







Behavioural economics merges psychology and economics to explore systematic deviations in financial decision-making from traditional economic models. This chapter examines key biases such as mental accounting, present bias, planning fallacy, and misunderstanding of risk, which influence spending, saving, investing, and insuring decisions. Demonstrating the interplay of cognitive biases and heuristics highlights why individuals make suboptimal choices despite financial literacy and resource capacity. Strategies like goal-setting, commitment devices, and education interventions are evaluated, focusing on their limitations and potential for addressing these biases. The chapter concludes by emphasising the need for systemic changes, such as policy-level interventions and financial regulation, to complement behavioural interventions and address structural barriers to better financial decisions. Future research directions are suggested, including tailoring interventions, exploring technology's role, and integrating systemic solutions to support sustainable financial well-being.
The ABCs of Financial Education: Experimental Evidence on Attitudes, Behavior, and Cognitive Biases
This paper uses a large-scale field experiment in India to study attitudinal, behavioral, and cognitive constraints that can stymie the link between financial education and financial outcomes. The study complements financial education with (i) financial incentives on a financial literacy test to affect participant motivation, (ii) financial goal setting to provide a psychological nudge, and (iii) personalized financial counseling to enhance the intensity of treatment. The analysis finds no impact of financial incentives on learning but significant effects of both goal setting and counseling on real financial outcomes. These results identify important complements to financial education that can bridge the gap between financial knowledge and behavior change. Data and the online appendix are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2017.2819 . This paper was accepted by Amit Seru, finance.

Behaviorally Informed Policies for Household Financial Decisionmaking
Low incomes, limited financial literacy, fraud, and deception are just a few of the many intractable economic and social factors that contribute to the financial difficulties that households face today. Addressing these issues directly is difficult and costly. But poor financial outcomes also result from systematic psychological tendencies, including imperfect optimization, biased judgments and preferences, and susceptibility to influence by the actions and opinions of others. Some of these psychological tendencies and the problems they cause may be countered by policies and interventions that are both low cost and scalable. We detail the ways that these behavioral factors contribute to consumers’ fiancial mistakes and suggest a set of interventions that the federal government, in its dual roles as regulator and employer, could feasibly test or implement to improve household financial outcomes in a variety of domains: retirement, short-term savings, debt management, the take-up of government benefits, and tax optimization.

Financial Literacy, Financial Education, and Downstream Financial Behaviors
Policy makers have embraced financial education as a necessary antidote to the increasing complexity of consumers' financial decisions over the last generation. We conduct a meta-analysis of the relationship of financial literacy and of financial education to financial behaviors in 168 papers covering 201 prior studies. We find that interventions to improve financial literacy explain only 0.1% of the variance in financial behaviors studied, with weaker effects in low-income samples. Like other education, financial education decays over time; even large interventions with many hours of instruction have negligible effects on behavior 20 months or more from the time of intervention. Correlational studies that measure financial literacy find stronger associations with financial behaviors. We conduct three empirical studies, and we find that the partial effects of financial literacy diminish dramatically when one controls for psychological traits that have been omitted in prior research or when one uses an instrument for financial literacy to control for omitted variables. Financial education as studied to date has serious limitations that have been masked by the apparently larger effects in correlational studies. We envisage a reduced role for financial education that is not elaborated or acted upon soon afterward. We suggest a real but narrower role for “just-in-time” financial education tied to specific behaviors it intends to help. We conclude with a discussion of the characteristics of behaviors that might affect the policy maker's mix of financial education, choice architecture, and regulation as tools to help consumer financial behavior. This paper was accepted by Uri Gneezy, behavioral economics.

Knowing When to Spend: Unintended Financial Consequences of Earmarking to Encourage Savings
Maintaining savings is an important financial goal. Yet there are times when savings should be spent, such as when people face unavoidable costs, and spending their savings allows them to avoid high interest rate debt. Existing behavioral research has focused on consumer decisions between savings and discretionary spending and has proposed interventions to promote savings in these contexts. However, when spending is not discretionary, such interventions could risk exacerbating a pattern found in economic research in which people borrow high interest rate debt while maintaining savings that earn low levels of interest. To examine how mental accounting interacts with considerations of personal responsibility and guilt to contribute to this pattern, this article explores whether people spend their savings when they need money most: during emergencies. Six studies reveal that people's tendency to preserve savings by borrowing from a high interest rate credit option varies as a function of the savings’ intended use. Paradoxically, people are most likely to turn to high interest rate credit with the belief that doing so is the responsible option.

The persistence of cognitive biases in financial decisions across economic groups
While economic inequality continues to rise within countries, efforts to address it have been largely ineffective, particularly those involving behavioral approaches. It is often implied but not tested that choice patterns among low-income individuals may be a factor impeding behavioral interventions aimed at improving upward economic mobility. To test this, we assessed rates of ten cognitive biases across nearly 5000 participants from 27 countries. Our analyses were primarily focused on 1458 individuals that were either low-income adults or individuals who grew up in disadvantaged households but had above-average financial well-being as adults, known as positive deviants. Using discrete and complex models, we find evidence of no differences within or between groups or countries. We therefore conclude that choices impeded by cognitive biases alone cannot explain why some individuals do not experience upward economic mobility. Policies must combine both behavioral and structural interventions to improve financial well-being across populations.

