{"id":20995,"date":"2024-10-04T14:31:14","date_gmt":"2024-10-04T09:01:14","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.sachdevajk.in\/?p=20995"},"modified":"2024-10-04T14:32:46","modified_gmt":"2024-10-04T09:02:46","slug":"research-analysis-of-financial-literacy","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.sachdevajk.in\/?p=20995","title":{"rendered":"Research analysis of Financial Literacy"},"content":{"rendered":"

Title :<\/span> Financial Literacy<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

Authors<\/strong><\/em> :<\/span> Smriti Ahuja (021330024578<\/span>)<\/span> , Dhani Awasthi(021330824010<\/span>)<\/span>, Sanjhi Sisodia (021330624099<\/span>)<\/span>, YashPokharna (021330124031<\/span>)<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

Introduction<\/b><\/em> :<\/span> \u00a0 <\/span><\/p>\n

The questions are designed to assess an individual’s past financial behavior and knowledge to understand how well they m<\/a>anaged their finances before gaining formal financial literacy. This context helps in identifying areas where they felt confident or lacked understanding, which is crucial for developing targeted financial education\u00a0programs.<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

Objective<\/strong> <\/em>:<\/span><\/p>\n

To understand the issue where financial literacy is lacking and be able to develop financial education programs.<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

Literature <\/span><\/strong><\/em>Review<\/strong><\/em> :<\/span><\/p>\n

The seminal work on the impact of financial education :<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

The 2001 study by Bernheim, Garrett, and Maki found that middle-aged individuals who took a personal financial management course in high school saved a higher proportion of their incomes compared to those who did not. This research used data from a Merrill Lynch survey and historical education records. However, many respondents had difficulty recalling whether they had taken such a course, making it challenging to determine the true impact of financial education on their later saving behaviors.<\/p>\n

Financial literacy of high school student<\/strong><\/em> :<\/p>\n

From 1997 to 2006, five extensive, biennial national surveys of high school seniors were conducted to gauge the level of financial literacy among young American adults. The findings indicate a poor degree of capacity. \u2060<\/span>The exam’s low baseline results have gotten worse, with scores on the 31 questions currently averaging slightly over 50%. \u2060<\/span>Students from households with larger financial means tend to be much more financially literate than those from families that are less well-off. Hence, aggravating the inequality of economic prosperity among families. \u2060<\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

Data <\/span><\/strong><\/em>Collection<\/strong><\/em> :<\/span><\/p>\n

For the above problem, following are 5 questions which were framed to be<\/p>\n

answered on Likert scale with 1 to 5 points. 100 students from ITM Business<\/p>\n

School – MBA College in Kharghar were surveyed & for each question which<\/p>\n

was coded as 1 to 5, mean, standard deviation, standard error and t-<\/p>\n

stat\u00a0was\u00a0calculated.<\/p>\n

Questions<\/strong><\/em> :<\/span><\/p>\n

Q1. I felt confident managing my personal finances.<\/p>\n

Q2. I had experience creating a financial plan.<\/p>\n

Q3. I used to track my expenses regularly.<\/p>\n

Q4. I researched before making major financial decisions.<\/p>\n

Q5. I was aware risk associated with credits\u00a0and\u00a0loan.<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

All questions are based on the Likert scale:<\/p>\n

\u2022 Strongly Disagree – 1<\/p>\n

\u2022 Disagree – 2<\/p>\n

\u2022 Neutral – 3<\/p>\n

\u2022 Agree – 4<\/p>\n

\u2022 Strongly\u00a0Agree\u00a0\u2013\u00a05<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

Data <\/span><\/strong><\/em>Analysis<\/strong><\/em> :<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n
\n

Response No.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

Q1<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

Q2<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

Q3<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

Q4<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

Q5<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n
\n

Mean<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

3.52<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

3.33<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

3.51<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

3.7<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

3.55<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n
\n

Standard Deviation<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

1.1234<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

1.2065<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

1.2267<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

1.0396<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

1.1403<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n
\n

Standard Error<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

0.1123<\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

0.1206<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

0.1226<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

0.1039<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

0.114<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n
\n

T-State<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

4.6288<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

2.735<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

4.157<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

6.733<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

4.824<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

\n
\n

Results<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

Strongly Agree<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

Agree<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

Strongly Agree<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

Strongly Agree<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n

\n
\n

Strongly Agree<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

\u00a0<\/p>\n

\u00a0 Conclusion:<\/span><\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n