The role of financial literacy and fraud awareness in strengthening self-managed superannuation funds (SMSFs)
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The current report details findings from a study that sought to better understand the vulnerability of SMSFs to fraud, focused predominantly on the role of financial literacy. In doing this, the project examined the following research questions:<br/>1. What level of financial literacy do SMSF members have? <br/>2. What level of fraud awareness do SMSF members have?<br/>3. What is the experience of SMSF members withdrawing their funds? <br/>4. How does financial literacy interact with fraud awareness and fraud vulnerability for SMSF members? <br/>The project seeks to test the following three hypotheses:<br/>1. SMSF members with lower levels of financial literacy will also have lower levels of fraud awareness.<br/>2. SMSF members with lower levels of financial literacy will have withdrawn their funds more often than those with high levels of financial literacy. <br/>3. SMSF members with low levels of fraud awareness will have withdrawn their funds more often than those with high levels of financial literacy. <br/>To answer these questions, the project used an online survey of 806 SMSF members, aged 18 years and over, who reside in Australia. The survey comprised of six modules which included questions about the respondent’s SMSF and any withdrawals, their level of financial literacy, and their attitudes and understanding of fraud. <br/>Key findings from the report indicate that: <br/>• More than half of respondents demonstrated a low level of financial literacy<br/>• Almost half of respondents demonstrated a low level of fraud awareness<br/>• One third of respondents demonstrated both a low level of financial literacy and a low level of fraud awareness<br/>• One quarter of respondents were approached during COVID-19 to assess their eligibility to withdraw funds from their SMSF or assist with a withdrawal<br/>• One third of respondents had made an early withdrawal from their SMSF<br/>• The most common amount withdrawn was between AUD$50,000 and AUD$100,000<br/>• Almost two thirds of those who withdrew their funds knew it was potentially illegal but withdrew the funds anyway<br/>• Low levels of financial literacy and low levels of fraud awareness impact negatively on those with SMSFs<br/>• Low levels of financial literacy and low levels of fraud awareness increase the vulnerability and potential exposure of SMSF holders to fraud victimisation <br/>
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle