MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3009693226 · doi:10.7939/r3-dkff-dc34

Family Financial Socialization among Latino Immigrant Families – A Mixed Methods Study

2019· article· en· W3009693226 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Leidy Johana Zuluaga Osorio

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Alberta Library · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationSocializationSociologyDemographic economicsPsychologySocial psychologyPolitical scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parents are the most important influence on children’s financial learning. Several studies have detailed the various ways in which children’s financial literacy is associated with their parents’ financial socialization practices. The majority of these studies focus on individual-level variables and retrospective evaluations of childhood experiences. However, little is known about the mechanisms that underlie parents’ engagement in financial socialization. This study focused on Latino families because dealing with finances may be especially difficult for Latino immigrant families who do not fully understand Canadian financial products and services. Drawing on the reasoned action approach and family systems theory; the purpose of this dyadic, embedded mixed methods design study was to address the limitations in the literature by answering four research questions: (a) is participants’ financial socialization self-efficacy associated with their own and their partners’ family financial socialization practices?; (b) are participants’ attitudes towards educating children about money management associated with their own and their partners’family financial socialization practices?; (c) what do Latino parents think about financial socialization?; and (d) how do parents’ perspectives about financial socialization inform the results found in the quantitative strand? In the quantitative component, the present study analyzed data from 80 heterosexual Latino couples. An actor-partner interdependence model revealed that self-efficacy and two attitudes (hoping children learn to make the right financial decisions outside of home and thinking that teaching children about family finances is important) were linked to financial socialization, but a third attitude (children will learn money management by themselves when they grow up) was not a predictor of financial socialization. Regarding partner effects, there was support for the beneficial impact of ‘hoping children learn to make right financial decisions outside of home’ and ‘thinking that teaching children about family finances is important’ on partners’ financial socialization. Findings support the roles of self-efficacy and attitudes in shaping family financial socialization. In the qualitative strand, five families from diverse countries of origin (Mexico, Cuba, Colombia, and Salvador) participated in an interview. Qualitative findings supported the notion that financial socialization is influenced by parents’ attitudes and self-efficacy. Results highlighted that the participants had positive attitudes towards financial socialization which inspired them to engage, or to want to engage, in financial socialization. However, they assumed that modeling is the main mechanism to teach money management. Parents also needed to overcome individual and contextual barriers in order to engage in financial socialization. Overall, results were consistent with the reasoned action approach and family systems theory. However, the results underscore the importance of looking at the intersection of other family and individual constructs. The study has some limitations including the sample size, cross-sectional design, and reliance on self-report methods. Yet, the study added to the existing literature on financial socialization. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.003
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.195 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Alberta LibrarySame topicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement AnalysisFrench-language works237,207