
that the amount of money that one makes is less important than the money that one spends
(Shim et al., 2009). There has been a continuous debate on the linear relationship between
income and happiness (an indicator of subjective well-being) in longitudinal data (Stevenson
and Wolfers, 2013). Notably, PFMB and financial access are essential for overall financial
well-being yet have not been much explored (Birkenmaier and Fu, 2019). Better financial
behavior may result in better financial access and better financial status (Gunay et al., 2015).
Again, there is a causality issue implying that financial access succeeds financial behavior and
vice-versa (Xiao et al., 2010). In addition to this, other terminal outcomes such as financial
resilience in times of emergencies warrant equal attention in the research (Lusardi et al., 2020).
According to Salignac et al. (2019, p. 5), "Financial resilience is an individual's ability to access
and draw on internal capabilities and appropriate, acceptable and accessible external resources
and supports in times of financial adversity." Future research should explore how the economic
shocks transform exposure to risk and risk management preferences both at the individual and
household levels (Schuchardt et al., 2009).

6.3 Methodological Expansion

6.3.1 PFMB measurement
Following the gap of a very few validated financial management behavior scales in the
research, there is a need for the researchers to establish financial behaviors inventory covering
all areas of behaviors (Dew and Xiao, 2011). Unfortunately, most of the existing studies
measure financial behaviors as per their convenience and lack a comprehensive composition.
Such a reliable and validated inventory would be advantageous for financial educators and
policymakers when evaluating financial education programs' influence on financial behavior,
financial satisfaction, and quality of life. To comment on the robustness of existing measures,
such scales must be scrutinized and used at different places and situations and on various
samples. This process may contribute to the maturity of the construct and its measurement.
Further research should also focus on developing scales that might reflect desirable financial
management behaviors, are relevant, and based on respondents' age or life situation. For
instance, a retired person might not opt for “long-term savings.” Thus, PFMB is an umbrella
term that incorporates multiple behaviors related to individuals, households, and consumers
(Xiao and Tao, 2020). Application of other methods such as Factor analysis is also desirable.

6.3.2 Methods
Extant literature shows that quantitative methods have been predominantly applied to
understand PFMB so far. Upon scrutinizing the sample countries in our review, we find that
the PFMB research should be focused equally on developing economies due to changing the
financial markets landscape (Xu and Zia, 2012). Further, our more in-depth inquiry into the
various research methods applied in the extant research spotlights eminent gaps in the
methodology and possible contributions to enriching knowledge in this area. Future research
should be extended to incorporate more conceptual papers focusing on the better
conceptualization of the PFMB construct. There is a dearth of studies collecting data from
secondary sources and the studies that are qualitative. Theoretical roots of PFMB point out that
consumers who are high on money ethics, risk aversive, and future-oriented are more likely to
show positive financial behavior. Qualitative research is needed to understand such complex
frameworks grounded in psychology. Most of the studies are survey-based (Boon et al., 2011),
and case-study and interview-based research are lacking. The use of an alternative qualitative
approach over quantitative methods may help gain a holistic understanding of the influence

14
exerted by various factors on PFMB and how, in turn, PFMB influences other outcomes.
Qualitative research (e.g., interviews and focus groups) would be useful to dig in the role of
attitudes and intentions. Additional methodologies could be applied to examine the factors
involved into the field of family financial issues. The researchers have used various data
analysis approaches, but regression has been most commonly used by most of them. SEM
should be applied in future studies. The mixed method of empirical research (both quantitative
and qualitative) has not been often used in PFMB research. Mixed methods are useful in
discerning contradictory findings between quantitative and qualitative studies and a better
understanding participants' experiences. The mixed methodology can improve study
robustness since the usage of the quantitative techniques improves the validity of the research.
Future research can include mixed methods, as well. Besides, it is suggested to the researchers
to critically compare their findings with varied outcomes of previous results while examining
the relationship between various factors and PFMB, positive or negative or insignificant.
Moreover, in order to understand the influence of attitudes and socialization process over time
and gain better insights on cause-and-effect relationships, future studies using longitudinal data
sets are needed (Copur and Gutter, 2019).
(Insert Table X about here)

7. Implications
The results of the study indicate that the determinants and outcomes of short-term and long-
term personal financial planning are manifold. These findings have several implications for
financial planners who play a significant role in promoting consumer financial well-being.
Improving responsible financial management behavior has been a challenge for financial
counselors. This study contributes to the academic platform by providing the fundamentals of
PFMB under one umbrella. In addition to making academic contributions, the findings can be
utilized by business professionals and financial service providers to understand the consumers’
PFMB. It will empower them to develop financial strategies and appropriate financial products
and services to meet consumers’ life goals while creating wealth and money for them and
giving potential business growth to the professionals. Such a study can be important to the
young working professionals who find themselves at the crossroads while making economic
decisions. Understanding how money and its literacy influence well-being will help financial
advisors to guide individuals in gravitating towards prudent economic decision-making. There
is a prompt need to develop an appropriate scale of PFMB. A strong comprehensive measure
could assist researchers and practitioners in various domains. Appropriate measurement of
financial behavior may have implications on physical health, mental health, and life satisfaction
(Xiao et al., 2009).
Further, financial education is one of the educators' primary agendas, social groups,
policymakers, businesses, and the government (Fernandes et al., 2014). Financially stable
households and individuals are better able to achieve their well-being as well as foster
economic growth. Financial educators' goal is not only imparting financial knowledge to the
students but also modifying their financial behavior for ultimate financial success (Hilgert et
al., 2003). To develop financial, educational programs focusing on behavioral change,
personal/consumer finance researchers need to understand better how such behaviors are
shaped and modified into desirable actions.
In the wake of the global crisis of 2008, policymakers have shown concern about financial
illiteracy and how people handle their finances. The COVID-19 has undeniably led to an
aberrant health crisis and has sparked a global financial crisis, which is even worse than the
2008 financial crisis. The novel virus's financial repercussions could be long-lived and develop
a long haul in the form of fragilities in the structure. Having emergency funds, investing wisely,
conservative borrowing, insurance coverage, and setting financial goals are some of the life-

15
 saving skills that can provide financial resilience in a crisis. The present study can help
policymakers, financial educators, consumers, and researchers unbundle the strategies to
challenge yet another crisis and take away lessons for future action courses.

8. Conclusion
The panorama of financial decisions confronted during the life course is considerably
astounding (Yakoboski et al., 2020). Individuals need to make a myriad of decisions relating
to their finance, such as consumption, cash flow, saving, investment, borrowing, retirement,
tax planning, estate planning, and insurance. However, all financial decisions are intrinsically
intertwined and often involve a trade-off. How efficiently individuals manoeuvre personal
financial decisions rests partly on their financial knowledge and money management skills
(Lusardi and Mitchell, 2007) and partly on behavioral, cultural, demographic, sociological,
economic, and technological factors. Therefore, understanding the evolution of the literature
on personal financial decision-making over time counts significantly at both levels, individual
and society. To this end, this review was undertaken to gauge the antecedents and consequences
of PFMB primarily across the depth and breadth of the subject. The research trends were also
examined to deliver the most comprehensive retrospective on the dynamic nuances of PFMB.
Like other studies, this review is not clear of limitations. Although we have attempted to ensure
that the terms used in the search represent the broad scope of the area, there might be a few
studies missing because of the absence of any related term in the search criteria. Secondly,
although the search has taken cognizance of maximal studies on the subject, searching other
databases can fetch added results. Further, it focuses on the studies published in the English
language only, without considering the issues in other languages, which may have
comprehended diverse views and arguments about PFMB. Abiding by the review's scope, the
research trends have been analyzed only for 160 studies about the antecedents and the
consequences of PFMB. Nonetheless, PFMB is most critical in an average individual's life yet
underserved discipline from an academic viewpoint.

References
Ajzen, I. (1991), “The theory of planned behavior”, Organizational behavior and human decision
processes, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 179-211.
Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1973), “Attitudinal and normative variables as predictors of specific
behavior”, Journal of personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 1-41
Allgood, S. and Walstad, W. (2013), “Financial literacy and credit card behaviors: A cross-sectional
analysis by age”, Numeracy, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 1-26.
Altfest, L. (2004), “Personal Financial Planning: Origins, Developments and a Plan for Future
Direction”, The American Economist, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 53–60.
Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. (1988), “Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and
recommended two-step approach”, Psychological bulletin, Vol. 103 No. 3, p.411.
Ando, A. and Modigliani, F. (1963), “The ‘life cycle’ hypothesis of saving: Aggregate implications
and tests”, The American economic review, Vol. 53 Vol. 1, pp. 55-84.
Antoni, D.Z., Rootman, C. and Struwig, F. (2019), “The Influence Of Parental Financial
Socialisation Techniques On Student Financial Behaviour”, International Journal of
Economics and Finance Studies, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 72–88.
Antonides, G., Manon de Groot, I. and Fred van Raaij, W. (2011), “Mental budgeting and the
management of household finance”, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 546–
555.

