Using the transtheoretical model of change to explore factors affecting adoption of positive financial behaviours by credit counselling clients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is the f,rrst known study in Canada in which a sample of credit counselling clients was interviewed by an independent researcher to assess the effectiveness of counselling practices.The study explored factors affecting the adoption of positive financial behaviours by counselled clients in a non-profit frnancial counselling agency in Winnipeg, Canada.The factors explored included processes drawn from the transtheoretical model of change.Findings indicate that respondents' financial behaviours improved after counselling.The more helpful aspects of counselling identified by respondents included raising clients' awareness of their financial behaviours, helping them with specific behaviours, and providing them with ideas, motivation and guidance to improve their financial behaviours.Findings also suggest that processes of change experiences drawn from the transtheoretical model are applicable to financial behaviours and could potentially be included in financial counselling interventions.The more important experiences mentioned by clients included their searching for more information about positive financial behaviours, reminding themselves of the benef,rts of these behaviours, and believing that they could apply them and make commitments to do so.Important implications for flnancially distressed individuals, for financial counselling agencies and other helping agents, and for researchers interested in this field ofstudy are discussed.The findings can be used to design a model for predicting financial behaviour change in a future study.I especially thank them for their many prayers offered on my behalf for the completion of this study.Thank you also to my fellow FSS graduate students; they were always there when I needed encouragement.A special thank you goes out to George who was always there for me, providing support, motivation and enlightenment.Another special thank you goes also to Dr. Ruth Berry, my mentor in this project.She was an endless source of new ideas and helpful suggestions.Most of all
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".