See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/333965615

Impact of Financial Literacy on Investment Decisions: The

Mediating Effect of Big-Five Personality Traits Model

Article · June 2019

CITATIONS READS

0 2,423

2 authors:

Nasrullah Hamza Imtiaz Arif

Government Of Pakistan 55 PUBLICATIONS   177 CITATIONS   
1 PUBLICATION   0 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Does Terrorism Hampered Foreign Direct Investment: Fresh Evidence from Terror Effected Countries View project

Influence of Brand Related User-Generated Content Through Facebook on Consumer Behavior: A Stimulus-Organism-Response Framework View
project

All content following this page was uploaded by Imtiaz Arif on 23 June 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Market Forces Volume 14, Issue 1
College of Management Sciences June 2019

Impact of Financial Literacy

on Investment Decisions: The
Mediating Effect of Big-Five
Personality Traits Model
Nasrullah Hamza
Government College, Gulzar-e-Hijri, Karachi, Pakistan

Imtiaz Arif1
Iqra University, Karachi, Pakistan

Abstract
The study examines the impact of financial literacy on investment decisions with the
mediating effect of personality traits based on the big-five model. A total of 235 respons-
es from Karachi were collected using the convenience sampling technique. The five-point
Likert scale questionnaire was used alongside the Smart-PLS software for data analysis.
The results suggest that financial literacy did not have a significant effect on investment
decisions through agreeableness, conscientiousness and extraversion. However, financial
literacy has a significant negative impact on investment decisions through openness to
experience and a significant positive impact through neuroticism. The study helps improve
our understanding of investor behavior by considering the mediating role of big five per-
sonality traits on the relationship between financial literacy and investment decisions. It is
recommended that financial institutions should provide investment counseling services to
prospective investors using the consumer profile technique.

Keywords: Financial literacy, big-five model, investment decisions, PLS-SEM, Pakistan.

Introduction
Behavioral finance suggests that individuals exhibit cognitive and affective behavior
which leads to deviation from rational behavior. The field of behavioral finance is based
on the application of human psychology in finance. In the past, finance researchers did
not consider how individual and environmental factors could affect investor decision
making (Xiao & Porto, 2017; Sivaramakrishnan, Srivastava, & Rastogi, 2017). Therefore, this
Corresponding Author: Dr. Imtiaz Arif; Email: [email protected]
1

43
Market Forces Volume 14, Issue 1 Market Forces Volume 14, Issue 1
College of Management Sciences June 2019 College of Management Sciences June 2019