16
Archuleta, K.L. (2008), The impact of dyadic processes and financial management roles on farm
couples (Doctoral dissertation, Kansas State University).
Arifin, A.Z. (2017), “The Influence of Financial Knowledge, Control and Income on Individual
Financial Behavior”, European Research Studies Journal, Vol. XX No. 3A, pp. 635-648.
Asandimitra, N. and Kautsar, A. (2020), “The Influence of Financial Information, Financial Self
Efficacy, And Emotional Intelligence To Financial Management Behavior Of Female
Lecturer”, Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews, Vol. 7 No. 6, pp. 1112–1124.
Atkinson, A. and F. Messy. (2012), “Measuring Financial Literacy: Results of the OECD /
International Network on Financial Education (INFE) Pilot Study”, OECD Working Papers on
Finance, Insurance and Private Pensions, No. 15, OECD Publishing, Paris.
Azmi, A.N., Samah, I.H.A., Rashid, I.M.A., Shamsuddin, A.S. and Harith, M. (2019), “Personal
Financial Management And Youth Bankruptcy Awareness: Moderating Effect Of Excessive
Lifestyle”, International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, Vol. 8 No. 12, p. 3.
Bailey, J.J. and Kinerson, C. (2005), “Regret avoidance and risk tolerance”, Journal of Financial
Counseling and Planning, Vol. 16 No. 1, p.23.
Bamforth, J., Jebarajakirthy, C. and Geursen, G. (2018), “Understanding undergraduates’ money
management behaviour: a study beyond financial literacy”, International Journal of Bank
Marketing, Vol. 36 No. 7, pp. 1285–1310.
Bandura, A. (1977), “Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change”, Psychological
Review, Vol. 84 No. 2, pp. 191–215.
Bandura, A. (1989), “Social cognitive theory”, Vasta, R. (Ed.), Annals of child development JAI
Press, Greenwich, pp. 1-60.
Bandura, A. and Walters, R.H. (1977), Social learning theory, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-hall,
New York, NY.
Bapat, D. (2019), “Exploring Antecedents to Financial Management Behavior for Young Adults”,
Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 44–55.
Bapat, D. (2020), “Antecedents to responsible financial management behavior among young adults:
moderating role of financial risk tolerance”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 38
No. 5, pp. 1177–1194.
Barbić, D., Lučić, A. and Chen, J.M. (2019), “Measuring responsible financial consumption
behaviour”, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 102–112.

Baryła-Matejczuk, M., Skvarciany, V., Cwynar, A., Poleszak, W. and Cwynar, W. (2020), “Link
between Financial Management Behaviours and Quality of Relationship and Overall Life
Satisfaction among Married and Cohabiting Couples: Insights from Application of Artificial
Neural Networks”, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol.
17 No. 4, p. 1190.
Bharucha, J. (2018), “Couples and breadwinning in low-income dual-earner households in India”,
International Journal of Sustainable Society, Vol. 10 No. 1, p. 62.
Białowolski, P. (2019), “Economic sentiment as a driver for household financial behavior”, Journal
of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, Vol. 80 No. 2019, pp. 59–66.
Birkenmaier, J. and Fu, Q.J. (2019), “Does Consumer Financial Management Behavior Relate to
Their Financial Access?”, Journal of Consumer Policy, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 333–348.
Boon, T.H., Yee, H.S. and Ting, H.W. (2011), “Financial literacy and personal financial planning
in Klang Valley Malaysia”, International Journal of Economics and Management, Vol. 5 No.
1, pp. 149-168.
Borda, M. and Rólczyńska, P.K. (2016), “Impact of demographic factors on household financial
decisions - evidence from Poland”, International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management,
Vol. 19 No. 1/2, p. 106.

17
Calvet, L.E., Campbell, J.Y. and Sodini, P. (2007), “Down or out: Assessing the welfare costs of
household investment mistakes”, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 115 No. 5, pp. 707-747.
Campbell, J.Y. (2006), “Household Finance”, The Journal of Finance, Vol. 61 No. 4, pp. 1553–
1604.
Chandra, A., Sanningammanavara, K. and Nandini, A.S. (2017), “Does individual heterogeneity
shape retail investor behaviour?”, International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 44 No. 5,
pp. 578–593.
Cho, S.H., Gutter, M., Kim, J. and Mauldin, T. (2012), “The Effect of Socialization and Information
Source on Financial Management Behaviors among Low- and Moderate-Income Adults:
Socialization And Information Source”, Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal,
Vol. 40 No. 4, pp. 417–430.
Cho, S.H., Mountain, T.P., Porto, N., Kiss, D.E., Gutter, M.S. and Griesdorn, T. (2016),
“Experimental Design to Understand the Student Loan Decision: A Methodological Note”,
Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 65–76.
Çineli, B. (2020), “Money Management and Gender Equality: An Analysis Of Dual earner Couples
in Western Europe”, Family Relations, Vol. 69 No. 4, pp. 803–819.
Clearwater, E. and Harvey, C.D.H. (1988), “Correlates of marital satisfaction in a Manitoba low
income sample”, Journal of Consumer Studies and Home Economics, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 183–
197.
Copur, Z. and Gutter, M.S. (2019), “Economic, Sociological, and Psychological Factors of the
Saving Behavior: Turkey Case”, Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp.
305–322.
Daud, S.N.M., Marzuki, A., Ahmad, N. and Kefeli, Z. (2019), “Financial vulnerability and its
determinants: Survey evidence from Malaysian households”, Emerging Markets Finance and
Trade, Vol. 55 No. 9, pp. 1991-2003.
Deacon, R.E. and Firebaugh, F.M. (1988), Family resource management: Principles and
applications, Allyn & Bacon, Boston, the US.
Dew, J., Barham, C. and Hill, E.J. (2020), “The Longitudinal Associations of Sound Financial
Management Behaviors and Marital Quality”, Journal of Family and Economic Issues, p. 1-
12.
Dew, J. and Xiao, J.J. (2011), “The financial management behavior scale: Development and
validation”, Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, Vol. 22 No. 1, p.43.
Doda, S. (2014), “Personal finance management among gender”, Mediterranean Journal of Social
Sciences, Vol. 5 No. 3, p.170.
Dolan, P., Elliott, A., Metcalfe, R. and Vlaev, I. (2012), “Influencing financial behavior: From
changing minds to changing contexts”, Journal of Behavioral Finance, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp.126-
142.
Eagly, A.H. and Chaiken, S. (1993), The psychology of attitudes, Harcourt brace Jovanovich college
publishers, California, the US.
Eberhardt, W., Bruine de Bruin, W. and Strough, J. (2019), “Age differences in financial decision
making: The benefits of more experience and less negative emotions”, Journal of Behavioral
Decision Making, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 79–93.
Estelami, H. (2014), “An ethnographic study of consumer financial sophistication”, Journal of
Consumer Behaviour, Vol. 13 No. 5, pp. 328-341.
Fama, E.F. (1970), “Efficient capital markets: a review of theory and empirical work”, Journal of
Finance, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 383-417.
Farrell, L., Fry, T.R. and Risse, L. (2016), “The significance of financial self-efficacy in explaining
women’s personal finance behaviour”, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 54 No. 2016,
pp. 85-99.

18
Feng, X., Lu, B., Song, X. and Ma, S. (2019), “Financial literacy and household finances: A
Bayesian two-part latent variable modeling approach”, Journal of Empirical Finance, Vol. 51
No. 2019, pp. 119–137.
Fernandes, D., Lynch, J.G. and Netemeyer, R.G. (2014), “Financial Literacy, Financial Education,
and Downstream Financial Behaviors”, Management Science, Vol. 60 No. 8, pp. 1861–1883.
Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. (1975), Belief, Attitude, Intention, and behavior: An introduction to
theory and research, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, Boston, the US.
Fitzsimmons, V. S., Hira, T. K., Bauer, J. W., and Hafstrom, J. L. (1993), “Financial management:
Development of scales”, Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Vol. 14, pp. 257-274.
Frijns, B., Gilbert, A. and Tourani-Rad, A. (2014), “Learning by doing: the role of financial
experience in financial literacy”, Journal of Public Policy, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 123–154.
Fulk, M. and White, K.J. (2018), “Exploring racial differences in financial socialization and related
financial behaviors among Ohio college students”, Cogent Social Sciences, Vol. 4 No. 1,
p.1514681.
Gamst-Klaussen, T., Steel, P. and Svartdal, F. (2019), “Procrastination and Personal Finances:
Exploring the Roles of Planning and Financial Self-Efficacy”, Frontiers in Psychology, Vol.
10, p. 775.
Garðarsdóttir, R.B. and Dittmar, H. (2012), “The relationship of materialism to debt and financial
well-being: The case of Iceland’s perceived prosperity”, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol.
33 No. 3, pp. 471–481.
Gerrans, P. and Heaney, R. (2019), “The impact of undergraduate personal finance education on
individual financial literacy, attitudes and intentions”, Accounting & Finance, Vol. 59 No. 1,
pp. 177–217.
Godwin, D.D. and Carroll, D.D. (1986), “Financial management attitudes and behaviour of
husbands and wives”, Journal of Consumer Studies and Home Economics, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp.
77–96.
Górniak, J. (1999), “Attitudes towards money and dealing with money: Selected results of the
research in Poland”, Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, Vol. 12
No. 4, pp. 633–645.
Goyal, K. and Kumar, S. (2021), “Financial literacy: A systematic review and bibliometric
analysis”, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 45, Issue 1, pp. 80-105.
https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12605
Grable, J.E. (2000), “Financial risk tolerance and additional factors that affect risk taking in
everyday money matters”, Journal of Business and Psychology, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 625-630.
Grable, J.E., Archuleta, K.L., Ford, M.R., Kruger, M., Gale, J. and Goetz, J. (2020), “The
Moderating Effect of Generalized Anxiety and Financial Knowledge on Financial
Management Behavior”, Contemporary Family Therapy, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 15–24.
Grable, J.E., Park, J.-Y. and Joo, S.-H. (2009), “Explaining Financial Management Behavior for
Koreans Living in the United States”, Journal of Consumer Affairs, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 80–
107.
Grinstein-Weiss, M., Spader, J., Yeo, Y.H., Taylor, A. and Freeze, E.B. (2011), “Parental transfer
of financial knowledge and later credit outcomes among low-and moderate-income
homeowners”, Children and Youth Services Review, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 78-85.
Grinstein-Weiss, M., Spader, J.S., Yeo, Y.H., Key, C.C. and Freeze, E.B. (2012), “Loan
Performance among Low-Income Households: Does Prior Parental Teaching of Money
Management Matter?”, Social Work Research, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 257–270.
Gross, I. H., Crandall, E. W. and Knoll, M. M. (1980), Management for modern families, Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, New York, the US.
Gudmunson, C.G. and Danes, S.M. (2011), “Family financial socialization: Theory and critical
review”, Journal of family and economic issues, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 644-667.

