The post #ResearchWednesday: The Gap in Financial Literacy in the Latinx Community appeared first on AFCPE.

This article was written before Biden announced the loan forgiveness executive order.

Quick Summary

With millions of baby boomers approaching retirement age and thereby leaving the workforce, the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program (PSLF) was created to increase the applicant pool for government and non-profit jobs.   PSLF is a federal program designed to provide an incentive to attract job seekers to employment in much needed, but often lower paying, service work. A component of the 2007 bipartisan College Cost Reduction and Access Act, PSLF  promised to forgive the outstanding federal student loan debt for qualified  workers who have made 120 monthly payments. However, the program was created without a clear, long term plan for implementation.  With legislative and executive branch turnover, problems arose.

2017 was the first year that individuals could have completed 120 qualifying payments.  While the program promised that student debt would be erased after a decade of payments and qualifying employment, 99% of those who initially applied were deemed ineligible, according to a 2019 report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO). Of program applicants from the Defense Department alone, 94% were denied by the Education Department, the GAO found in an April report. For example, a “60 Minutes” report broadcast recently found that of the nearly 180,000 active-duty members with federal student loans, just 124 were approved for debt forgiveness. Some of the issues included insufficient months of qualifying work and confusion around program requirements, including qualifying loans, repayment plans, and the actual payment terms themselves. Public dissatisfaction with the program grew each year as it continued to produce less than stellar or promised results.

The Education Department acknowledged the program has fallen short of its pledge to public and non-profit workers and began an overhaul to “restore the promise” of student loan forgiveness. In 2018, in an effort to set things rights, Congress appropriated $700 million for what was called Temporary Expanded Public Service Loan Forgiveness (TEPSLF).  This program expand PSLF for certain borrowers who were unknowingly on unqualifying repayment plans, most commonly  the balance based graduated or extended plans.  Although this was a start, it still did not have any significant impact. However, on October 6, 2021 the U.S. Department of Education announced the PSLF Waiver. As the name implies, the Waiver, which is set to expire on October 31, 2022, waives many of the original qualifying requirements.  For a limited time, payments made under the wrong loan type, payments made late, and payments made prior to a new consolidation all count. Additionally, educators who receive teacher loan forgiveness can count their qualifying time towards PSLF, and active-duty service members can count months of deferral or forbearance toward their 120 qualifying payments. The Biden administration estimates the PLSF Waiver will benefit more than 550,000 teachers, members of the military, first responders and government employees.  These changes are significant.

Key Insights

If this works as planned, the results will be big! As of January 2022, more than #1.7 billion of federal student loan debt has been forgiven or canceled for individuals providing a public service. It is expected that over the next year, more than one-half million borrowers could benefit from the temporary changes. Additionally, the Biden administration also plans to match Department of Education data with information from other federal agencies to automatically help U.S. workers access loan forgiveness and will review denied applications to identify and correct errors in loan-cancellation processing. Although some of the new rules appear to be less complicated, the program still creates a lot of questions. Additionally, there is still a lot of miss-information or myths floating around the general public mindsets. So, if you have clients, who may still be dealing with their student loans, and they work for any level of government or 501(c)3 non-profit, the most important nuances are noted below:

New Rules for Qualifying Payments

Under the new, temporary rules of the PSLF Waiver, any prior payment on Direct, FFEL, or Perkins Loans will now qualify.  Payments on the latter two had previously been excluded.   Payments made on any repayment plan, and even late and partial payments will be counted.  However, borrowers continue to need qualifying employment. This change will apply to student loan borrowers with Direct Loans, those who have already consolidated into the Direct Loan Program (DL), and those who consolidate into the Direct Loan Program by Oct. 31, 2022. This means, borrowers who were in the old Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFLE), and have qualifying employment should consider, consolidation into DL program.  Periods of repayment on parent PLUS loans are not eligible under the limited PSLF waiver, unless they had been previously consolidated with other eligible loans into Direct loan.

Requirements to receive additional qualifying payments:

Full-time Employment

Borrowers must have worked full-time (30 hours per week or more), or combined full-time for one or more qualifying employer during the calendar month they were also in repayment on their loans. Borrowers can receive credit only for periods of repayment after Oct. 1, 2007, since that is when the PSLF Program began. If they haven’t already, your clients/borrowers must file a Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) & Temporary Expanded PSLF (TEPSLF) Certification & Application (PSLF form) for any period for which they may receive additional credit toward PSLF. Also, under this temporary provision, your clients do not have to be employed by a qualifying employer at time of application to have their loans forgiven, as long as they have already met the 120 month requirement.