study focuses on the variables which impact the investment decision making criteria of In addition, the study finds that professional investors have a higher trading frequency as
an individual. The study uses investment decisions as the dependent variable. In addition, compared to other investors.
financial literacy is the independent variable, while personality traits are used as mediating
variables. Past studies suggest that individuals do not always behave rationally. The Sivaramakrishnan et al., (2017) examined the effect of financial literacy on investment
behavioral finance literature explores a number of factors that affect the financial decisions decisions in the stock market. The study adopts the theory of planned behavior to explain
of an individual (Davis & Runyan, 2016; Dinç Aydemir & Aren, 2017). investor participation in the stock market of India. The theory of planned behavior
conceptualizes consumer financial literacy as a part of perceived behavioral controls
Financial products such as mortgages, leasing, credit cards, business loans are now (Ajzen, 1991). Structural equation modelling was used for data analysis. The results of the
conveniently available to all investors. Financial development requires that resources are study suggest that the intention to invest in the stock market was positively affected by
used sensibly so that the maximum benefit can be derived (Lusardi & Mitchell, 2014). Poor both subjective and objective financial literacy, whereas behavior was only influenced
quality financial information complicates the decision making process and increases the by objective financial literacy. The study also suggests that financial well-being positively
uncertainty in financial markets (Cox, Brounen, & Neuteboom, 2015). Financial literacy influence investor behavior.
supports efficient management of financial resources. Past studies suggest that investors
that have low financial literacy tend to make investment decisions that are not favorable. It Bongomin, Munene, Ntayi & Malinga (2018) focused on testing the association between
has been observed that investors with low financial literacy avoid participation in the stock financial inclusion and financial literacy of the lower class in rural Uganda. The study has a
markets and hold less diversified portfolios (Fedorova, Nekhaenko, & Dovzhenko, 2015). In a cross-sectional quantitative research design. The Baron & Kenney (1986) approach was used
changing world, financial products are becoming increasingly complicated which requires to investigate whether cognition moderates the association between financial inclusion and
investors to remain updated with the latest financial information (Garg & Singh, 2018). financial literacy of lower class in rural areas of Uganda. The results indicate that cognition
Therefore, the study investigates the impact of financial literacy on investment decisions positively moderates the association between financial inclusion and financial literacy of
with the mediating effect of personality traits based on the big-five model. lower class in rural areas of Uganda. In addition, the study found that financial inclusion of
the lower class in rural areas of Uganda is influenced by financial literacy and cognition.
Literature Review
Lubis et al., (2015) examined the psychological factors which impact investment Adam et al., (2018) investigated gender inequality in financial literacy of retired individuals
decisions. The study discusses the criteria for investment decisions from three dimensions, of Cape Coast, Ghana. The study used data from a total of 334 retired individuals comprising
i.e. corporate data, risk and repay. The study also considers the effect of personality traits, 151 females and 183 males. The survey instrument was used to assess the respondent’s
defense mechanisms, financial literacy and emotional intelligence on investment decisions. understanding of budgeting, use of automated teller machines (ATMs), concept of time
A total of 320 respondents were surveyed for data collection. The results suggest that all the value of money, types of bank accounts, use of cheques and insurance facilities. The data
independent variables influence investment decisions except emotional intelligence. was analyzed through the independent t-test and Pearson correlations. The results of the
study indicate that male respondents were more financially literate as compared to female
Fedorova et al., (2015) examined the influence of financial literacy on the stock market. respondents. The study anticipates that gender differences in financial literacy are likely to
The study uses data from 1,006 participants. The survey instrument was used to collect data diminish in the future due to a change in social trends. On the other hand, Potrich & Vieira
from the respondents. Demographic information such as, income, age, gender, education, (2018) analyzed the financial literacy of respondents residing in different cities of Brazil. The
job designation was sought from the respondents. The findings of the study suggest results suggest that financial literacy had a direct impact on compulsive buying behavior of
that financially literate investors participate proactively in the stock market. Kourtidis, respondents.
Chatzoglou, & Sevic (2017) examined whether the personality traits of investors affect their
trading behavior in the market. The study used structural equation modeling for analyzing Conceptual Framework
the data collected from 345 Greek investors. The findings of the study suggests that the Figure 1 shows the conceptual framework. The conceptual framework is based on three
trading behavior and performance of Greek investors are influenced by their personality theories, i.e. theory of planned behavior (Ajzen, 1985), prospect theory (Kahneman &
traits. The results indicate that trading volume has a positive effect on trading frequency.

44 45
Market Forces Volume 14, Issue 1 Market Forces Volume 14, Issue 1
College of Management Sciences June 2019 College of Management Sciences June 2019

Tversky, 1979) and five-factor personality model (Digman, 1990). cases were used for empirical analysis. Thus, the response rate was approximately 81.3%.