19
Gunay, G., Boylu, A.A. and Oğuz, A. (2015), “Determinants of financial management behaviors of
families”, In Handbook of Research on Behavioral Finance and Investment Strategies:
Decision Making in the Financial Industry, IGI Global, pp. 236-254.
Gunay, G., Savas, B., Gunes, H. and Bener, O. (2014), “Knowledge and Reported Behavior
towards Banking Home Loans in a Sample of Turkish Consumers”, The International Journal
of Interdisciplinary Social and Community Studies, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp.25-37.
Guzman, F., Paswan, A. and Tripathy, N. (2019), “Consumer centric antecedents to personal
financial planning”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 36 No. 6, p. 11.
Hanna, S.D., Lee, J. and Lindamood, S. (2015), “Financial Behavior and Attitudes of Asians
Compared to Other Racial/Ethnic Groups in the United States”, Journal of Family and
Economic Issues, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 309–318.
Harari, M.B., Parola, H.R., Hartwell, C.J. and Riegelman, A. (2020), “Literature searches in
systematic reviews and meta-analyses: A review, evaluation, and recommendations”, Journal
of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 118 No. 2020, p.103377.
Harrison, N. and Chudry, F. (2011), “Overactive, overwrought or overdrawn? The role of
personality in undergraduate financial knowledge, decision‐making and debt”, Journal of
Further and Higher Education, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp.149–182.
Hastings, J.S., Madrian, B.C. and Skimmyhorn, W.L. (2013), “Financial Literacy, Financial
Education, and Economic Outcomes”, Annual Review of Economics, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 347–
373.
Hastings, J. and Mitchell, O.S. (2020), “How financial literacy and impatience shape retirement
wealth and investment behaviors”, Journal of Pension Economics & Finance, Vol. 19 No. 1,
pp. 1-20.
Hayhoe, C.R., Cho, S.H., DeVaney, S.A., Worthy, S.L., Kim, J. and Gorham, E. (2012), “How Do
Distrust and Anxiety Affect Saving Behavior?”, Family and Consumer Sciences Research
Journal, Vol. 41 No. 1, pp. 69–85.
Henchoz, C., Coste, T. and Wernli, B. (2019), “Culture, money attitudes and economic outcomes”,
Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 155 No. 1, pp.1-13.
Hilgert, M.A., Hogarth, J.M. and Beverly, S.G. (2003), “Household financial management: The
connection between knowledge and behavior”, Fed. Res. Bull., Vol. 89, p.309.
Hira, T.K. and Mugenda, O.M. (1999), “The relationships between self-worth and financial beliefs,
behavior, and satisfaction”, Journal of family and consumer sciences, Vol. 91 No. 4, p.76.
Ho, C.S.M. and Lee, H.L.D. (2020), “Integrating positive financial attitudes to nurture students’
identity as informed financial decision-makers in high power distance Chinese contexts”,
Journal of Educational Change, pp. 1-24.
Hofstede, G. (2001), Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and
organizations across nations, Thousand Oaks: Sage publications, California, the US.
Hoffmann, A.O.I. and McNair, S.J. (2019), “How Does Consumers’ Financial Vulnerability Relate
to Positive and Negative Financial Outcomes? The Mediating Role of Individual Psychological
Characteristics”, Journal of Consumer Affairs, Vol. 53 No. 4, pp. 1630–1673.

Howlett, E., Kees, J. and Kemp, E. (2008), “The Role of Self-Regulation, Future Orientation, and
Financial Knowledge in Long-Term Financial Decisions”, Journal of Consumer Affairs, Vol.
42 No. 2, pp. 223–242.
Huston, S.J. (2010), “Measuring Financial Literacy”, Journal of Consumer Affairs, Vol. 44 No. 2,
pp. 296–316.
Joo S. (2008), “Personal Financial Wellness”, Xiao J.J. (Ed.) Handbook of Consumer Finance
Research, Springer, New York, NY.
Joo, S. and Grable, J.E. (2004), “An Exploratory Framework of the Determinants of Financial
Satisfaction”, Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 25–50.

20
Jorgensen, B. L. (2007), “Financial literacy of college students: Parental and peer influences”,
Unpublished Masters Thesis, The Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1979), “Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk”,
Econometrica, Vol. 47, pp. 263–292.
Kaiser, T. and Menkhoff, L. (2017), “Does Financial Education Impact Financial Behavior, and if
So, When?”, The World Bank Economic Review, Vol. 31. No. 3, pp. 611–630.
Kebede, M. and Kuar, J. (2015), “Financial Literacy and Management of Personal Finance: A
Review of Recent Literatures”, Research Journal of Finance and Accounting, Vol. 6 No. 13,
pp. 92-106.
Kempson, E., Collard, S. and Moore, N. (2006), “Measuring financial capability: An exploratory
study for the Financial Services Authority”, Consumer financial capability: Empowering
European consumers, p. 39.
Kerkmann, B.C., Lee, T.R., Lown, J.M. and Allgood, S.M. (2000), “Financial management,
financial problems and marital satisfaction among recently married university students”,
Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, Vol. 11 No. 2, p.55.
Keynes, John M. (1936), The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, Palgrave
Macmillan, Harcourt, Brace, New York, NY.
Kidwell, B., Brinberg, D. and Turrisi, R. (2003), “Determinants of money management behavior”,
Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 33 No. 6, pp.1244-1260.
Kidwell, B. and Turrisi, R. (2004), “An examination of college student money management
tendencies”, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 601–616.
Kim, J., Garman, E. T., and Sorhaindo, B. (2003), “Relationship among credit counseling clients’
financial wellbeing, financial behaviors, financial stressor events, and health”, Financial
Counseling and Planning, Vol. 14, pp. 75-87.
Kłopocka, A.M. (2017), “Does Consumer Confidence Forecast Household Saving and Borrowing
Behavior? Evidence for Poland”, Social Indicators Research, Vol. 133 No. 2, pp. 693–717.
Kulic, N., Minello, A. and Zella, S. (2020), “Manage Your Money, Be Satisfied? Money
Management Practices and Financial Satisfaction of Couples Through the Lens of Gender”,
Journal of Family Issues, Vol. 41 No. 9, pp. 1420–1446.
Kumar, S., Tomar, S. and Verma, D. (2019), “Women’s financial planning for retirement:
Systematic literature review and future research agenda”, International Journal of Bank
Marketing, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 120–141.
Kusairi, S., Sanusi, N.A., Muhamad, S., Shukri, M. and Zamri, N. (2019), “Financial households’
efficacy, risk preference and saving behaviour: Lessons from lower-income households in
Malaysia”, Economics & Sociology, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 301–318.
Lai, M.M. and Tan, W.K. (2009), “An empirical analysis of personal financial planning in an
emerging economy”, European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative
Sciences, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 99-111.
Lea, S.E.G., Webley, P. and Walker, C.M. (1995), “Psychological factors in consumer debt: Money
management, economic socialization, and credit use”, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol.
16 No. 4, pp. 681–701.
LeBaron, A.B., Holmes, E.K., Jorgensen, B.L. and Bean, R.A. (2020), “Parental Financial
Education During Childhood and Financial Behaviors of Emerging Adults”, Journal of
Financial Counseling and Planning. 10.1891/JFCP-18-00021
Lee, E. and Hanna, S.D. (2014), “Gender Differences of Asian College Students’ Financial
Knowledge Pathways”, Asian Women, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 27-55.
Loke, Y.J. (2015), “Living beyond one’s means: evidence from Malaysia”, International Journal of
Social Economics, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 2–18.
Lott, Y. (2017), “When My Money Becomes Our Money: Changes in Couples’ Money
Management”, Social Policy and Society, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 199–218.

21
Loke, Y.-J. (2017a), “The Influence Of Socio-Demographic And Financial Knowledge Factors On
Financial Management Practices Of Malaysians”, International Journal of Business and
Society, Vol. 18 No. 1, p.18.
Lusardi, A. (2008), “Household saving behavior: The role of financial literacy, information, and
financial education programs (No. w13824)”, National Bureau of Economic Research.
Lusardi, A. and Mitchell, O.S. (2007), “Financial literacy and retirement preparedness: Evidence
and implications for financial education”, Business economics, Vol. 42 No. 1, pp. 35-44.
Lusardi, A. and Mitchell, O.S. (2008), “Planning and financial literacy: How do women fare?”,
American Economic Review, Vol. 98 No. 2, pp. 413-17.
Lusardi, A. and Mitchell, O.S. (2011a), “Financial literacy around the world: an overview”, Journal
of Pension Economics and Finance, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 497–508.
Lusardi, A. and Mitchell, O.S. (2011), “Financial literacy and planning: Implications for retirement
wellbeing (No. w17078)”, National Bureau of Economic Research.
Lusardi, A. and Mitchell, O.S. (2014), “The economic importance of financial literacy: Theory and
evidence”, Journal of economic literature, Vol. 52 No. 1, pp. 5-44.
Lusardi, A., Michaud, P.C. and Mitchell, O.S. (2017), “Optimal financial knowledge and wealth
inequality”, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 125 No. 2, pp. 431-477.
Lusardi, A., Hasler, A. and Yakoboski, P.J. (2020), “Building up financial literacy and financial
resilience”, Mind & Society, pp. 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11299-020-00246-0.
Lyssens-Danneboom, V. and Mortelmans, D. (2014), “Living Apart Together and Money: New
Partnerships, Traditional Gender Roles”, Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 76 No. 5, pp.
949–966.
Mandell, L. (2008), “Financial Literacy of High School Students”, Xiao, J.J. (Ed.), Handbook of
Consumer Finance Research, Springer, New York, NY, pp. 163–183.
Mandell, L. and Klein, L.S. (2009), “The impact of financial literacy education on subsequent
financial behavior”, Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, Vol. 20 No. 1, p. 10.
Markowitz, H. (1952), “Portfolio selection”, Journal of Finance, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 77-91.
Maslow, A. H. (1943), “A theory of human motivation”, Psychological Review, Vol. 50, pp. 370–
396.
McHugh, S. and Ranyard, R. (2012), “Credit repayment decisions: The role of long‐term
consequence information, economic and psychological factors”, Review of Behavioural
Finance, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 98–112.
McKenna, J., Hyllegard, K. and Linder, R. (2003), “Linking psychological type to financial
decision-making”, Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, Vol. 14 No. 1, p. 11.
McNair, S., Summers, B., de Bruin, W.B. and Ranyard, R. (2016), “Individual-level factors
predicting consumer financial behavior at a time of high pressure”, Personality and Individual
Differences, Vol. 99, pp. 211-216.
Miotto, A.P.S.C. and Parente, J. (2015), “Antecedents And Consequences Of Household Financial
Management In Brazilian Lower-Middle-Class”, Revista de Administração de Empresas, Vol.
55 No. 1, pp. 50–64.
Moreland, K.A. (2018), “Seeking Financial Advice and Other Desirable Financial Behaviors”,
Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 198–207.
Morgan, P.J. and Trinh, L.Q. (2019), “Fintech and Financial Literacy in the Lao PDR”, SSRN
Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3398235.
Moschis, G.P. (1987), Consumer socialization: A life-cycle perspective, Free Press, New York, NY.
Mugenda, O.M., Hira, T.K. and Fanslow, A.M. (1990), “Assessing the causal relationship among
communication, money management practices, satisfaction with financial status, and
satisfaction with quality of life”, Lifestyles Family and Economic Issues, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp.
343–360.

