Menu
Home
Log in / Register
 
Home arrow Business & Finance arrow Chronic Regulatory Focus and Financial Decision-Making
< Prev   CONTENTS   Next >

5.4 Additional Analyses

5.4.1 Asset and Portfolio Selection

As indicated in Sect. 4.3.2.1, the portfolios provided in the book are not previously tested. This section explores whether the portfolios are associated with states of promotion and prevention. If the assets are associated with the portfolios, it would indicate that the portfolios are sensitive to states of promotion and prevention. Thus, a chi-squared test of association was conducted to determine the association between asset selection and portfolio selection. Significant results were only obtained for the association between self-report—asset selection and self-report—portfolio selection, but not when eye tracker was used as the instrument (eye tracker—asset and eye tracker—portfolio). Table 5.19 Basic pearson chi-squared test and cross tabulation for portfolio allocation * asset allocation

Table 5.19 indicates the chi-squared test of association between self-report— asset selection and self-report—portfolio selection, where there was a main effect (n = 93, χ2 = 7.444, p < 0.05). Table 5.19 indicates that 72.1 % of those who selected the prevention asset selected the prevention portfolio. 56 % of those who selected the promotion asset also selected the promotion portfolio.

5.4.1.1 Asset and Portfolio Selection: Regulatory Focus

Research indicates that regulatory focus is associated with certain assets (Zhou and Pham 2004). The significant results given in the previous section, is likely that examining groups based on the chronic regulatory focus may yield further insight into the relationship between asset and portfolio selections with one's chronic reg- ulatory focus. Significant results were only obtained for the association between self-report—asset selection and self-report—portfolio selection for the chronic promotion-focused, but not for the chronic prevention-focused. No significant results were obtained for the association between eye tracker—asset selection and eye tracker—portfolio selection, after examining participants by their regulatory focus.

Table 5.20 represents the results for the promotion group, with a main effect of self-report—asset selection on self-report—portfolio selection (n = 50, χ2 = 10.628, p < 0.05). Table 5.20 indicates that 56 % of the promotion participants selected the prevention asset. No significant results were obtained for the prevention group, although the majority of prevention-oriented participants selected the prevention asset. The next section divides participants by their education level (basic degree, higher degree) and tests the association between asset and portfolio selection.

Table 5.20 Basic Pearson chi-squared test and cross tabulation for portfolio allocation * asset allocation (Chronic promotion focus) Table 5.21 Basic Pearson chi-squared test and cross tabulation for Portfolio allocation * asset allocation (higher degree)

5.4.1.2 Asset and Portfolio Selection: Education

In Sect. 5.3.3, education had a significant effect on the portfolio selections made on the eye tracker. Thus, education may have an effect on the relationship between asset and portfolio selection. To gain further insight, participants were examined based on their education level (basic degree, higher degree) and a chi-square test for the association between self-report—asset selection and self-report measure— portfolio selection, eye tracker—asset selection and eye tracker—portfolio selection was conducted. Significant results were only observed for the association between self-report—asset selection and self-report—portfolio selection, for the higher degree group.

Table 5.21 indicates that when only participants in the higher degree group are included, there was a main effect of self-report—asset selection and self-report— portfolio selection (n = 39, χ2 = 12.230, p < 0.05). None of those who selected the promotion asset picked the prevention portfolio. Participants had a roughly equal chance of selecting the promotion or prevention portfolio after selecting the pre- vention asset. As indicated in this section, having a higher degree seems to lead to select only promotion portfolio, after selecting the prevention asset on the self-report. In this section and Sect. 5.3.3, significant results were only obtained for higher degree participants.

5.5 Summary of Results

The main hypotheses were unsupported, regardless of the measure used, be it the eye tracker or self-report. Participants were more likely to select prevention assets, on both the eye tracker and self-report. They were more likely to select prevention portfolios on the eye tracker, but were almost equally likely to select either portfolio on the self-report. The effect of the adverse world financial outlook is purported to have influenced participants, to select the asset and portfolio, not in accordance to their regulatory focus. Hα and Hγ are supported, indicating that gender and education are related to regulatory focus and the selections made. Hβ was not supported indicating that age may not have had an effect on the relationship at hand. Several other findings were also obtained. The cross tabulations of asset and portfolio selection yielded inter- esting insights when participants were segmented into their demographic variables. The section that follows discusses the results obtained and puts forth explanations to the various findings observed.


 
Found a mistake? Please highlight the word and press Shift + Enter  
< Prev   CONTENTS   Next >
 
Subjects
Accounting
Business & Finance
Communication
Computer Science
Economics
Education
Engineering
Environment
Geography
Health
History
Language & Literature
Law
Management
Marketing
Philosophy
Political science
Psychology
Religion
Sociology
Travel