Measures
All the variables of the study were measured using scales adapted from the previous
literature. The scales for knowledge, skills, attitude and behavior were adapted from
Personality Trade using Bongomin et al., (2018). In addition, the scales for personality traits i.e. openness,
the Big Five Model extraversion, consientiousness, agreeableness and neuroticism were adapted from John
Self-Image/ & Srivastava (1999). Finally, the scales of firm-image coincidence, accounting information,
Image coincidence
Openness neutral information, advocate information and personal financial needs were adapted from
Knowledge Hassan Al-Tamimi & Anood Bin Kalli (2009).
Accounting
Conscientiousness Information
Data Analysis
Skills Henseler, Ringle, and Sarstedt (2015) suggest that PLS-SEM has smaller size requirements
Financial Investment Neutral
Extraversion as compared to CB-SEM. Therefore, PLS-SEM was applied in this research.
Literacy Decisions Information
Attitude
Results and Findings
Agreeableness Advocate
Information
Behavior
Pre-testing
Neuroticism Personal
Prior to administering the questionnaire a pilot test was undertaken to ascertain the
Financial Needs reliability of constructs used in the study. The Cronbach’s Alpha values for all variables were
above 0.70, indicating acceptable internal consistency (Nunally & Bernstein, 1994).
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework
Data screening
The authors have screened the data for both univariate outliers and multivariate
According to the theory of planned behavior, individuals behavior depends on their on outliers. For univariate outliers, standardized values (z-scores) were estimated, whereas, for
behavioral intentions. Behavioral intentions depend on internal and external factors (Ajzen, multivariate outliers, Mahalanobis Distance (D2) had been estimated. The cut-off values
2002). On the other hand, prospect theory suggests that individuals are generally risk- for univariate outliers were ±3.29, whereas, D2 < 0.001 was used for multivariate outliers
averse and take decisions that reflect this attitude towards risk. Prospect theory focuses (Tabachnick, Fidell, & Osterlind, 2001). The responses exceeding the cut-off values were
on the cognitive behavior of individuals and their desire to avoid risk for gaining particular deleted from the data. A total of seven univariate outliers and two multivariate outliers were
objectives and outcomes (Kahneman & Tversky, 1979). In addition, the five-factor model detected and dropped. Therefore, the final dataset for empirical analysis consisted of 235
suggests that an individual’s behavior is dependent upon his personality traits, i.e. openness, responses.
conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness and neuroticism (Digman, 1990).
Demographic Profile of the Respondents
Methodology Table 1 provides the demographic profile of the respondents of the study.

Sample
The study uses data that was collected from Karachi, Pakistan. A total of 300 questionnaires
were distributed to the respondents using convenience sampling while 255 questionnaires
were filled and returned. After excluding 11 un-useable questionnaires the remaining 244

46 47
Market Forces Volume 14, Issue 1 Market Forces Volume 14, Issue 1
College of Management Sciences June 2019 College of Management Sciences June 2019

Table 1: Demographic Profile (n = 235)

Frequency Percent Table 2 Measurement Model
Age Group 18 years to 25 years 66 28.1 Second Order First Order Items Factor CR AVE
26 years to 35 years 46 19.6 Loadings
36 years to 45 years 61 26.0 Attitude 4 0.653 -0.901 0.862 0.614
46 years to 55 years 40 17.0 Behavior 3 0.897-0.973 0.956 0.880
56 years to 65 years 22 9.4 Financial Literacy Knowledge 4 0.690-0.893 0.868 0.624
Gender Female 166 70.6 Skills 3 0.752-0.900 0.873 0.697
Male 69 29.4 Agreeableness 3 0.883-0.935 0.938 0.834
Employment Status Full-time 62 26.4 Conscientiousness 2 0.754-0.896 0.812 0.685
Part-time 54 23.0 Five Factor Model Extraversion 5 0.559-0.946 0.866 0.573
Self-employed 37 15.7 Openness 4 0.797-0.935 0.771 0.541
Unemployed 31 13.2 Neuroticism 3 0.573-0.931 0.922 0.747
Student 33 14.0 Neutral Information 4 0.860-0.935 0.908 0.713
Retired 18 7.7 Personal Financial Needs 3 0.8520.938 0.837 0.563
Monthly Income 10,000 or less 62 26.4 Investment Decisions Self/Firm Image 2 0.983-0.985 0.942 0.902
10,001 to 25,000 98 41.7 Accounting Information 4 0.734-0.911 0.943 0.846
25,001 to 40,000 54 23.0 Advocate Information 4 0.717-0.815 0.984 0.968
40,001 to 65,000 21 8.9 The results show that the factor loadings for most of the variables are greater than 0.6.
Academic Qualification Intermediate 13 5.5 Moreover, composite reliability and AVE are greater than 0.70 and 0.50 respectively, in most
Undergraduate 100 42.6 cases. Thus, it can be inferred that the variables fulfill the requirements of construct validity
(Hair, 2010; Fornell & Larcker, 1981).
Graduate 58 24.7
Post-Graduate 64 27.2

Measurement Model
Table 2 shows the composite reliability, average variance explained and factor loadings.