22
Mullis, R.J. and Schnittgrund, K.P. (1982), “Budget Behaviour: Variance Over The Life Cycle Of
Low Income Families”, Journal of Consumer Studies and Home Economics, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp.
113–119.
Navickas, M., Gudaitis, T. and Krajnakova, E. (2014), “Influence of financial literacy on
management of personal finances in a young household”, Business: theory and practice, Vol.
15 No. 1, pp. 32-40.
Nejad, M.G. and Javid, K. (2018), “Subjective and objective financial literacy, opinion leadership,
and the use of retail banking services”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 36 No.
4, pp. 784–804.
Netemeyer, R.G., Warmath, D., Fernandes, D. and Lynch Jr, J.G. (2018), “How am I doing?
Perceived financial well-being, its potential antecedents, and its relation to overall well-being”,
Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 45 No. 1, pp. 68-89.
NFCC. (2020), “Consumer Financial Literacy Survey. The Harris Poll”, Harris Insights and
Analytics LLC, A Stagwell Company, available at: https://www.nfcc.org/wp-
content/themes/foundation/assets/files/NFCC_Discover_2020_FLS_Datasheet%20With%20
Key%20Findings_Clean.pdf (accessed on 20 November 2020).
Norvilitis, J.M., Merwin, M.M., Osberg, T.M., Roehling, P.V., Young, P. and Kamas, M.M. (2006),
“Personality Factors, Money Attitudes, Financial Knowledge, and Credit-Card Debt in College
Students”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 36 No. 6, pp. 1395–1413.
Nuspl, L.M. (1972), “Personal financial management. I. Paving your own road to
success”, Canadian Medical Association Journal, Vol. 107 No. 1, p.75.
OECD. (2009), Financial Literacy and Consumer Protection: Overlooked Aspects of the Crisis,
OECD.
OECD. (2014), “PISA 2012 technical background”, in OECD (Ed.), PISA 2012 Results: Students
and Money: Financial Literacy Skills for the 21st Century, Vol. VI, OECD Publishing, Paris,
pp. 123-145.
Pahl, J. (1989), Money and marriage. Macmillan, New York, NY.
Pak, T.Y. and Chatterjee, S. (2016), “Savings decisions of American households: The roles of
financial literacy and financial practice” Economics Bulletin, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 1486-1496.
Panos, G.A. and Wilson, J.O.S. (2020), “Financial literacy and responsible finance in the FinTech
era: capabilities and challenges”, The European Journal of Finance, Vol. 26 No. 4–5, pp. 297–
301.
Pepin, J.R. (2019), “Beliefs about money in families: Balancing unity, autonomy, and gender
equality”, Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 81 No. 2, pp. 361-379.
Perry, V.G. and Morris, M.D. (2005), “Who Is in Control? The Role of Self-Perception, Knowledge,
and Income in Explaining Consumer Financial Behavior”, Journal of Consumer Affairs, Vol.
39 No. 2, pp. 299–313.
Pirouz, D. (2009), “Culture, Self-Control, and Consumer Financial Behavior”, McGill, A. L. and
Shavitt, S. (Ed.s), Advances in Consumer Research, Duluth, MN : Association for Consumer
Research, NA, pp. 908-909.
Ponchio, M.C., Cordeiro, R.A. and Gonçalves, V.N. (2019), “Personal factors as antecedents of
perceived financial well-being: evidence from Brazil”, International Journal of Bank
Marketing, Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 1004-1024.
Porter, N. M., and Garman, E. T. (1993), “Testing a conceptual model of financial well-being”,
Financial Counselling and Planning, Vol. 4, pp. 135–164.
Prochaska, J.O. and DiClemente, C.C. (1982), “Transtheoretical therapy: toward a more integrative
model of change”, Psychotherapy: theory, research & practice, Vol. 19 No. 3, p. 276.
Prochaska-Cue, K. (1993), “An exploratory study for a model of personal financial management
style”, Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, Vol. 4, pp. 111-134.

23
Rashman, L., Withers, E. and Hartley, J. (2009), “Organizational learning and knowledge in public
service organizations: A systematic review of the literature”, International Journal of
Management Reviews, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 463–494.
Rebouças, R. and Soares, A.M. (2020), “Voluntary simplicity: A literature review and research
agenda.”, International Journal of Consumer Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12621
Reynolds, L. M. and Abdel-Ghany, M. (2001), “Consumer sciences research: A two-decade
comparison, 1980s and 1990s”, Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, Vol. 29, pp.
382-440.
Richins, M.L. (2004), “The Material Values Scale: Measurement Properties and Development of a
Short Form”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 209–219.
Riitsalu, L. and Murakas, R. (2019), “Subjective financial knowledge, prudent behaviour and
income: The predictors of financial well-being in Estonia”, International Journal of Bank
Marketing, Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 934–950.
Rodrigues, S.P., Sousa, L. and Alarcão, M.M. (2016), “Financial management in long-term low-
income households: comparing perspectives of professionals and families in Portugal”,
European Journal of Social Work, Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 977–991.
Sachitra, V., Wijesinghe, D. and Gunasena, W. (2019), “Exploring undergraduates’ money-
management life: insight from an emerging economy”, Young Consumers, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp.
167–189.
Salignac, F., Marjolin, A., Reeve, R. and Muir, K. (2019), “Conceptualizing and Measuring
Financial Resilience: A Multidimensional Framework”, Social Indicators Research, Vol. 145
No. 1, pp. 17–38.
Sargent, T.J. (1987), “Rational expectations”, Newman, P., Eatwell, J. and Milgate, M. (Ed.s), The
New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, Palgrave Macmillan, New York, NY, pp. 76-79.
Scannell, E. (1990), “Dairy Farm Families’ Financial Management”, Financial Management, Vol.
1, p. 14.
Schuchardt, J., Bagwell, D.C., Bailey, W.C., DeVaney, S.A., Grable, J.E., Leech, I.E., Lown, J.M.,
et al. (2007), “Personal Finance: An Interdisciplinary Profession”, Journal of Financial
Counseling and Planning, Vol. 18 No. 1, p. 9.
Schuchardt, J., Hanna, S.D., Hira, T.K., Lyons, A.C., Palmer, L. and Xiao, J.J. (2009), “Financial
literacy and education research priorities”, Journal of Financial Counseling and
Planning, Vol. 20 No. 1.
Sharpe, W.F. (1964), “Capital asset prices: a theory of market equilibrium under conditions of risk”,
Journal of Finance, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 425-442.
Shim, S., Barber, B.L., Card, N.A., Xiao, J.J. and Serido, J. (2010), “Financial Socialization of First-
year College Students: The Roles of Parents, Work, and Education”, Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, Vol. 39 No. 12, pp.1457–1470.
Shim, S., Xiao, J.J., Barber, B.L. and Lyons, A.C. (2009), “Pathways to life success: A conceptual
model of financial well-being for young adults”, Journal of Applied Developmental
Psychology, Vol. 30 No. 6, pp. 708–723.
Singh, S. and Bhandari, M. (2012), “Money Management and Control in the Indian Joint Family
across Generations”, The Sociological Review, Vol. 60 No. 1, pp. 46–67.
Skimmyhorn, W. (2016), “Assessing Financial Education: Evidence from Boot Camp”, American
Economic Journal: Economic Policy, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 322–343.
Spinella, M., Yang, B. and Lester, D. (2007), “Development of the executive personal finance
scale”, International Journal of Neuroscience, Vol. 117 No. 3, pp. 301-313.
Spuhlera, B.K. and Dew, J. (2019), “Sound Financial Management and Happiness: Economic
Pressure and Relationship Satisfaction as Mediators”, Journal of Financial Counseling and
Planning, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 157–174.

