Dealing with “Do Not Know” Responses in the Assessment of Financial Literacy: The Use of a Sample Selection Model

IF 2.1 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE International Journal of Financial Studies Pub Date : 2024-08-06 DOI:10.3390/ijfs12030076
Anna Conte, Paola Paiardini, Jacopo Temperini
{"title":"Dealing with “Do Not Know” Responses in the Assessment of Financial Literacy: The Use of a Sample Selection Model","authors":"Anna Conte, Paola Paiardini, Jacopo Temperini","doi":"10.3390/ijfs12030076","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Financial literacy assessments typically rely on sample surveys containing sets of questions designed to gauge respondents’ comprehension of fundamental financial concepts necessary for making informed decisions. The answers to such questions, either categorical or continuous in nature, generally include a “Do not know” option. If those who choose the “Do not know” option are not a random sample of the population but exhibit peculiar characteristics, treating these observations as either incorrect responses or as missing data may distort the results regarding the determinants of financial literacy. A noteworthy case lies in the observation from survey studies that women tend to choose the “Do not know” option more frequently than men. In similar cases, treating the “Do not know” responses as incorrect answers increases the gender gap in financial literacy while treating them as missing values reduces the gap. We propose using a model with sample selection, which enables us to disentangle the inclination to answer “Do not know” from actual responses. By applying this model to a representative sample of the UK population, we do not find any systematic gender gap in financial knowledge. The study’s novel treatment of “Do not know” responses contributes valuable insights to the broader discourse on the determinants of financial literacy and the related gender-based differences.","PeriodicalId":45794,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Financial Studies","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Financial Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/ijfs12030076","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

Financial literacy assessments typically rely on sample surveys containing sets of questions designed to gauge respondents’ comprehension of fundamental financial concepts necessary for making informed decisions. The answers to such questions, either categorical or continuous in nature, generally include a “Do not know” option. If those who choose the “Do not know” option are not a random sample of the population but exhibit peculiar characteristics, treating these observations as either incorrect responses or as missing data may distort the results regarding the determinants of financial literacy. A noteworthy case lies in the observation from survey studies that women tend to choose the “Do not know” option more frequently than men. In similar cases, treating the “Do not know” responses as incorrect answers increases the gender gap in financial literacy while treating them as missing values reduces the gap. We propose using a model with sample selection, which enables us to disentangle the inclination to answer “Do not know” from actual responses. By applying this model to a representative sample of the UK population, we do not find any systematic gender gap in financial knowledge. The study’s novel treatment of “Do not know” responses contributes valuable insights to the broader discourse on the determinants of financial literacy and the related gender-based differences.
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
在金融知识评估中处理 "不知道 "的回答:样本选择模型的使用
金融知识评估通常依赖于抽样调查,其中包含一系列问题,旨在衡量受访者对做出明智决策所必需的基本金融概念的理解程度。此类问题的答案或为分类答案,或为连续答案,一般都包含一个 "不知道 "选项。如果选择 "不知道 "选项的人不是人口的随机样本,而是表现出特殊的特征,那么将这些观察结果视为不正确的回答或缺失数据,可能会扭曲有关金融素养决定因素的结果。一个值得注意的例子是,调查研究发现,女性比男性更倾向于选择 "不知道 "选项。在类似情况下,将 "不知道 "的回答视为错误答案会增加金融素养方面的性别差距,而将其视为缺失值则会缩小差距。我们建议使用样本选择模型,该模型使我们能够将回答 "不知道 "的倾向与实际回答区分开来。通过将该模型应用于具有代表性的英国人口样本,我们没有发现在金融知识方面存在任何系统性的性别差距。本研究对 "不知道 "回答的新颖处理为金融知识决定因素及相关性别差异的广泛讨论提供了宝贵的见解。
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
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
8.70%
发文量
100
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Financial Interdependencies: Analyzing the Volatility Linkages between Real Estate Investment Trusts, Sukuk, and Oil in GCC Countries Impacts of Digital Transformation and Basel III Implementation on the Credit Risk Level of Vietnamese Commercial Banks Deregulating the Volume Limit on Share Repurchases Microcredit Pricing Model for Microfinance Institutions under Basel III Banking Regulations Efficiency of Healthcare Financing: Case of European Countries
×
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