Loan Consolidation

If your clients/borrowers have FFEL loans, Federal Perkins Loans, or other types of federal student loans that are not Direct Loans (e.g., those from older loan programs, such as Federally Insured Student Loans [FISL] or National Defense Student Loans [NDSL]), they must consolidate those loans into the Direct Loan program by Oct. 31, 2022. Client tip: They can log in to Aid Summary to find out how many and what types of loans they have.

There are other options for loan forgiveness for those without PLSF qualifying employment.  Income driven repayment plans have maximum payment terms ranging from 20-25 years. At the conclusion of the loan terms, the balance is forgiven.  Unlike PSLF, however, balances forgiven are treated as taxable income.

My Aha Moment, by Jacquie

Again, if this works as planned, it will be big!

There was a lot of talk during and since the last election cycle about PSLF, as well as student loan forgiveness in general. My ears perked up throughout, but the one point I kept hearing—which damped my hopes was—President Biden noting that he didn’t have the authority to do blanket loan forgiveness, or to make changes to the existing PSLF—this had to be accomplished via Congress. I am certain that I am not alone–my faith in Congress over the last few years has decreased, and I didn’t have any real hopes of anything changing. However, I must say that I think the recent approach of U.S. Department of Education and the Biden administration using the HEROS Act of 2003, which was already approved by Congress and provide the President with the authority to “waive or modify any statutory or regulatory provision applicable to federal student loans under the Higher Education Act, as the Secretary deems necessary” during a declared national emergency, such as a pandemic or war, was brilliant. The Biden administration just launched this new page to help spread the word about the limited waiver: Public Service Loan Forgiveness – The White House. This action is an effective way to honor the promises made to millions of public sector workers almost two decades ago.

My Aha Moment, by Dorothy

There was a lot of talk during and since the last election cycle about PSLF, as well as student loan forgiveness in general.  Widespread student loan forgiveness is fraught with legal, political, and ethical problems.  While there has been pressure on the current president to use executive order to indiscriminately cancel outstanding student loans, constitutionally, Congress controls spending. Attempting to circumvent the legislative checks and balances process is likely to result in legal action. On the policy front, forgiveness retroactively turns billions of dollars owed to our government into grants, reversing earlier legislation.  I also question the societal benefit to general student loan forgiveness.  Even if loan forgiveness was capped at $10,000 per borrower, the cost to taxpayers would be $373 billion but only about 25% of the benefit would go to the lowest third income earners.  To put that in perspective, the US has spent about that much on welfare and less than that on school lunches cumulatively since 2000.  Finally, blanket student debt forgiveness is unfair to those who sacrificed to pay their obligations, or who opted to work a trade or enter the military rather than accumulate student debt. Forgiveness would do nothing to alleviate the high cost of education or better prepare individuals for successful careers.  Smaller steps, such as eliminating interest capitalization, better funding early education, and further expanding the Pell Grant program would be more equitable solutions and still promote individual responsibility.

Conversation Starter question….

This program is effective until October 2022. How do you plan to spread the word to your clients and to your community?

Education Department proposes rule changes on student loans (insidehighered.com)

GAO-19-717T, PUBLIC SERVICE LOAN FORGIVENESS: Opportunities for Education to Improve Both the Program and Its Temporary Expanded Process

Public Service Loan Forgiveness: DOD and Its Personnel Could Benefit from Additional Program Information | U.S. GAO

Public Service Loan Forgiveness Limited Waiver Opportunity | Federal Student Aid

Written by: Dorothy Nuckols, MPH, AFC Family and Consumer Sciences Educator, University of Maryland Extension and Jacquie Carroll, EdD, AFC Director, Program Evaluation, AccessLex Institute Center for Education and Financial Capability

The post #ResearchWednesday: Public Service Loan Forgiveness…Has this program been redeemed? appeared first on AFCPE.

Can financial counseling be used as a tool to help alleviate financial-related depression symptoms in adults?

Quick Summary

The literature examined by the authors considered the relationship between financial stressors and mood disorders–specifically, depression. They found that generally financial stress is positively related to depression symptoms.  In addition, three key factors affect the relationship: 

• Having a lower income leads to more economic uncertainty, unhealthy lifestyles, etc. (social causation)
• How the financial stress is viewed by the person-how manageable or unmanageable is the current financial situation (does it cause psychological stress)
• Already having a mental health disorder (social selection).