24
Stendardi, E.J., Graham, J.F. and O’Reilly, M. (2006), “The impact of gender on the personal
financial planning process”, Humanomics, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 223-238.
Stevenson, B. and Wolfers, J. (2013), “Subjective well-being and income: Is there any evidence of
satiation?”, American Economic Review, Vol. 103 No. 3, pp. 598-604.
Sundarasen, S.D.D. and Rahman, M.S. (2017), “Attitude towards money: Mediation to money
management”, Academy of Accounting and Financial Studies Journal, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 80-
96.
Sonnenberg, S.J. (2018), “22 The Economic Psychology of Financial Decision-Making and Money
Management in the Household”, Centre For Decision Research, University Of Leeds, Uk,
p.354.
Sonnenberg, S.J., Burgoyne, C.B. and Routh, D.A. (2011), “Income disparity and norms relating to
intra-household financial organisation in the UK: A dimensional analysis”, The Journal of
Socio-Economics, Vol. 40 No. 5, pp. 573-582.
Tang, N. and Baker, A. (2016), “Self-esteem, financial knowledge and financial behavior”, Journal
of Economic Psychology, Vol. 54, pp. 164–176.
Taylor, M. (2011), “Measuring financial capability and its determinants using survey data”, Social
Indicators Research, Vol. 102 No. 2, pp. 297-314.
Thaler, R. (1985), “Mental accounting and consumer choice”, Marketing Science, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp.
199-214.
Thaler, R. H. and Shefrin, H. M. (1981), “An economic theory of self- control”, Journal of Political
Economy, Vol. 89 No. 2, pp. 392–406.
Thibault, J. W. and Kelley, H. H. (1959), The social psychology of groups, Wiley, New York, NY.
Titus, P.M., Fanslow, A.M. and Hira, T.K. (1989), “Net Worth and Financial Satisfaction as a
Function of Household Money Managers’ Competencies”, Home Economics Research
Journal, Vol. 17 No. 4, pp. 309–318.
Topa, G., Hernández-Solís, M. and Zappalà, S. (2018), “Financial Management Behavior Among
Young Adults: The Role of Need for Cognitive Closure in a Three-Wave Moderated Mediation
Model”, Frontiers in Psychology, 9, p. 2419.
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D. and Smart, P. (2003), “Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-
Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review”, British Journal of
Management, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 207–222.
Triandis, H.C. (1994), “Culture And Social Behavior”, p. 1.
Tufano, P. (2009), “Consumer finance”, Annual Review Financial Economics, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp.
227-247.
van Deventer, M. (2019), “Differences in black Generation Y students’ attitudes towards personal
financial planning and perceived financial-management skills based on selected demographic
factors”, Polish Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 19 No. 2, p. 13.
van Deventer, M., de Klerk, N. and Bevan-Dye, A.L. (2014), “African Generation Y students’
attitudes towards personal financial planning”, Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, Vol.
5 No. 21, pp. 111-111.
Van Raaij, W.F. (2016), Understanding consumer financial behavior: Money management in an
age of financial illiteracy, Springer, Germany.
Van Rooij, M.C.J., Lusardi, A. and Alessie, R.J.M. (2011), “Financial literacy and retirement
planning in the Netherlands”, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 593–608.
Vogler, C., Brockmann, M. and Wiggins, R.D. (2006), “Intimate relationships and changing patterns
of money management at the beginning of the twenty-first century”, The British Journal of
Sociology, Vol. 57 No. 3, pp. 455–482.
Vogler, C., Lyonette, C. and Wiggins, R.D. (2008), “Money, Power and Spending Decisions in
Intimate Relationships”, The Sociological Review, Vol. 56 No. 1, pp. 117–143.

25
Vosylis, R. and Erentaitė, R. (2019), “Linking Family Financial Socialization With Its Proximal and
Distal Outcomes: Which Socialization Dimensions Matter Most for Emerging Adults’
Financial Identity, Financial Behaviors, and Financial Anxiety?”, Emerging Adulthood, Vol. 8
No. 6, pp. 464-475.
Waller, W. and Hill, R. (1951), The family: A dynamic interpretation, Dryden Press, New York,
NY.
Webster, D.M. and Kruglanski, A.W. (1994), “Individual differences in need for cognitive closure”,
Journal of personality and social psychology, Vol. 67 No. 6, p.1049.
West, T. and Worthington, A. (2019), “The impact of major life events on household asset portfolio
rebalancing”, Studies in Economics and Finance, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 334–347.
Wiepking, P. and Bekkers, R. (2010), “Does who decides really matter? Causes and consequences
of personal financial management in the case of larger and structural charitable donations”,
Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp.
240-263.
Xiao, J.J. (2008), “Applying Behavior Theories to Financial Behavior”, Xiao, J.J. (Ed.), Handbook
of Consumer Finance Research, Springer New York, New York, NY, pp. 69–81.
Xiao, J.J. (2015), “Consumer economic wellbeing”, In Xiao, J.J. (Ed.), Consumer economic
wellbeing, Springer, New York, NY, pp. 3-21.
Xiao, J.J., Chen, C. and Chen, F. (2014), “Consumer Financial Capability and Financial
Satisfaction”, Social Indicators Research, Vol. 118 No. 1, pp. 415–432.
Xiao, J. J., Chen, C., and Sun, L. (2015), “Age differences in consumer financial capability”,
International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 39 No. 4, pp. 387-395.
Xiao, J.J., Collins, M., Ford, M., Keller, P., Kim, J. and Robles, B. (2010), “A review of financial
behavior research: Implications for financial education.”, Commissioned report submitted to
National Endowment on Financial Education.
Xiao, J.J., Ford, M.W. and Kim, J. (2011), “Consumer Financial Behavior: An Interdisciplinary
Review of Selected Theories and Research: Consumer Financial Behavior”, Family and
Consumer Sciences Research Journal, Vol. 39 No. 4, pp. 399–414.
Xiao, J. J., Newman, B. M., Prochaska, J. M., Leon, B., Bassett, R., and Johnson, J. L. (2004a),
“Applying the transtheoretical model of change to debt reducing behavior”, Financial
Counseling and Planning, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 89-100.
Xiao, J.J., O'Neill, B., Prochaska, J.M., Kerbel, C.M., Brennan, P. and Bristow, B.J. (2004b). “A
consumer education programme based on the transtheoretical model of change”, International
Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp.55-65.
Xiao, J. J., and O’Neill, B. (2016), “Consumer financial education and financial capability”,
International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 40 No. 6, pp. 712-721.
Xiao, J.J. and O’Neill, B. (2018a), “Mental accounting and behavioural hierarchy: Understanding
consumer budgeting behaviour”, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 42 No. 4,
pp. 448–459.
Xiao, J.J. and O’Neill, B. (2018b), “Propensity to plan, financial capability, and financial
satisfaction”, International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 42 No. 5, pp. 501–512.
Xiao, J. J. and Porto, N. (2017), “Financial education and financial satisfaction: Financial literacy,
behavior, and capability as mediators”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 35 No.
5, pp. 805-817.
Xiao, J.J. and Porto, N. (2019), “Present bias and financial behavior”, Financial Planning Review,
Vol. 2 No. 2, p. e1084.
Xiao, J.J. and Tao, C. (2020), “Consumer finance/household finance: the definition and scope”,
China Finance Review International, ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print),
https://doi.org/10.1108/CFRI-04-2020-0032

26
Xiao, J. J., Tang, C., and Shim, S. (2009), “Acting for happiness: Financial behavior and life
satisfaction of college students”, Social Indicators Research, Vol. 92, pp. 53-68.
Xu, L. and Zia, B. (2012), Financial literacy around the world: an overview of the evidence with
practical suggestions for the way forward, The World Bank, p. 58.
Xu, Y., Briley, D.A., Brown, J.R. and Roberts, B.W. (2017), “Genetic and environmental influences
on household financial distress”, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Vol. 142, pp.
404-424.
Xu, Y., Beller, A.H., Roberts, B.W. and Brown, J.R. (2015), “Personality and young adult financial
distress.”, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 51, pp. 90–100.
Yakoboski, P.J., Lusardi, A. and Hasler, A. (2020), “The 2020 TIAA Institute-GFLEC Personal
Finance Index”, p. 29, available at: https://www.tiaainstitute.org/publication/2020-tiaa-
institute-gflec-personal-finance-index (accessed on 10 November 2020).
Zulfaris, M.D., Mustafa, H., Mahussin, N., Alam, M.K. And Daud, Z.M. (2020), “Students and
Money Management Behavior of a Malaysian Public University”, The Journal of Asian
Finance, Economics and Business, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 245-251.

27
Table I. A summary of extant reviews on PFMB

Author(s) Focus of the Review Article

Type
Lusardi and Mitchell (2007) Levels of FL and the linkage of FL with Review +
retirement preparedness Conceptual
Schuchardt (2007) History of personal finance and summary of Review
conceptual foundation
Xiao et al. (2011) Review of few theories on PFMB Review
Hastings et al. (2013) Impact of financial education on FL and Review
financial outcomes
Fernandes et al. (2014) Impact of FL and financial education on Meta-
financial behaviour analysis
Kebede et al. (2015) FL and personal financial management Review
Kumar et al. (2018) Women’s retirement financial planning Systematic
literature
review
Sonnenberg (2018) Psychology of household money management Review
Xiao and Tao (2020) Definition and the scope of consumer Review +
finance/Household finance/Personal finance Conceptual
Table II. Database and search string used for data retrieval

Database Search String

Scopus and Web of Science "personal financ* management" OR "personal financ*
behavi?r*" OR "personal financ* planning" OR "personal
financ* management behavi?r*" OR "financ*
management behavi?r*" OR "manag* personal financ*"
OR "personal financ* decision*" OR "personal financ*
outcome*" OR "household financ* management" OR
"household financ* behavi?r*" OR "household financ*
planning" OR "famil* financ* management" OR "famil*
financ* planning" OR "famil* financ* behavi?r*" OR
"individual financ* management" OR "individual financ*
planning" OR "individual financ* behavi?r*" OR
"consumer financ* behavi?r*" OR "consumer financ*
planning" OR "consumer financ* management" OR
"money management"
Table III. Definitions of PFMB

Author(s) Definitions
Deacon and Firebaugh Performance of behaviours regarding planning, implementing, and
(1988) evaluating decisions associated with cash, credit management,
investments, insurance, and retirement and estate planning.

Pahl (1989) It is defined as the income allocation within the household: female
whole wage system, male whole wage system, joint pooling,
household allowance or independent money management.
Altfest (2004) It is a process which incorporates all components which are of
financial interest to the individuals. These comprise of cash flow
management, investments, risk management, retirement planning,
tax planning and estate planning.
Schuchardt et al. (2007) It consists of tools like financial statements, checking and savings
accounts, debt instruments, mortgages and investment vehicles.