48 49
 Market Forces Volume 14, Issue 1 Market Forces Volume 14, Issue 1
College of Management Sciences June 2019 College of Management Sciences June 2019

Discriminant Validity Statistical Results

Table 3 provides the Heterotrait-Monotrait (HTMT) ratio for assessing discriminant Tables 4 and 5 provides the statistical results from PLS-SEM.
validity.
Table 3: Discriminant Validity using HTMT Ratio Table 4: 2nd-Order Reflective Construct (Financial Literacy)
Table 3: Discriminant Validity using HTMT Ratio
AI ADV AGREE ATT BEHAVE CONSC EXTRA KNOW NEURO NEUTRAL OPEN PFN SI Skills Estimates Std. Error T-Stats Prob.
Accounting Information Financial Literacy → Attitudes 0.797 0.023 34.686 0.000
Advocate Information 0.696
Agreeableness 0.324 0.219
Financial Literacy → Behavior 0.958 0.004 227.511 0.000
Attitudes 0.691 0.683 0.156 Financial Literacy → Knowledge 0.921 0.008 111.724 0.000
Behavior 0.943 0.690 0.083 0.712 Financial Literacy → Skills 0.831 0.023 35.650 0.000
Conscientiousness 0.571 0.361 0.953 0.347 0.126
Extraversion 0.248 0.447 0.547 0.312 0.330 0.537
Knowledge 0.882 0.811 0.200 0.825 0.961 0.378 0.284 Table 4 suggests that financial literacy has a positive and significant effect on attitudes
Neuroticism 0.300 0.413 0.843 0.609 0.425 0.771 0.675 0.572 (0.797, p<0.000), behavior (0.958, p<0.001), knowledge (0.921, p<0.000) and skills (0.831,
Neutral Information 0.677 0.919 0.064 0.775 0.914 0.195 0.256 0.892 0.489 p<0.000).
Openness 0.224 0.201 0.076 0.253 0.214 0.373 0.204 0.240 0.291 0.170
Personal Financial Needs 0.605 0.951 0.082 0.857 0.652 0.187 0.296 0.854 0.559 0.776 0.142 Table 5: 2nd-Order Reflective Construct (Investment Decision)
Self-Image 0.947 0.629 0.197 0.796 0.787 0.346 0.349 0.755 0.484 0.570 0.090 0.753
Skills 0.840 0.901 0.188 0.591 0.981 0.300 0.330 0.818 0.449 0.956 0.173 0.696 0.635 Estimates Std. Error T-Stats Prob.
The HTMT ratio was used to assess discriminant validity of the constructs. The HTMT Investment Decision → Accounting Information 0.843 0.023 35.982 0.000
ratio should be less than 1.00 for acceptable discriminant validity ( Hair et al., 2012; Clark & Investment Decision → Advocate Information 0.876 0.010 85.336 0.000
Watson, 1995; Henseler et al., 2015; Kline, 2015). Table 5 suggests that the HTMT ratio is less Investment Decision → Neutral Information 0.874 0.014 62.090 0.000
than 1 for all the constructs and therefore, they have acceptable discriminant validity.
Investment Decision → Personal Financial Needs 0.876 0.010 91.825 0.000
[+] Investment Decision → Self-Image 0.848 0.020 42.533 0.000
[+] 0.764
0.182 Neutral Information
[+]
0.849 Neuroticism Table 5 suggests that investment decisions have a positive and significant effect on
Knowledge [+] -0.054 0.874 [+] accounting information (0.843, p<0.001), advocate information (0.876, p<0.000), neutral
-0.426 0.719
[+] 0.921 0.008
0.848 Self Image
information (0.874, p<0.000), personal financial needs (0.876, p<0.000) and self-image
0.691 0.086
0.831
0.089 Agreeableness
[+] [+]
(0.848, p<0.000).
Skills 0.928 0.843
[+] 0.895 0.711
0.797 0.108 0.018
[+] [+] 0.876 Accounting Information
0.635 0.012 Investment
Financial Literacy Decisions
0.958 0.390 0.022
Attitude Conscientiousness [+]
0.876 0.767
[+] -0.144
0.254 [+]
0.917 0.152 Advocate Information
Behavior Extraversion [+]
0.767
[+]
0.065 Personal Financial
Needs
Openness

Figure 2: Measurement Model

50 51
Market Forces Volume 14, Issue 1 Market Forces Volume 14, Issue 1
College of Management Sciences June 2019 College of Management Sciences June 2019

Path Analysis
Table 6 provides the results of direct effect of the developed hypotheses. Indirect Effects
Table 7 shows the indirect effect of the hypotheses.
Table 6: Direct Effect Path Analysis for Hypothesis-Testing
Table 7: Indirect Effect Path Analysis for Hypothesis-Testing
Estimates Std. Error T-Stats Prob.
Estimates Std. Error T-Stats Prob.
Financial Literacy → Agreeableness 0.089 0.064 1.388 0.083
Financial Literacy → Agreeableness →
Financial Literacy → Conscientiousness 0.108 0.086 1.253 0.105 Investment Decisions 0.008 0.007 1.080 0.140
Financial Literacy → Extraversion 0.390 0.056 6.966 0.000 Financial Literacy → Conscientiousness →
Financial Literacy → Neuroticism -0.426 0.040 10.701 0.000 Investment Decisions 0.002 0.006 0.340 0.367
Financial Literacy → Openness 0.254 0.059 4.299 0.000 Financial Literacy → Extraversion →
Financial Literacy → Investment Decision 0.928 0.027 33.741 0.000 Investment Decisions 0.008 0.013 0.654 0.256
Agreeableness → Investment Decision 0.086 0.041 2.122 0.017 Financial Literacy → Neuroticism →
Conscientiousness → Investment Decision 0.018 0.043 0.430 0.334 Investment Decisions 0.023 0.017 1.359 0.087
Extraversion → Investment Decision 0.022 0.031 0.690 0.245 Financial Literacy → Openness →
Neuroticism → Investment Decision -0.054 0.039 1.367 0.086 Investment Decisions -0.037 0.009 4.080 0.000
Openness → Investment Decision -0.144 0.026 5.589 0.000
The results show that openness mediates financial literacy and investment decisions
relationship. Moreover, the results show that the mediating roles of agreeableness,
The direct path analysis results reported in Table 6 suggests that agreeableness (0.089, conscientiousness, extraversion and neuroticism are insignificant.
p<0.10), extraversion (0.390, p<0.001), and openness to experience (0.254, p<0.001) are
significantly and positively affected by financial literacy. On the other hand, neuroticism
(-0.426, p<0.001) was negatively affected by financial literacy while conscientiousness (0.108,
Predictive Relevance
Table 8 provides the predictive relevance of the variables in the structural model.
p>0.10) was not significantly affected by financial literacy. Similarly, agreeableness (0.086,
p<0.05) has significant positive impact on investment decisions while neuroticism (-0.054,
Table 8: Predictive Relevance
p<0.10) and openness to experience (-0.144, p<0.001) have a significant negative impact on
investment decisions. However, conscientiousness (0.018, p>0.10) and extraversion (0.022, R-Squared Adjusted R Squared Q Square
p>0.10) have been found positive but statistically insignificant in relation to investment Agreeableness 0.008 0.004 0.005
decisions.
Conscientiousness 0.012 0.007 0.006
Extraversion 0.152 0.148 0.030
Openness 0.065 0.061 0.025
Neuroticism 0.182 0.178 0.091
Investment Decisions 0.895 0.893 0.462

Table 8 suggests that financial literacy can explain agreeableness by 0.8 percent,

52 53
Market Forces Volume 14, Issue 1 Market Forces Volume 14, Issue 1
College of Management Sciences June 2019 College of Management Sciences June 2019

conscientiousness by 1.2 percent, extraversion by 15.2 percent, openness to experience by Annexure 1

6.5 percent and neuroticism by 18.2 percent. However, financial literacy and all five mediators Constructs and Items in the Questionnaire
including agreeableness, conscientiousness, extraversion, openness to experience and
neuroticism can predict investment decisions by 89.5 percent. In addition, all the Q-square Financial Literacy
coefficients are also greater than zero. Therefore, predictive relevance has been achieved for
Knowledge
the structural model.
In this household, members are Knowledgeable about financial risks
Conclusion In this household, members are knowledgeable about costs associated with financial
The results of direct relationships suggests that financial literacy has a positive and products/services
significant impact on agreeableness, extraversion, openness and investment decisions. In this household, members can easily compute interest rates
However, financial literacy has a negative and significant impact on neuroticism. On the In this household, members can easily understand simple financial terms
other hand, financial literacy does not have a significant influence on conscientiousness. In this household, members have knowledge of key features of financial products/services
The effect of neuroticism and openness on investment decisions is significant and negative,
Skills
whereas the impact of agreeableness on investment decisions is positive and significant.
On the other hand, the impact of conscientiousness and extraversion on investment Members of my household have the ability to prepare a personal budget
decisions are insignificant. The results also suggest that neuroticism and openness mediate In this household, members have the ability to decide what financial services to choose
the relationship between financial literacy and investment decisions. On the Contrary, In this household, members have the ability to accurately determine benefits from financial
agreeableness, conscientiousness and extraversion do not have a significant mediating role dealings
on financial literacy and investment decisions. Hence, the findings suggest that financial In this household, members have the ability to accurately determine costs from financial
literacy and big five personality traits help investors in taking rational investment decisions. dealings
In this household, members are capable of evaluating the different financial products and
The development of financial education programs enhance the financial knowledge
services
of employees, investors and policymakers. Many organizations are introducing financial
literacy programs which help managers to enhance their financial knowledge. On the Attitudes
other hand, many companies are also providing financial counselling services to investors Members of this household have good attitude towards saving money
after assessing their profile and attitude towards risk. The results of the study imply that Members of this household have good attitude towards spending money responsibly
policymakers and managers need to focus on profiling investors based on their personality In this household, members find it easy to save money
traits. This way of profiling will help attract new investors and help increase the total financial
In this household, members enjoy spending money
investment in the market. Future studies may examine the impact of financial literacy on
investment decisions in a cross country setting. In addition, other variables such as risk Members of this household are always organized in regards to managing money
adjusted performance and portfolio performance may also be included to investigate their Behavior
effect on investment decisions. In this household, we always read the terms and conditions on use of financial products/
services
In this household, members always look to saving money
In this household, members always look to spending money
Members of this household always keep aside some money for their future use
Members of this household always choose financial products that suits their needs and
conditions

54 55
Market Forces Volume 14, Issue 1 Market Forces Volume 14, Issue 1
College of Management Sciences June 2019 College of Management Sciences June 2019

Five-Factor Model Of Personality Traits Investment Decisions

Extraversion Self-image/firm image coincidence
I see myself as someone who is talkative Religious reasons
I see myself as someone who is friendly Feelings for a firm’s products and services
I see myself as someone who is full of energy Reputation of the firm’s board members
I see myself as someone who generates a lot of enthusiasm “Get rich quick”
I see myself as someone who tends to be communicative Firm status in industry
Agreeableness Accounting information
I see myself as someone who tends to find care for others Past performance of the firm’s stock
I see myself as someone who is helpful and unselfish with others Expected bonus shares
I see myself as someone who starts agreement with others The results of technical analysis
I see myself as someone who has a forgiving nature Stock marketability
I see myself as someone who is generally trusting Expected corporate earnings
Conscientiousness Neutral information
I see myself as someone who does a thorough job Government holdings
I see myself as someone who is caring Fluctuation/developments in the stock index
I see myself as someone who is a reliable worker Coverage in the press
I see myself as someone who tends to be organized Statements from government officials
I see myself as someone who tends to be active Current economic indicators
Neuroticism (Emotional Instability) Advocate information
I see myself as someone who is depressed, blue Broker recommendation
I see myself as someone who is intolerant, cannot handles stress Family member opinions
I see myself as someone who can be tense Friend recommendations
I see myself as someone who worries a lot Opinions of the firm’s majority stockholders
I see myself as someone who is emotionally instable, easily upset Financial advisors and analysts’ recommendation
Openness Personal financial needs
I see myself as someone who is original, comes up with new ideas Diversification purpose
I see myself as someone who is curious about many different things Dividends paid
I see myself as someone who is ingenious, a deep thinker Expected dividends
I see myself as someone who has an active imagination Ease of obtaining borrowed funds
I see myself as someone who is inventive Minimizing risk

56 57
Market Forces Volume 14, Issue 1 Market Forces Volume 14, Issue 1
College of Management Sciences June 2019 College of Management Sciences June 2019

References Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables
and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(3), 382-
Adam, A. M., Boadu, M. O., & Frimpong, S. (2018). Does gender disparity in financial literacy 388.
still persist after retirement? Evidence from Ghana. International Journal of Social
Economics, 45(1), 18-28. Garg, N., & Singh, S. (2018). Financial literacy among youth. International Journal of Social
Economics, 45(1), 173-186.
Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In Action control (pp.
11-39). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. Hair, J. F. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis. USA: Pearson College Division.