Key Insights

The authors noted the following key findings:

• Lower level of household income is related to a higher risk of depression symptoms
• A decrease in household income is related to an increased risk of depression symptoms 
• Small numbers of household assets (cars, furniture, etc.) are related to an increased risk of depression
• An increase in household wealth is related to a decrease in risk of depression symptoms
• Debt is positively related to depression symptoms but varies based on the type of debt
• Current financial hardships matter most in terms of depressive symptoms
• Financial strain (current or in childhood) may affect depression symptoms
• The correlation between financial stress and depression symptoms is more pronounced in lower-income groups

My A-HA Moment

My client’s mental health can be affected by their financial health and this is an important consideration, especially for those clients who may come from a lower socioeconomic status. In particular, recognizing that some of my clients dealing with unsecured debt could be affecting their mental health, I will focus on improving their situation through financial counseling, focusing especially on debt management–hoping to foster a positive effect on their mental health. 

Continuing the Discussion:

As mental health issues have increasingly been part of the national dialogue, I am interested in learning more about changes to your best practices. 

• How are you considering a client’s mental well-being in tangent with their financial well-being?
• Have you changed your client conversations around financial-wellbeing and mental health?
• Could financial counseling community outreach in lower socio-economic areas decrease depression symptoms?

Written by: Jennifer Witkowski, AFC® Candidate

Read the full research paper here. 

The post #ResearchWednesday: Financial stress and depression in adults: A systematic review appeared first on AFCPE.

New! AFCPE’s Research to Practice Task Force is now contributing regular articles to AFCPE’s blog. These articles are designed to summarize research, share personal realizations from a practitioner point of view, and encourage dialogue between researchers, practitioners, and educators.

As you read research, ask yourself: What’s your “Aha moment?” Can you apply these learnings to your practice? Or did the research raise new questions and/or research opportunities for you?

“The Utilization of Robo-Advisors by Individual Investors: An Analysis Using Diffusion of Innovation and Information Search Frameworks” by Lu Fan and Swarn Chatterjee (Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, 2020)

Quick Summary:

The literature suggests, and sets the expectation, that technology is going to displace many workers and careers over the next couple of decades – and that financial coaches, counselors, and advisors will not be exempt. This technology shift, leveraging minimal human intervention, may be the cause of some of that displacement. Robo-advisors (also known as robos) provide digital financial advice based on mathematical rules or algorithms. These algorithms are designed by financial advisors, investment managers, and data scientists and coded in software by programmers. These algorithms are executed by software and do not require a human advisor to impart financial advice to a client. The software utilizes its algorithms to automatically allocate, manage, and optimize clients’ assets. This research addresses target users, pros and cons of robo technology, and possible implications to the field of financial counseling.

Key Insight:

Understanding my Clients. As I read this research, I realized that the information sheds some light on how I can be more purposeful and intentional with the clients I currently serve. In addition, I gathered that I need to get onboard with some fintech tools to avoid being left behind. Knowing who I serve plays an important part in how I will continue to provide my services. According to this research, robo-users like saving time, have a specific personal risk profile, subjective financial knowledge, and financial resources. In addition, early adopters of robo-advisors tend to be:

• Younger (below 64 years of age)
• Possess higher amounts of investable assets
• Feel more comfortable with investment knowledge
• Identify themselves as more risk-tolerant
• More likely to carefully shop for the “perfect” credit card
• Appreciative of the easy accessibility, convenience, time saving, cost efficiency, technology, and tax efficiency

Additionally, there are some caveats to consider. Robo-users seem to be overconfident in their financial knowledge and expect robo-advisors to outperform markets. However, as the research notes, the reality is that robo-advisors use a passive management of portfolios approach consisting of exchange traded fund ETFs which could result in underperformance.  Lastly, robo-users moderate-risk tolerance and target investment horizons are often mismatched due to lack of detailed information.

My AHA Moment:

Practical Application. I see three key ways to use this information in my daily practice.

1. I am going to take a good look at my clients and try to identify patterns. I’ll begin with an initial client analysis and compare my clients’ attitudinal factors to the robo-user noted in the research. Are most of my clients Millennials or Baby Boomers? Are they working, have busy lives, or are they retired? Then, I will do a deeper dive into their financial statuses. Do they have assets or not, and if they do how much? At this point, based on my clients’ group profiles, I could also develop a sort of needs assessment for each unique group. For example, since robo-advisors are recommended for short-term investments, which of my clients are in need of a long-term investment strategy?
2. Knowing which clients are more likely to use robo services, I can prepare talking points of the pros and cons of such services. This will allow me to help clients identify when using robo-services can be most useful for them. Furthermore, the article noted a significant shortcoming of robo-advisors. The research states that the “simple questionnaires used by robo-advisors may create a mismatch between the robo-advisor recommendation and the actual investment goals and needs of clients. Complex financial situation, life’s curveballs, and the psychological perspective of clients cannot be captured by robos.”