Household Finance
Household financial decisions are complex, interdependent, and heterogeneous, and central to the functioning of the financial system. We present an overview of the rapidly expanding literature on household finance (with some important exceptions) and suggest directions for future research. We begin with the theory and empirics of asset market participation and asset allocation over the life cycle. We then discuss household choices in insurance markets, trading behavior, decisions on retirement saving, and financial choices by retirees. We survey research on liabilities, including mortgage choice, refinancing, and default, and household behavior in unsecured credit markets, including credit cards and payday lending. We then connect the household to its social environment, including peer effects, cultural and hereditary factors, intra-household financial decision-making, financial literacy, cognition, and educational interventions. We also discuss literature on the provision and consumption of financial advice.
Perspectives on mental accounting: An exploration of budgeting and investing
This article provides an overview of recent advances in the literature on mental accounting within the context of consumer financial decision‐making. We first discuss the categorization process that underlies mental accounting and the methods people use to categorize funds. We then highlight some of the notable work that examines how mental accounting influences budgeting, spending, and investment decisions. The article concludes by proposing an agenda for future research, focusing on current gaps in our knowledge and promising areas to explore.

Savers and Borrowers: Strategies of Personal Financial Management
Saving and borrowing are traditionally and stereotypically thought of as opposites, with different motivations and consequences. Through a questionnaire survey of economic position, practices, and attitudes, the present paper examined the relation between saving and borrowing among British respondents. While saving and borrowing were found to be determined by different economic, social, and psychological factors, they did not describe mutually exclusive strategies of financial management. Saving regularly could also be distinguished from having savings. In all, six strategies were identified (combining saving or not saving, borrowing or not borrowing, and having or not having savings). Each combination was found to have specific discriminating characteristics. Savers and borrowers were found to have different psychological motivations, seeing debt either as a failure or as a normal part of everyday life. Many people retained savings or carried on saving at the same time as having debts: they were found to feel more in control and optimistic about their financial position than those who had debts but no savings. A further group had neither debts nor savings: they adopted an inflexible approach to financial management. Each group of people with different financial management strategies was illustrated by a case study.

Do people like financial nudges?
Do people like financial nudges? To answer that question we conducted a pre-registered survey presenting people with 36 hypothetical scenarios describing financial interventions. We varied levels of transparency (i.e., explaining how the interventions worked), framing (interventions framed in terms of spending, or saving), and ‘System’ (interventions could target either System 1 or System 2). Participants were a random sample of 2,100 people drawn from a representative Australian population. All financial interventions were tested across six dependent variables: approval, benefit, ethics, manipulation, the likelihood of use, as well as the likelihood of use if the intervention were to be proposed by a bank. Results indicate that people generally approve of financial interventions, rating them as neutral to positive across all dependent variables (except for manipulation, which was reverse coded). We find effects of framing and System. People have strong and significant preferences for System 2 interventions, and interventions framed in terms of savings. Transparency was not found to have a significant impact on how people rate financial interventions. Financial interventions continue to be rated positive, regardless of the messenger. Looking at demographics, we find that participants who were female, younger, living in metro areas and earning higher incomes were most likely to favor financial interventions, and this effect is especially strong for those aged under 45. We discuss the implications for these results as applied to the financial sector.

The Financial Knowledge Scale: An Application of Item Response Theory to the Assessment of Financial Literacy
Despite increasing interest in and funding for financial literacy and financial education programs in the private and public sectors, the field of financial literacy still has a major obstacle to overcome: the lack of a widely disseminated measure of financial literacy, developed through rigorous psychometric analyses. In this article, we develop such a measure, focusing specifically on financial knowledge . Using item response theory (IRT), we analyze items from three national surveys, resulting in a psychometrically sound 20‐item financial knowledge scale. By using IRT, the current analysis uses individuals' answers to inform which questions to include in the scale in the first place, rather than simply confirming relationships between these answers and other financially relevant outcomes post hoc. Widespread use of this index and the continued use of modern psychometric techniques would allow for the comparison of financial knowledge, measured consistently and reliably, across studies, populations, and programs.

Financial product sensitivity predicts financial health
Abstract Recent research has aimed to understand how people consider financial decisions because they have important consequences for well‐being. Yet existing research has largely failed to examine how attitudes and behaviors vary as a function of the specific financial product (e.g., debt type). We ask to what extent people differentiate between similarly categorized financial products (e.g., debt or investment) as a function of their terms (e.g., interest costs and expected returns) and whether such differentiation predicts financial health. Across four studies, we find not only that there are individual differences in attitudes toward similar financial products (e.g., two distinct loans), but also that the extent to which a consumer is averse to high‐cost versus low‐cost products predicts financial health. This relationship cannot be fully explained by financial literacy, numeracy, or intertemporal discounting. In addition, nudging people toward differentiating between financial products promotes decisions that are aligned with financial health.