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision Hair, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Mena, J. A. (2012). An assessment of the use of partial
processes, 50(2), 179-211. least squares structural equation modeling in marketing research. Journal of the Academy
of Marketing Science, 40(3), 414-433.
Ajzen, I. (2002). Perceived behavioral control, self‐efficacy, locus of control, and the theory of
planned behavior. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 32(4), 665-683. Hassan-Al-Tamimi, H. A., & Anood-Bin-Kalli, A. (2009). Financial literacy and investment
decisions of UAE investors. The Journal of Risk Finance, 10(5), 500-516.
Baron, R. and Kenney, D. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological
research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality & Social Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant
Psychology, 51(16), 1173-1182 validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 43(1), 115-135.
Bongomin, G. O. C., Munene, J. C., Ntayi, J. M., & Malinga, C. A. (2018). Nexus between
financial literacy and financial inclusion: Examining the moderating role of cognition John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and
from a developing country perspective. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 36(7), theoretical perspectives. Handbook of personality: Theory and Research, 2(1999), 102-138.
1190-1212.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). On the interpretation of intuitive probability: A reply to
Clark, L. A., & Watson, D. (1995). Constructing validity: Basic issues in objective scale Jonathan Cohen. Cognition, 7(4), 409-411
development. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 309-319.
Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. London: Guilford
Cox, R., Brounen, D., & Neuteboom, P. (2015). Financial literacy, risk aversion and choice of Publications.
mortgage type by households. The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, 50(1),
74-112. Kourtidis, D., Chatzoglou, P., & Sevic, Z. (2017). The role of personality traits in investors
trading behaviour: Empirical evidence from Greek. International Journal of Social
Davis, K., & Runyan, R. C. (2016). Personality traits and financial satisfaction: Investigation of Economics, 44(11), 1402-1420.
a hierarchical approach. Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, 27(1), 47-60.
Lubis, H., Kumar, M. D., Ikbar, P., & Muneer, S. (2015). Role of psychological factors in
Digman, J. M. (1990). Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model.  Annual individuals investment decisions. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues,
Review of Psychology, 41(1), 417-440. 5(1S), 397-405.
Dinç Aydemir, S., & Aren, S. (2017). Do the effects of individual factors on financial risk-taking Lusardi, A., & Mitchell, O. S. (2014). The economic importance of financial literacy: Theory
behavior diversify with financial literacy?. Kybernetes, 46(10), 1706-1734. and evidence. Journal of Economic Literature, 52(1), 5-44.
Fedorova, E. A. e., Nekhaenko, V. V., & Dovzhenko, S. E. e. (2015). Impact of financial literacy Nunally, J., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychonometric Theory. McGraw-Hill: New York.
of the population of the Russian Federation on behavior on financial market: Empirical
evaluation. Studies on Russian Economic Development, 26(4), 394-402. Potrich, A. C. G., & Vieira, K. M. (2018). Demystifying financial literacy: a behavioral perspective
analysis. Management Research Review, 41(9), 1047-1068.

58 59
Market Forces Volume 14, Issue 1
College of Management Sciences June 2019

Sivaramakrishnan, S., Srivastava, M., & Rastogi, A. (2017). Attitudinal factors, financial literacy,
and stock market participation. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 35(5), 818-841.
Tabachnick, B. G., Fidell, L. S., & Osterlind, S. J. (2001). Using Multivariate Statistics (5th edn).
New York: NY: Haper and Row.
Xiao, J. J., & Porto, N. (2017). Financial education and financial satisfaction: Financial literacy,
behavior, and capability as mediators. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 35(5), 805-
817.

60
View publication stats