Joo (2008) Efficient personal financial behavior is corollary to positive

financial well-being and failing in managing personal finances can
lead to severe long term consequences.

Dew and Xiao (2011) The financial behaviors include consumption, cash flow
management, savings and investment, credit and insurance.
Table IV. A Summary of Theories Used

S. No. Theory Origin Example Citations

1 Motives Theory Keynes (1936) Copur and Gutter (2019)
2 Maslow’s Need Hierarchy Maslow (1943) Spuhlera and Dew (2019)
Theory
3 Role Theory Waller and Hill Kerkmann et al. (2000)
(1951)
4 Modern Portfolio Theory Markowitz (1952) Guzman and Paswan (2019)
5 Social Exchange Theory Thibault and Kerkmann et al. (2000)
Kelley (1959)
6 Life Cycle Hypothesis Ando and Copur and Gutter (2019);
Modigliani (1963) Bialowolski (2019); Panos and
Wilson (2020)
7 Asset Pricing Models Sharpe (1964) Guzman and Paswan (2019)
8 Efficient Market Hypothesis Fama (1970) Guzman and Paswan (2019);
Kusairi et al. (2019)
9 Rational Behavior Theory Ajzen and Lee and Hanna (2014)
Fishbein (1973)
10 Theory of Reasoned Action Fishbein and Kidwell and Turrisi (2004)
Ajzen (1975)

11 Self- Efficacy Concept Bandura (1977) Xiao et al. (2014); Gamst-

Klaussen et al. (2019)
12 Social Learning Theory Bandura and Sachitra et al. (2018)
Walters (1977)
13 Prospect Theory Kahneman and Cho et al. (2016)
Tversky (1979)
14 Theory of Self Control Thaler and Shefrin Xiao and Porto (2019)
(1981)
15 Transtheoretical Model of Prochaska Bapat (2020)
Change and DiClemente
(1982)

16 Theory of Mental Accounting Thaler (1985) Antonides et al. (2011); Miotto

and Parente (2015)
17 Theory of consumer Moschis (1987) Fulk and White (2018); Antoni et
Socialization al. (2019)
18 Rational Expectations Theory Sargent (1987) Guzman and Paswan (2019);
Kusairi et al. (2019)
19 Family Resource Deacon and Mugenda et al. (1990)
Management Model Firebaugh (1988)
20 Social Cognitive Theory Bandura (1989) Copur and Gutter (2019);
Asandimitra and Kautsar (2019)
21 Theory of Planned Behavior Ajzen (1991) Kidwell and Turrisi (2004);
Copur and Gutter (2019); Barbic
et al. (2019); Bapat (2020)
22 Theory of Social Behavior Triandis (1994) Kidwell and Turrisi (2004)
23 Hofstede’s Cultural Value Hofstede (2001) Ho and Lee (2020)
Dimensions
24 Couples and Finances Theory Archuleta (2008) Baryła-Matejczuk et al. (2020)
Table V. Top regions and top countries in PFMB research based on sample segregation

Single Country (n=144) Multi No

Country country
(n=5) Specific
(n=11)
Region Country Number of
Publications
America US 60
Brazil 1
Canada 1
Europe UK 17
Poland 5
Turkey 4
Asia Malaysia 10
India 6
China 3
Indonesia 3
Australia Australia 4
New Zealand 1
Africa South Africa 3
Table VI. Most prominent existing PFMB scales

Existing Scales of PFMB Variables Reference

Frequency of Financial Planning regarding usage of money; Fitzsimmons et al.
Management Scale Tracking spending; Written budget (1993)
Financial Management Consumption; Credit; Cash; Saving; Porter & Garman
Behaviors Scale Investment; Risk; Capital; Retirement (1993)

The Prochaska-Cue Estate planning; Insurance; Financial Prochaska-Cue

Inventory of Financial record keeping; Budgeting; Saving; (1993)
Management Style (PIFS) Investing

Household Financial Cash flow management; Credit Hilgert et al. (2003)

Management Practices Index management; Savings; Investment
Financial Behavior Scale Planning; Saving; Budgeting; Cutting Kim et al. (2003)
down spending; Credit management
Financial Behavior Scale Budgeting; Saving; Controlling Perry and Morris
spending (2005)
College Student Financial Budgeting; Tracking spending; Jorgensen (2007)
Literacy Survey (Financial Savings; Borrowing; Insurance
behavior)
Executive Personal Finance Impulse control; Organization; Spinella et al. (2007)
Scale Planning; Motivational drive
Financial Behavior Scale Cash management; Credit Xiao et al. (2008)
Management; Saving
The Financial Management Consumption; Credit; Cash; Saving; Dew and Xiao
Behavior Scale Investment (2011)

Money Management Scale Basic financial management Garðarsdóttir and

tendencies Dittmar (2012)

OECD/INFE Financial Consumption; Cash flow Atkinson and Messy

Behavior Scale management; Long term financial (2012)
goal setting; Responsible budgeting;
Active saving; Borrowing
Table VII. Classification of 160 studies based on research methods, research designs, data collection approach and data analysis tools

Research Method Research Design Data Collection Data Analysis Sub Classification in Example Citations
Technique Approach Analysis tool
Empirical (n=145) Quantitative(n=121) Survey(n=113) Descriptive Hilgert et al. (2003); Mandell (2008);
Boon et al. (2011); Lusardi et al.
(2020)
Correlation Scannell (1990); Grable et al. (2009);
McHugh and Ranyard (2012);
Eberhardt et al. (2019)
ANOVA (Analysis of Lai and Tan (2009); Nejad and Javid
Variance) (2018); Xiao and O’Neill (2018b)
T-Test Lai and Tan (2009); Grable et al.
(2009); Van Deventer et al. (2014)
Chi-Square Test Mullis and Schnittgrund (1982);
Mandell and Klein (2009)
Regression Multiple Regression Godwin and Carroll (1986); Perry and
Morris (2005); Harrison and Chudry
(2011); Guzman et al. (2019)
Logistic Regression Gorniak (1999); Fulk and White
(2018); Pepin (2019)
Linear Regression Kidwell and Turrisi (2004); Henchoz
et al. (2019); Birkenmaier and Fu
(2019)
OLS (Ordinary Least Kidwell et al. (2003); Wiepking and
Squares Regression) Bekkers (2010); Xiao and Porto
(2019); Bapat (2020)
Hierarchical Hayhoe et al. (2012); Gunay et al.
Regression (2014); Hoffman and McNair (2019)
Sobel Regression Grable et al. (2009)
Probit Regression Allgood and Walstad (2013); Hanna et
al. (2015); Loke (2017a)
 Logit Regression Lea et al. (1995); Pak and Chatterjee
(2016); Hastings and Mitchell (2020)
Cox Regression Grinstein et al. (2012)
Tobit Regression Grinstein et al. (2011); West and
Worthington (2019)
SUR(Seemingly Farrell et al. (2016)
Unrelated )Regression
Hybrid Panel Lott (2017)
Regression
SEM (Structural Joo and Grable (2004); Shim et al.
Equation Modeling) (2010); Barbic et al. (2019); Dew et al.
(2020)
Factor Analysis (EFA Pak and Chatterjee (2016); Sundarasen
(Exploratory Factor and Rahman (2017); Vosylis and
Analysis); CFA Erentaite (2019); Antoni et al. (2019)
(Confirmatory Factor
Analysis)
Discriminant Analysis Grable (2000); Arifin (2017)
Mathematical Model Bialowolski (2019); Feng et al. (2019)
Archival (n=1) Regression OLS (Ordinary Least Klopocka (2017)
Squares) Regression
Laboratory (n=7) Descriptive Cho et al. (2016)
Correspondence Analysis Sonnenberg et al. (2011)
ANOVA (Analysis of Bailey and kinerson (2005); Cho et al.
Variance) (2016); Gerrans and Heaney (2019)
MANOVA (Multivariate Howlett et al. (2008)
Analysis of Variance)
Regression OLS (Ordinary Least Cho et al. (2012); Skimmyhorn (2016)
Squares) Regression
Linear Regression Gerrans and Heaney (2019)
Qualitative (n=18) In-Depth Mugenda et al. (1990); Bharucha
Interviews/ Focus (2018)
 Groups
Mixed (n=6) Survey + Regression Linear Regression Miotto and parente (2015)
Interviews/ Focus
groups
Logistic Regression Cho et al. (2012); Cineli (2020)
Multiple Regression Asandimitra and Kautsar (2019)
OLS (Ordinary Least Cho et al. (2012)
Squares) Regression
SEM (Structural Bapat (2019)
Equation Modeling)
Factor Analysis EFA Miotto and Parente (2015); Bapat
(Exploratory Factor (2019)
Analysis);CFA
(Confirmatory Factor
Analysis)
Chi-Square Test Vogler et al. (2008)
Conceptual (n=6) Nuspl (1972); McKenna et al. (2003);
Stendardi et al. (2006); Xiao (2008);
Dolan et al. (2012); Van Raaij (2016)
Literature Review Lusardi and Mitchell (2007); Xiao et
(n=5) al. (2011); Hastings et al. (2013);
Fernandes et al. (2014)
Modelling and Quantitative Survey Bayesian Two-part Feng et al. (2019)
Analytical (n=3) Latent Variable
Regression Model
Fixed Effects Lusardi et al. (2017)
Regression; Simulation
Probit Regression Calvet et al. (2007)
Mixed (Empirical Mixed Survey Descriptive Doda (2014)
+ Conceptual)
(n=1)
Table VIII. Summary table of the antecedents of PFMB and their established relationships

