Defining and measuring financial literacy in the Indian context: a systematic literature review

IF 1.9 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE Managerial Finance Pub Date : 2024-02-05 DOI:10.1108/mf-08-2022-0358
T.P. Arjun, Rameshkumar Subramanian
{"title":"Defining and measuring financial literacy in the Indian context: a systematic literature review","authors":"T.P. Arjun, Rameshkumar Subramanian","doi":"10.1108/mf-08-2022-0358","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>This paper aims to analyse how financial literacy (FL) is conceptualised and operationalised in the Indian context.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) protocol. Thirty-six articles published between 2010 and 2020 were considered for analysis. The FL conceptualisation was examined based on knowledge, ability, skill, attitude and confidence elements. The FL operationalisation was analysed using the modified version of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2012 model for organising the domain for an assessment framework.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>The findings indicate that, despite offering operationalisation details of the FL, 13 out of 36 studies did not include a conceptual definition of FL. Of the 23 studies that mentioned a conceptual definition, 87% are primarily focused on the “knowledge” element and only 39% have combined knowledge, ability/skill and attitude elements in defining FL. As in the developed countries, the Indian studies also preferred investment/saving-related contents in their FL measures. The volume of content focusing on the financial landscape is meagre amongst the FL measures used in India and developed countries. The survey instruments of most studies have been designed in the individuals’ context but have failed to measure the extent to which individuals apply the knowledge in performing their day-to-day financial transactions. Further, it was found that 20 out of 36 studies did not convert the FL level of their target groups into a single indicator or operational value.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that explores the FL’s assessment practices in India. Further, this study offers new insights by comparing the contents of FL measures used in Indian studies with those used in developed countries.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":18140,"journal":{"name":"Managerial Finance","volume":"75 1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Managerial Finance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/mf-08-2022-0358","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to analyse how financial literacy (FL) is conceptualised and operationalised in the Indian context.

Design/methodology/approach

A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) protocol. Thirty-six articles published between 2010 and 2020 were considered for analysis. The FL conceptualisation was examined based on knowledge, ability, skill, attitude and confidence elements. The FL operationalisation was analysed using the modified version of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2012 model for organising the domain for an assessment framework.

Findings

The findings indicate that, despite offering operationalisation details of the FL, 13 out of 36 studies did not include a conceptual definition of FL. Of the 23 studies that mentioned a conceptual definition, 87% are primarily focused on the “knowledge” element and only 39% have combined knowledge, ability/skill and attitude elements in defining FL. As in the developed countries, the Indian studies also preferred investment/saving-related contents in their FL measures. The volume of content focusing on the financial landscape is meagre amongst the FL measures used in India and developed countries. The survey instruments of most studies have been designed in the individuals’ context but have failed to measure the extent to which individuals apply the knowledge in performing their day-to-day financial transactions. Further, it was found that 20 out of 36 studies did not convert the FL level of their target groups into a single indicator or operational value.

Originality/value

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that explores the FL’s assessment practices in India. Further, this study offers new insights by comparing the contents of FL measures used in Indian studies with those used in developed countries.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
印度金融扫盲的定义与衡量:系统文献综述
目的 本文旨在分析印度是如何将金融知识(FL)概念化和可操作化的。设计/方法/途径 采用系统综述和元分析首选报告项目(PRISMA)协议进行了系统文献综述(SLR)。对 2010 年至 2020 年间发表的 36 篇文章进行了分析。根据知识、能力、技能、态度和信心等要素对FL概念化进行了研究。使用经济合作与发展组织(OECD)2012 年国际学生评估项目(PISA)评估框架领域组织模型的修订版分析了FL 的可操作性。研究结果表明,尽管提供了FL 的可操作性细节,但 36 项研究中有 13 项未包含FL 的概念定义。在提及概念定义的 23 项研究中,87%的研究主要关注 "知识 "要素,只有 39% 的研究在定义学习方法时将知识、能力/技能和态度要素结合起来。与发达国家一样,印度的研究在衡量学习能力时也更倾向于与投资/储蓄相关的内容。在印度和发达国家使用的财务状况衡量标准中,侧重于财务状况的内容很少。大多数研究的调查工具都是根据个人情况设计的,但未能衡量个人在日常金融交易中应用知识的程度。此外,在 36 项研究中,有 20 项研究没有将目标群体的财务自由水平转换为单一指标或操作值。此外,本研究通过比较印度研究中使用的 FL 测量内容与发达国家使用的 FL 测量内容,提供了新的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Managerial Finance
Managerial Finance BUSINESS, FINANCE-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
103
期刊介绍: Managerial Finance provides an international forum for the publication of high quality and topical research in the area of finance, such as corporate finance, financial management, financial markets and institutions, international finance, banking, insurance and risk management, real estate and financial education. Theoretical and empirical research is welcome as well as cross-disciplinary work, such as papers investigating the relationship of finance with other sectors.
期刊最新文献
The effects of FinTech adoption on bank loan spreads Twitter-based economic uncertainties and time-frequency connectedness among cryptocurrencies Charity begins at the office: issuing cheap stock and stock options to employees and insiders before going public Corporate spin-offs and stock performance: a comparative study of pure and composite schemes Dividend omissions and dividend cuts behaviour: a dynamic random-effect probit panel regression analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1