The role of mental accounting and financial attitudes in shaping financial behavior among entrepreneurial students using fintech
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the influence of mental accounting, financial attitudes, financial knowledge, and financial self-efficacy on the financial behavior of diligent students in using fintech. This study differs from previous research because it uses a sample of students who already have a business and often use fintech. Data collection was carried out through the distribution of questionnaires to respondents. This study found that financial attitudes and self-efficacy had a significant effect on financial behavior, while financial knowledge had no significant effect on financial self-efficacy and mental accounting. Mental accounting significantly affects financial attitudes, financial behavior, and financial self-efficacy. These findings prove the importance of mental accounting in increasing the confidence and effectiveness of students who often use fintech and have a business in making financial decisions. This research contributes to developing the theory of planned behavior in the context of financial behavior. It reveals that financial literacy does not necessarily increase financial self-efficacy and mental accounting, especially among students who often use fintech and are just starting a business.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".