Search results

Do women exhibit greater financial risk aversion than men? We answer this question using attitudinal and behavioral specifications of risk aversion drawn from the 2010 Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF). To approximate attitudinal specification of risk aversion, we use individuals’ self-reported financial risk tolerance. We use individuals’ relative risk aversion, that is, the effect of wealth on the proportion of assets categorized as risky as behavioral specification of risk aversion. We find that while women display greater attitudinal risk aversion, gender difference in behavioral risk aversion depends upon individuals’ marital status and role in household finances. Single women exhibit greater behavioral risk aversion compared to single men. However, this gender difference does not exist when we compare behavioral risk aversion of married women and men in charge of household finances.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between the customer's risk aversion and its relationship with brand loyalty and to test empirically whether this relationship is mediated by brand trust and brand affect.

A randomly selected sample of Austrian mobile phone users was drawn. Their risk aversion, two forms of loyalty (attitudinal and repurchase loyalty), brand trust and brand affect have been measured with existing and tested scales. The hypothesized model has been tested using PLS (Partial least squares).

Customer's risk aversion is significantly related to the two forms of loyalty (attitudinal loyalty and brand loyalty). When brand affect and brand trust are introduced into the model, the previously highly significant relationship between domain‐specific risk aversion and attitudinal loyalty becomes insignificant and the risk aversion‐repurchase relationship becomes much weaker, while risk aversion strongly influences brand trust and brand affect.

The findings are limited to mobile phone users. The generalisation of the results could be extended by broadening the list of products, for example with other durable products and services in which brand affect and brand trust may be even more important in developing brand loyalty.

This paper explains why certain customers have more trust and experience more affect than others and how this is related to loyalty. Hence, marketers can increase brand loyalty by targeting more risk aversive customers.

From a theoretical point of view the results of this study illuminate the relationship between enduring individual differences and important brand related constructs. From a practical point of view, they explain why certain customers have more trust and experience more affect than others. It is hypothesized and demonstrated empirically that risk aversion is also related to loyalty via brand trust and brand affect.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship among risk aversion, brand trust, brand affect, attitudinal loyalty and behavioral loyalty for low involvement day-to-day use of personal care products.

To achieve the above-stated objective, a theoretical model was tested using structural equation modeling. Before undertaking the analysis, preliminary analysis techniques such as the common method bias social desirability bias reliability and validity analysis were also assessed.

The results indicate that, for low involvement products, risk adverse consumers do not purchase a brand based only on trust. Risk aversion is also positively associated with attitudinal loyalty. When it comes to the relationship between brand trust and brand affect, it has been concluded that brand trust has had an important impact on brand affect. In this study, it has been found that attitudinal loyalty has a positive and strong impact on behavioral loyalty. This paper explains that due to the lack of trust, certain risk adverse customers are sticking with a particular brand.

Most of the brand loyalty research has been performed on high involvement products, whereas very limited research is available on low involvement day-to-day use products (i.e. personal care products), in particular where the consumption period of the product is less than a month. This kind of research is very rare, and this study has been done to fill this gap using rigorous data analysis.

This paper aims to examine the moderating role of positive and negative strategies of emotion regulation on the relationship between risk aversion and brand sensitivity.

By conducting a survey, this study has collected a total of 405 responses and the data have been examined with structural equation modeling.

The study has demonstrated that some strategies of emotion regulation have a significant moderating effect, and they can down-regulate the effect of risk aversion on brand sensitivity. These strategies are positive refocusing, refocus on planning, positive reappraisal, putting into perspective, acceptance and rumination.

Future studies should consider a broader range of respondents to validate the results. Moreover, the role of emotion regulation in the relationships among repurchase intention, customer loyalty and customer compliant could be examined. Further research could also focus on the relationship between risk aversion and brand sensitivity with regard to different types of buying situations and consumers’ types.

The findings demonstrate a substantial implication regarding emotion regulation and brand management. Positive strategies of emotion regulation make risk-averse people less likely to pay attention to brands and lead them to be less brand-sensitive. New companies and businesses could use these findings to make consumers regulate their emotions positively.

This research provides novel findings about the influence of consumers’ emotion regulation on brand sensitivity. People who use positive strategies of emotion regulation tend to dampen the effect of their risk aversion on brand sensitivity and will become less sensitive to the brand.

Previous literature has reported inconsistent findings regarding the impact of uncertainty avoidance (UA) on intercultural experiences. This includes positive, negative and insignificant associations between UA on the one hand and cosmopolitanism or comfort with intercultural service encounters (ICSE) on the other hand. The purpose of this paper is to participate in addressing these contradictions. More specifically, this study examines how UA affects expatriate cosmopolitanism as well as approach of service environments patronized by local customers by introducing two moderators: national identification and perceived discrimination.

The authors propose a conceptual model based on the results of a literature review. The authors test it with survey data collected from Indian expatriates (n=341) living in Qatar, using structural equation modeling.

The results corroborate the moderating role of national identification. Under low identification, expatriate consumers engage in a prospective form of uncertainty management, leading them to adopt a more cosmopolitan stance. Under high identification, their uncertainty plays an inhibitory role, reducing their cosmopolitanism and negatively affecting their approach of service places patronized by local consumers. Perceived discrimination did not moderate the impact of UA as expected on either cosmopolitanism or approach.

This paper extends the prior research on UA by testing how two moderators could activate either a prospective or an inhibitory form of uncertainty. It also contributes to research on ICSE, by focusing on customer-to-customer interactions in a multicultural marketplace.

A main focus in recent online consumer research has been on context specific trust, risk, and online buying experience. Despite the importance, their individual level “equivalents” – trust disposition, risk aversion, and technology readiness – have received limited attention. This research attempts to fill that gap by focussing on these crucial personality traits.

This research employs a survey‐based method to test a theoretically grounded set of hypotheses. The measurement model is tested using SEM and the hypotheses are tested using regression techniques.

The personality characteristics are found to have significant moderating effects on online purchase intentions. Interestingly, provided the consumers are satisfied, risk aversion is found to increase the likelihood of purchase. Moreover, while technology readiness increases the likelihood of online purchase, dispositional trust is found not to have a similar effect.

Significant full and quasi moderator effects of three hitherto untested personality traits on online purchase behaviour are found. Results show that risk aversion, trust disposition, and technology readiness are fundamental to online consumer behaviour literature.

The results suggest that to be successful, relatively unknown web‐based service providers need to go beyond matching their large competitor and need to offer unique web sites to browsers. Results also indicate that personality traits pose both significant challenges as well as unexpected opportunities to online service providers in identifying inherently more loyal customers.

The paper identifies a set of hither to untested personality traits that have fundamental relevance to online consumer behaviour. It also offers practical recommendations to relatively unknown online service providers on how to compete with their better known competitors. Results are generalisable to online service providers in a number of industries.

Using data obtained from 525 individuals who were surveyed during early spring 2020, this study addressed three aims: (1) to ascertain the degree to which disappointment aversion and expectation proclivity are related; (2) to identify who is most likely to exhibit patterns of disappointment aversion; and (3) to determine to what extent the combination of disappointment aversion and expectation proclivity is associated with financial risk aversion.

Several analytic methods were used in this study. Descriptive statistics were calculated for each of the measures examined in this study. Correlation, analysis of variance (ANOVA) and regression techniques were used to estimate associations between and among the variables of interest in this study.

A negative relationship between disappointment aversion and expectation proclivity was noted, which is counter to conventional thinking. It is traditionally thought that those who establish high expectations will experience the greatest disappointment when choice outcomes fall below expectations. In this study, it was determined that when a financial decision-maker consistently establishes high outcome expectations and results fall below expectations, the financial decision-maker feels less disappointment. More precisely, those who consistently establish high expectations tend to be more disappointment tolerant than others.

This paper provides evidence that categories of disappointment aversion and expectation proclivity are associated with financial risk aversion and certain demographic characteristics.

This paper adds support for assertions made in the International Journal of Bank Marketing (IJBM) that it is important for financial service professionals and bankers to manage customer expectations to reduce disappointment with products and services. This paper shows that combinations of disappointment aversion and expectation proclivity are related to the financial risk aversion of customers.

Findings from this paper indicate that a commonly used heuristic that decision-makers should reduce expectations to avoid disappointment may not be accurate or particularly useful in the context of financial decision-making.

Findings from this study add to the existing body of literature by showing that aversion to disappointment and the establishment of expectations, while distinct concepts, are interrelated.

This study aims to examine the roles of individual factors on risky investment intention as an indicator of risky financial behavior.

The data were collected from a survey instrument and composed of 496 individuals’ responses. The authors exploited structural equation modelling and multigroup structural equation modelling for direct and indirect effects, respectively.

Results indicate that emotional intelligence and locus of control have a positive impact on financial risk-taking, while risk aversion in general has the negative one. Although financial literacy does not have a direct effect on risky financial behavior, it has important role as a moderator variable, interacting with external locus of control.

The authors expect this study to contribute into behavioral finance literature in two ways. First, they investigate joint and relative effects of four major factors (i.e. emotional intelligence, locus of control, risk aversion in general and financial literacy) identified in the literature on financial risk-taking of individual investors. Each belongs to a different venue in an individual’s psyche and therefore is expected to influence financial risk-taking through different mechanisms. However, the research arguing their roles on the financial risky behavior directly is very limited. Investigating their individual effects is likely to provide unique insights into our understanding of risky financial behavior. Second, the authors also posit and manifest that the effects of the first three of the aforementioned factors on risk-taking intentions are moderated by financial literacy. This finding is likely to provide rather valuable insights pertaining to the emergence of risk-taking behaviors and may shed light on the root reasons behind equivocal findings in previous research regarding the effect of each factor.

An aspect of prospect theory posits that decision‐makers, when making decisions in the face of risk, make their decisions with respect to a pre‐existing reference point or ‘frame’ (the statusquo bias). We utilize data from the Australian version of the TV game show, Deal or No Deal, to explore whether risk aversion varies with a change in reference point in a context where stakes are real and high.We achieve this by exploiting a special and unique Australian feature of the Deal or No Deal lottery‐choice setting, namely, the existence of the Chance or the SuperCase rounds (supplementary rounds). These rounds reverse the decision‐frame that was obtained in earlier (normal) rounds. We fit and estimate a complete dynamic decision‐making model to our dataset and find that the risk aversion estimate of contestants who participated in both the normal and the supplementary rounds indeed differs depending on the nature of the round, a result consistent with the operation of the existence of a framing effect.