Typology Factor (Antecedent) Sub-Factor Citations Association

with PFMB
Demographic And Socio-Economic Age Allgood and Walstad (2013); Chandra et al. (2017); Positive
Loke (2017a); Eberhardt et al. (2018); Sachitra et al.
(2019); Bapat (2020)
Marital Status Mugenda et al. (1990); Pepin (2019); Sachitra et al. Positive
(2019)
Gender Stendardi et al. (2006)*; Lee and Hanna (2014); Doda Significant
(2014); Chandra et al. (2017); Loke (2017a); Bharucha
(2018); Cho et al. (2016)
Income Mugenda et al. (1990); Perry and Morris (2005); Positive
McHugh and Rob Ranyard (2012); Gunay et al. (2014);
Loke (2015); Rodrigues et al. (2016)
Grable et al. (2009) Insignificant
Education Gorniak (1999); McHugh and Rob Ranyard (2012); Positive
Gunay et al. (2014); Chandra et al. (2017); Loke (2017a)
Loke (2015) Insignificant
Job Status Gorniak (1999); Lai and Tan (2009); Gunay et al. Positive
(2014)
Household Size Mugenda et al. (1990); Calvet et al. (2007) Positive
Borda and Kowalczyk-Rólczyńska (2016) Negative
Occupation Bapat (2020) Positive
Race/ Ethnicity Hanna et al. (2015); Loke (2017a) Significant
Family Income Gorniak (1999); Sachitra et al. (2019) Positive
Family Structure Scannell (1990); Borda and Kowalczyk-Rólczyńska Positive
(2016)
Generational Singh and Bhandari (2012) Significant
Complexity (Nuclear/
Joint family)
Length of Marriage Godwin and Carroll (1986) Positive
 Home Ownership Copur and Gutter (2019) Positive
Life Cycle Mullis and Schnittgrund (1982); Nuspl (1972)*; Miotto Significant
and Parente (2015)
Earning Disparities Vogler et al. (2006); Sonnenberg et al. (2011); Lott Significant
between Partners (2017); Kulic et al. (2019); Pepin (2019); Cineli (2020)
Gender Egalitarian Cineli (2020) Significant
Beliefs
Gender of the higher Pepin (2019) Significant
earner between
Partners
Relationship Type Vogler et al. (2006); Lyssens‐Danneboom and Significant
Mortelmans (2014); Lott (2017)
Female Labour Godwin and Carroll (1986); Vogler et al. (2006); Significant
Market Participation Bharucha (2018)
Contribution to Lyssens‐Danneboom and Mortelmans (2014); Bharucha Significant
Family Income/ (2018); Kulic et al. (2019)
Breadwinning Role
Psychological Cognitive Abilities Numeracy Eberhardt et al. (2018); Topa et al. (2018) Positive
Experience
Based
Knowledge
Financial Risk Grable (2000); Joo and Grable (2000); Bailey and Positive
Tolerance Kinerson (2005); Bapat (2020)
Financial Attitude Kidwell et al. (2003); Kidwell and Turrisi (2004); Gunay Positive
et al. (2014); Barbic et al. (2019); Bapat (2020); Ho and
Lee (2020)
Self -Regulation Howlett et al. (2008) Positive
Locus of Control Bapat (2020); Kidwell et al. (2003); Lea et al. (1995); Positive
Arifin (2017); Perry and Morris (2005); McNair et al.
(2016)
Grable et al. (2009) Negative
Financial Self Farrell et al. (2016); Gamst-Klaussen et al. (2019); Positive
Efficacy Asandimitra and Kautsar (2020)
Negative Emotions Eberhardt et al. (2018) Positive
Distrust Hayhoe et al. (2012) Positive
Cognitive Style Analytical, Guzman and Paswan (2019) Positive

Intuitive Guzman and Paswan (2019) Insignificant

Mental Budgeting Antonides et al. (2011); Xiao and O’Neill (2018a) Positive
Motivation Eberhardt et al. (2018) Positive
Anxiety McHugh and Rob Ranyard (2012); Hayhoe et al. (2012); Negative
Sachitra et al. (2019); Grable et al. (2020)
Self Esteem Hira and Mugenda (1999); Tang and Baker (2016); Positive
Sachitra et al. (2019)
Affect Kidwell et al. (2003); Kidwell and Turrisi (2004) Positive
Materialism Gardarsdóttir and Dittmar (2012) Insignificant
Norvilitis et al. (2006); McNair et al. (2016) Significant
Past Behavior Kidwell et al. (2003); Kidwell and Turrisi (2004) Positive
Subjective Norm Kidwell and Turrisi (2004); Copur and Gutter (2019) Positive
Perceived Kidwell and Turrisi (2004); Miotto and Parente (2015); Positive
Control/Self- Control Barbic et al. (2019)
Zulfaris et al. (2020) Negative
Perceived Ability Kidwell et al. (2003) Positive
Preference for Credit Miotto and Parente (2015) Positive
Planning Horizon Copur and Gutter (2019) Positive
Impulsiveness Kidwell et al. (2003); Copur and Gutter (2019) Negative
Propensity to Plan Miotto and Parente (2015); Xiao and O’Neill (2018b) Positive
Financial Optimism Gorniak (1999) Positive
Financial Threat Gorniak (1999) Negative
Achievement Gorniak (1999) Positive
Orientation
Attitudes Towards Lea et al. (1995); Gorniak (1999); Norvilitis et al.
Money (2006); Harrison and Chudry (2011); Sundarasen and
Rahman (2017); Henchoz et al. (2019)
 Time Orientation/ Lea et al. (1995); Antonides et al. (2011); Xiao and Porto Positive
Present Bias (2019); Guzman and Paswan (2019); Hastings and
Mitchell (2020)
Howlett et al. (2008) Negative
Framing Effect Cho et al. (2016) Significant
Self- Confidence Kłopocka (2016); Chandra et al. (2017); Białowolski Positive
(2019); Sachitra et al. (2019)
Emotional Asandimitra and Kautsar (2020) Positive
Intelligence
Self-Other Guzman and Paswan (2019) Positive
Orientation
Psychological Type Extravert; McKenna et al. (2003)* Significant
Introvert;
Sensing;
Intuitive;
Thinking;
Feeling;
Judging;
Perceiving
Procrastination Gamst-Klaussen et al. (2019) Negative
Personality Xu et al. (2015); Gerrans and Heaney (2016); Xu et al. Positive
(2017)
Harrison and Chudry (2011) Negative
Social Family Financial Lea et al. (1995); Shim et al. (2009); Grinstein-Weiss et Positive
Socialization al. (2011); Cho et al. (2012); Grinstein-Weiss et al.
(2012); Sundarasen and Rahman (2017); Fulk and White
(2018); Vosylis and Erentaite (2019); Sachitra et al.
(2019); Antoni et al. (2019); Lebaron et al. (2020)
Peer Influence Bamforth et al. (2018); Zulfaris et al. (2020) Negative
Financial Literacy Objective FL Hilgert et al. (2003); Norvilitis et al. (2006); Lusardi and Positive
Mitchell (2007)*; Howlett et al. (2008); Lusardi (2008);
Lusardi and Mitchell (2008); Grable et al. (2009);
 Antonides et al. (2011); Harrison and Chudry (2011);
Boon et al. (2011); Lusardi and Mitchell (2011b);
Hastings et al. (2013)*; Allgood and Walstad (2013);
Lee and Hanna (2014); Navickas et al. (2014); Arifin
(2017); Loke (2017a); Lusardi et al. (2017); Nejad and
Javid (2018); Topa et al. (2018); Grable et al. (2019);
Bapat (2019); Sachitra et al. (2019); Feng et al. (2019);
Barbic et al. (2019); Bapat (2020); Bialowolski et al.
(2020); Zulfaris et al. (2020); Lusardi et al. (2020);
Hastings and Mitchell (2020)
Pak and Chatterjee (2016) Negative
Subjective FL Sundarasen and Rahman (2017) Positive
Environmental Genetic Xu et al. (2017) Significant
Financial Education Godwin and Carroll (1986); Mandell and Klein (2009); Positive
Skimmyhorn (2016); Gerrans and Heaney (2016); Fulk
and White (2018); Ho and Lee (2020); Mandell (2008);
Fernandes et al. (2014) Insignificant
Professional Financial Advice Topa et al. (2018); Moreland (2018); Bapat (2019) Positive
Technological Fin-Tech Bapat (2019); Panos and Wilson (2020) Positive
Communication Mugenda et al. (1990) Positive
Financial Information McHugh and Rob Ranyard (2012); Asandimitra and Positive
Kautsar (2020)
Financial Experience Lee and Hanna (2014) Positive
Financial Resources Rodrigues et al. (2016)
Situational Miotto and Parente (2015); West and Worthington Significant
(2019)
Cultural Grable et al. (2009); Henchoz et al. (2019) Significant
Financial Vulnerability Hoffman and McNair (2019) Negative
Note: The studies marked with * are conceptual and not empirical, but contribute towards the literature conceptually. Also, the directionality of relationships
(positive or negative) has been reported as mentioned in the studies. All the studies do not report the direction of the association, ergo, only
significance/insignificance has been reported. Different studies on a single sub-factor might have shown either positive, negative or insignificant results
which implies a non-consensus.
Table IX. Summary table of the consequences of PFMB and their established relationships

Outcome Variable (Consequence) Citations Association with PFMB

Financial Satisfaction Mugenda et al. (1990); Scannell (1990); Joo Positive
and Grable (2004); Xiao et al. (2014); Gunay et
al. (2015); Xiao and Porto (2017); Xiao and O’
Neill (2018b); Spuhlera and Dew (2019)
Quality Of Life Mugenda et al. (1990); Dew et al. (2020) Positive
Relationship Satisfaction Clearwater and Harvey (1988); Vogler et al. Positive
(2008); Bharucha (2018); Kulic et al. (2019);
Baryła-Matejczuk et al. (2020)

Financial Status Gunay et al. (2015) Positive

Financial Access Birkenmaier and Fu (2019) Positive
Financial Vulnerability/Financial Fragility Daud et al. (2019); Lusardi et al. (2020) Negative
Financial Well-Being Xiao (2008)*; Xiao et al. (2015); Xiao (2015)*; Positive
Xiao and O’ Neill (2016); Xiao and Porto
(2017); Riitsalu and Murakas (2018); Baryła-
Matejczuk et al. (2020)
Financial Anxiety Vosylis and Erentaite (2019) Negative
Happiness Spuhlera and Dew (2019) Positive
Net Worth Titus et al. (1989) Positive
Financial Resilience Lusardi et al. (2020) Positive
Note: The studies marked with * are conceptual and not empirical, but contribute towards the literature conceptually. Out of 160 studies, this table contains
those studies that relate to the consequences of PFMB.
Table X. Research agenda for PFMB