There is no good replacement for real and meaningful discussions about one’s personal and financial goals. Perhaps with some clients the conversation may be more about identifying, or recommending, some fintech which could make their financial lives easier.

3. I realized that I do need to get onboard with fintech to avoid being left behind completely. This research confirms that there are no one-size-fits all financial tools to meet the needs of all individuals and families. I could embed technology into a systematic framework for the individuals I serve. For example, after we have clearly identified both short- and long-term goals and objectives, I could help clients explore tools such as robo-advisors.

Thinking that your job or career can be eliminated due to advances in technology can create a lot of angst, concern, and anxiety. But what I realize from this article is that there will always be a place for personalized, intentional conversations about personal finances. That will not change! What can change is the technology that I might use now, or in the future, to serve my clients. Therefore, I am going to be more proactive about incorporating fintech resources.

Leveraging technology while continuing to provide personalized service is my goal!

Continuing the discussion:

What are ways that you are embracing technology without losing the personalized 1:1 feel?

How do we create linkages from robo to professional?

Guest contributor: Jacquie Carroll, Ed.D., AFC^®  and the Research to Practice Task Force

The post To Robo or not to Robo, is that the question? appeared first on AFCPE.

The post #ResearchWednesday: Research Shouldn’t Be on the Naughty List appeared first on AFCPE.

The shift from traditional defined benefit plans to defined contribution plans has changed the personal financial planning landscape significantly. Today, many individuals look to financial professionals such as advisors for guidance on establishing financial goals, investing, and identifying the right financial products for protection against an uncertain future. The services offered by a financial advisor are valuable.

One area we expect financial advisors to thrive is money management. However, the dynamic movement of the financial market is often beyond the control of a financial advisor. So is the inevitable recession. A little more than a decade ago we experienced the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Within our study we wanted to examine the client-advisor relationship during the financial crisis happened from 2007 to 2009. Surprisingly, clients were not firing their financial advisors even though their wealth was decreasing. Also, many individuals who experienced an increase in income sought out the services of a financial advisor.

Our result implies that financial advisors should focus more on commutation and relationship management to retain clients.

Guest Contributor: Yuanshan Cheng, Winthrop University

Read the full research: Factors Associated With Hiring and Firing Financial Advisors During the Great Recession from Cheng, Kalenkoski, and Gibson in the Journal of Financial Counseling & Planning, Volume 30, Issue 2.

The post #ResearchWednesday: Retaining Clients appeared first on AFCPE.

Exploring associations between objective and subjective measures of financial well-being among older Americans.

Financial planners and counselors use various methods to measure individuals’ financial situations. One method is to calculate financial ratios and compare them to benchmarks recommended by financial professionals.This study examines three financial ratios including the liquidity ratio, the debt-to-asset ratio, and the investment ratio. These financial ratios are considered objective measures of individuals’ financial condition.  These objective measures are compared to individuals’ perceptions of financial well-being.

Goal:
The goal of this study is to explore the relationship between the financial ratios and perceptions of financial well-being, specifically for older Americans.

Results:
The results of this study suggest financial planners should use financial ratios but not overly rely on the on them as the financial ratios only tell part of the story. Educators of financial planning and financial literacy can use this study to help emphasize to students the importance of understanding financial ratios and that some ratios likely are related to perceptions of financial well-being. For example, for older Americans, this study suggests that increases in the investment ratio are related to higher increases in perceptions of financial satisfaction compared to increases in the liquidity ratio.

Guest Contributor:  Jacob A. Tenney, University of Charleston &
Charlene M. Kalenkoski, Texas Tech University

This study has been accepted for publication in the Journal of Financial Counseling & Planning. Read the full research HERE.

The post #ResearchWednesday: Financial ratios and financial satisfaction appeared first on AFCPE.

In our article, “Financial Knowledge, Confidence, Credit Use, and Financial Satisfaction” we investigate the associations between consumers’ confidence in their financial knowledge and their financial behaviors and financial satisfaction. We observe that in order for customers to use their financial knowledge when making credit card use decisions, they must be sufficiently confident in that knowledge.