Consumer Financial Decision Making: Where We’ve Been and Where We’re Going
When making purchasing decisions, consumers consider their available budget and determine what payment method they will use as well as how they will finance the purchase. Consumers must also plan for long-term consumption by considering short- and long-term savings objectives, taking into account how they will invest money saved, as well as how they will borrow needed money and repay outstanding loans. This issue of the Journal of Association of Consumer Research explores financial decision making, which we define as the accumulation and use of resources across time, as reflected by consumers’ behavior and choices.

Artificial intelligence and personal finance
Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming how consumers access and use financial information, education and advice for personal financial decision making. While consumers’ increasing use of AI tools and AI-generated content for personal finance brings opportunities in terms of accessibility, personalisation and decision making, it also increases risks related to bias, hallucinations, commercial influence, data privacy and exclusion, with uncertain benefits on long-term financial well-being. This policy paper provides policymakers and stakeholders with an overview of current trends, opportunities and risks in the use of AI in personal finance and in the design and delivery of financial education. It also proposes a set of financial literacy competencies to support the use of AI in personal financial decision making.

Beyond Income: Dynamic Consumer Financial Vulnerability
This research challenges the entrenched belief that financial vulnerability affects only low-income consumers. Instead, most consumers across the socioeconomic spectrum experience varying degrees of financial vulnerability at different points during their lives, whether sporadically or chronically; vulnerability is dynamic and heterogeneous. The authors propose a novel, theory-driven definition of consumer financial vulnerability (CFV) as the risk of incurring future harm, given the consumer's current access to various financial resources. A new conceptual framework decouples “vulnerability” from “harm” to distinguish the state of CFV, its determinants (access to various interdependent financial resources), and the constructs it foreshadows (multiple interconnected forms of realized harm). Five research propositions follow: (1) financial resource volatility plays a vital role in CFV, (2) recovering from harm requires more financial resources than preventing harm, (3) a multiperiod lens is needed to assess CFV accurately, (4) greater financial resource access can increase CFV, and (5) generalized financial literacy is not a panacea for mitigating CFV. The propositions and their implications for marketing strategy, public policy, and consumer well-being offer a rich research agenda. The authors propose a measure of CFV—the probability that financial resources are insufficient to meet or exceed a harm threshold—for future empirical investigations.

Reducing debt improves psychological functioning and changes decision-making in the poor
Significance The impact of chronic debt on the poor is psychological, not just financial. We hypothesize that chronic debt impairs psychological functioning and decision-making, contributing to the poverty trap. This is because debt is not considered fungible and is viewed as costly mental accounts that consume cognitive bandwidth. We test this using quasiexperimental evidence from a one-off, unanticipated debt-relief program worth several months’ household income. Comparing the poor before and after debt relief, those with more debt accounts paid off experienced greater improvements in cognitive functioning, reported less anxiety, and became less present-biased. These findings provide actionable evidence for poverty-alleviation policy. , We examine how chronic debt affects behavior by studying how a large, unanticipated debt-relief program affected psychological functioning and economic decision-making in beneficiaries. A charity granted low-income households debt relief worth up to Singapore dollars 5,000 (∼3 month’s household income). We exploited quasiexperimental variation in the structure of debt relief: For the same dollar amount of relief, some beneficiaries had more debt accounts eliminated, while others had fewer paid off. Comparing 196 beneficiaries before and after debt relief, and controlling for debt-relief amount, having an additional debt account paid off improves cognitive functioning by about one-quarter of a SD and reduces the likelihood of exhibiting anxiety by 11% and of present bias by 10%. To achieve the same effect on cognitive functioning of eliminating one debt account, a beneficiary must receive debt relief worth ∼1 month’s household income. There is no effect of debt-relief magnitude on anxiety and decision-making. We exclude training and calendar effects, debt-causing behaviors, and liquidity constraints as explanations. Instead, these results support the hypothesis that chronic debt impairs behavior because the mental-accounting costs of owing distinct debt accounts consume mental bandwidth. Poverty-alleviation policies aimed at the indebted poor should consider addressing mental accounting and bandwidth taxes.

Malleable Mental Accounting: The Effect of Flexibility on the Justification of Attractive Spending and Consumption Decisions
Mental accounts are often characterized as self‐control devices that consumers employ to prevent excess spending and consumption. However, under certain conditions of ambiguity, the mental accounting process is malleable; that is, consumers have flexibility in assigning expenses to different mental accounts. We demonstrate how consumers flexibly classify expenses, or construct accounts, to justify spending. An expense that can be assigned to more than one account (i.e., an ambiguous expense) is more likely to be incurred than an unambiguous expense that is constrained either by existing budgets or by previously constructed accounts. We explore the justification processes that underlie these results and their implications for mental accounts as self‐control devices.