Research Gap Future Research Questions References

1 Whether PFMB is a part of finance, a topic within family or consumer Altfest (2004); Schuchardt et al. (2007)
Conceptualization sciences or it is a standalone topic of research?
2 What is the scope of personal finance construct and how can it be Schuchardt et al. (2007); Xiao and Tao (2020)
defined universally?
3 What are the different terms used for “personal finance”? Xiao and Tao (2020)
4 How can theoretical approaches used in multiple disciplines can Schuchardt et al. (2007); Xiao (2008); Gamst-Klaussen
inform the stage at which people are willing and able to alter their et al. (2019)
various financial behaviors?
Theories
5 What is the theoretical foundation for the linkage between financial Xiao (2008); Xiao et al. (2011); Fernandes et al. (2014)
education, personal financial behavior and life satisfaction?
6 Develop socio-psychological theories as such to support behavioral Triandis (1994)
biases due to culture and other social factors.
7 Apply the TPB and the TTM on diversified behaviors and Kidwell and Turrisi (2004); Bapat, (2020)
populations.
8 What are the processes through which various demographic and Copur and Gutter (2019)
socio-economic, social, psychological, cultural, situational and
technological factors differentially relate to a set of financial
Antecedents of outcomes?
PFM 9 What are the possible factors and sub-factors of PFMB? Copur and Gutter (2019), Bapat (2020)
10 Re-examine through future research the impact of various factors on Mugenda et al. (1990); Gorniak (1999); Kidwell and
financial management behaviors such as income level, education, Turrisi (2004); Perry and Morris (2005); Grable et al.
household size, self-control, personality traits, LOC, financial (2009); Xu et al. (2015); Pak and Chatterjee (2016);
education and FL. Zulfaris et al. (2020)
11 Examine the relationship between fintech and various consumer Xiao and Tao (2020)
financial topics.
 12 What are the antecedents of financial knowledge (Objective vs Grable et al. (2009)
subjective) as a pivotal factor for sound financial behavior?
13 Explore the hierarchical financial behavior on other behaviors (other Xiao and O’ Neill (2018a)
than budgeting) such as saving, investing, borrowing, etc.
14 How demographics indirectly affect financial outcomes via financial Shim et al. (2009, 2010)
Mediators of PFM socialization processes?
15 What are the pathways between various factors and sound financial Barbic et al. (2019)
management behavior?
16 What is the effect of a mediating relationship of financial attitude Shim et al. (2010)
between financial socialization and financial behavior?
17 What is the effect of psychological factors as mediators between Bapat (2020)
demographics and financial behavior?
Moderators of 18 What are the interactions of social categorizations such as Pepin (2019); Cineli (2020)
FPM race/ethnicity or socio-economic status in couples’ financial systems
and relational outcomes?

19 Re-examine the moderating effects of FL on the relationship between Eagly and Chaiken, (1993); Barbic et al. (2019)
financial attitude and financial behavior.
20 What are the interaction effects of professional financial advice with Topa et al. (2018)
FL and financial behavior?
21 What is the moderating role of culture on FL and behavior? Grable et al. (2009)
22 What is the moderating role of additional psychological factors in Miotto and Parente (2015)
changing the relationship between demographics, FL, social factors
and financial behavior?
23 How use of fin-tech may influence FL level and its interaction effect Bapat (2019); Morgan and Trinh (2019)
towards financial behavior?
Consequences of 24 Whether there is an existence of linear relationship between income, Stevenson and Wolfers, 2013
PFM PFM and happiness?
25 Whether relationship exists between financial attitude, financial Xiao et al. (2014); Spuhlera and Dew (2019)
behavior and financial satisfaction?
26 Examine the relationship between financial behavior, financial access Birkenmaier and Fu (2019)
and financial well-being.
 27 Does FL and better financial behavior results in financial resilience? Lusardi et al. (2020)
28 What are the consequences of PFM behavior? Xiao et al. (2014)
Measures of PFM 29 How can the construct of PFMB be measured/ Which financial Xiao (2008); Dew and Xiao (2011)
behaviors constitute it?
30 Develop age or life situations specific PFMB scales. Xiao (2008)
Research 31 Extend the research to include more conceptual papers focusing on Schuchardt et al. (2007)
methodology better conceptualization of the PFMB construct.
32 Add studies that are qualitative in nature and collect data from Boon et al. (2011); Navickas et al. (2014)
secondary sources as well.
33 Use of SEM in future studies and mixed methodology of research. Miotto and Parente (2015); Birkenmaier and Fu (2019);
Bapat (2020);
34 How can the causality issue between FL and financial behaviour be Lusardi and Mitchell (2014)
resolved?
35 How can the causality issue between FL and financial experience be Frijns et al. (2014)
resolved?
36 Explore the causality issue between financial behavior and financial Xiao et al. (2010)
access.
 Records identified through two
After limiting the results
Identification databases: Web of Science and
to English language
Scopus (1578)

1138 records after removal of 440 duplicates were

duplicates removed

Documents screened on the

Screening

basis of reading title and Retained for full paper

abstract relevant to the subject consideration
of PFMB (n=245)

133 articles shortlisted on

Eligibility

antecedents and consequences

of PFMB
Manual addition of 27
relevant articles on
antecedents and
consequences through
cross references
Inclusion

Studies included in the final

review (n=160)

 
Figure 1. Retrieval and selection of articles
 Evolution of Theories Theory of Self Control; Transtheoretical
Model of Change; Theory of Mental
Accounting; Theory of Consumer
Socialization; Rational Expectations Theory;
Family Resource Management Theory; Social
Cognitive Theory

Rational Behavior Theory;

Theory of Reasoned
Action; Self-Efficacy
concept; Social Learning
Theory; Prospect Theory

Life Cycle Hypothesis;

Role Theory; Modern Asset Pricing Models;
Portfolio Theory; Social Efficient Market
Exchange Theory Hypothesis

Hofstede's
Cultural
Value
Dimensions;
Theory of Planned Couples and
Behavior; Theory of Social Finances
Behavior Theory

Maslow's Need
Motives Theory Hierarchy Theory

Time Period 

1931-1940 1941-1950 1951-1960 1961-1970 1971-1980 1981-1990 1991-2000 2001-2010  

Figure 2. Evolution of theories on PFMB

 Number of Articles

2011-2020 109

2001-2010 33

1991-2000 11

1981-1990 6

1971-1980 1

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Figure 3. Publication trend of 160 articles

 Number of Articles Based on Sample Population

Adults (All Age Groups) 52

Young Adults 26
Couples 20
Low Income 16
Households 16
No Sample Specific 16
Women 4
High School Students 3
Generation Y 2
Professionals 1
Primary Students 1
Older 1
Individual Investors 1
Government Employees 1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Figure 4. Overview of sample population used in 160 studies

 Number of Articles Based on PFM Themes

50 44
45 41 42
40 37
35 30
30
25 20
20 16
15 12 12
10 6 8
2 4
5 1 1 1 1
0

Figure 5. Number of publications based on PFMB themes across 160 studies

  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Antecedents of PFMB
Consequences of PFMB
Demographic and Socio-economic Psychological  Financial
                

Age, Marital Status, Gender, Income, Financial risk tolerance, satisfaction

Education, Job Status, Household Size, Financial attitude, Cognitive  Financial
Occupation, Race/Ethnicity, Family abilities, Self- regulation,
well-being
Income, Family Structure, Nuclear/Joint Locus of control, Financial
 Quality of
Family, Length of Marriage, Home self-efficacy, Negative
life
ownership, life cycle, Earning disparities emotions, Distrust, Cognitive

                                  
Mediators  Relationship
between partners, Gender egalitarian style, Mental budgeting,
 Attitude towards money satisfaction
values, Gender of the higher earner Motivation, Anxiety, Self-
between partners, Relationship type, esteem, Affect, Materialism,  Financial
 Self -control
Female Labor Market participation, Past behavior, Subjective status
 Financial attitude
Breadwinning role  norm, Self-control, Perceived  Financial
                                                  

 Economic pressure Access

ability, Preference for credit,  Financial self-efficacy
Planning horizon,  Financial
 Generalized anxiety Vulnerability
Personality traits Impulsiveness, Propensity to
plan, Optimism, Financial  Investment advice use  Financial
Conscientiousness, Agreeableness,  Locus of control, Power anxiety
threat, Attitude towards
Openness to change, Extraversion,
money, Time orientation,  Subjective financial  Happiness
Neuroticism
Framing effect, Self - literacy  Net worth
confidence, Emotional  Personal savings  Financial
intelligence, Self-other orientation resilience
orientation, Psychological  Money management  Overall well-
Social type Procrastination skills being
Financial socialization (Parents, Peers,  Financial
Workplace, Colleagues, Media), Parental capability
Situational
Norms Health issues, Death,  Old age
Divorce, Marriage, Birth of a anxiety
child, Inheritance

Technological
Fin-tech (Electronic banking, mobile
Cultural
payments, smartphone apps), Access of
Individualism/ Collectivism,
financial information through internet
Power distance,
Masculinity/Femineity,
Uncertainty avoidance
Environmental (e.g., Genetic)

Moderators
Financial education
 Financial literacy
Financial literacy At school, college,
 Cognitive Closure
Objective financial literacy, Subjective workplace, society
 Culture
financial literacy
 Excessive lifestyle
 Financial organization
 Financial risk tolerance
Others  Perceived control
Professional Financial Advice, Financial experience, Financial  Self-regulation
                                             

information, Financial resources, Communication, Financial vulnerability  Time perspective

Figure 6. A framework of antecedents and consequences of PFMB