Interestingly, confidence in financial knowledge helps customers make better credit card use decisions and exhibit a higher financial satisfaction even when their actual level of financial knowledge is low.  Additionally, financial knowledge has a positive effect on credit card use decision and financial satisfaction even when financial confidence is low, suggesting that knowledge and confidence are complements to increased healthy credit card use and financial satisfaction. For example, we see that 1-point increase in customers’ financial confidence and knowledge is associated with a decrease of 16% and 18%, respectively, in the probability of making only the minimum payments toward their credit card balance.

Our findings suggest that boosting people’s confidence in their financial knowledge may support their ability to engage in healthy financial behaviors by helping them gain and preserve the capability to be in charge of their personal finances.

 

Guest Contributor: Dorin Micu, University of Rhode Island

Read the full article in the Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, Volume 30, Number 2, 2019. Read a research brief on this and other financial satisfaction research HERE

The post #ResearchWednesday: Financial Knowledge, Confidence, Credit Use, & Financial Satisfaction appeared first on AFCPE.

Financial literacy has become a popular topic of study and research. For several years now, academics have advocated for more financial literacy education in schools, and public funding for other such programs. At face value, this seems like a good thing: the more financial education the better. But this assumes that such programs and efforts actually work. Research testing this assumption (i.e., that financial literacy programs are effective) has generally shown that such programs provide only small benefits which are short-lived. In other words, financial education programs do not seem to be living up to their promises. A potential reason for this is that financial literacy encompasses elements of habit and skill while most financial literacy programs seem to focus simply on information transmission (i.e., imparting information through lecture). Skill acquisition and habit formation are conspicuously missing from many financial literacy programs.

 

Part of this may have to do with the role of family in society – much of one’s beliefs, habits, and behaviors are shaped by family and other important role models. While teachers may indeed serve as role models, their influence is limited compared to that of close family. The question, then, is how do money-lessons taught by family at an early age affect the development of money habits and skills? Such was the question explored by our study.

 

We looked at how different aspects of childhood financial socialization (i.e., how individuals were taught about money during childhood) affected their chances of meeting industry benchmarks for their household debt ratio and current ratio – objective measures of household financial health. Consistent with expectations, the childhood financial experience had a significant influence on financial wellbeing in adulthood, even when controlling for financial knowledge. Notably, financial knowledge did not influence financial wellbeing, which lends further evidence suggesting that simply imparting information to students or clients is of limited value.

 

We discuss various implications of our results, including a section specifically for practitioners. Perhaps the most important take-away is that financial literacy efforts should begin in early childhood, not adolescence or adulthood. To that extent, practitioners have a great opportunity to provide value for clients by making financial counseling or planning a family affair so that their children can begin to develop healthy financial habits which will provide longer-lasting benefits into adulthood.

 

Guest Contributors: Allen Ammerman & Cherie Stueve

Continue the Conversation: Tell us what you think in the comments below.

Download the research: Childhood Financial Socialization and Debt-Related Financial Well-Being Indicators in Adulthood, JFCP, Vol 30(2)

The post #ResearchWednesday: How do money-lessons taught by family at an early age affect the development of money habits and skills? appeared first on AFCPE.

 

Today, more couples are delaying marriage. Many are choosing to cohabit before marriage or instead of marrying, and this is especially true among young adults. Money, specifically not enough of it, is often cited as a reason for this decision. Our study explored this possibility with survey data from 424 young adults (aged 26-35) who were in committed relationships (i.e., married, cohabiting, and living apart). Surprisingly, we found that individual values, more so than financial strain, contributed to the choice of relationship type.

Specifically, we found that young adults who placed higher value on career stability chose to live apart. Conversely, we found that young adults who placed greater value on belonginess and life enjoyment choose to cohabit rather than marry.

Does this mean money doesn’t matter? Not really. The young adults who endorsed higher career stability were also more likely to come from less advantaged backgrounds and report higher financial strain. So, it may be that these young adults are prioritizing career before relationships at the moment.

For cohabiters, past family experiences rather than money, played a role. These young adults were more likely to have witnessed their parents breakup (divorced or separated). The cohabiters may be a bit more cautious about marriage, choosing to take their relationship more slowly.

What do the findings mean for financial practitioners who work with young adults and couples? Our findings suggest that personal values in the context of one’s financial situation play an important part in the relationship choices young adults make. Financial practitioners may find it useful to encourage clients to explore the connections between their personal values and their financial goals as they plan for the future. It may be easier to motivate clients to stick to a financial plan when they are aware of the implications of their current choices on other aspects of their life and their future.

Continue the Conversation: Tell us what you think in the comments below.

Download the research (available to AFCPE members or by request from the authors): Jennifer K. Rea, Joyce Serido, Lynne M. Borden, Sharon M. Danes, Sun Young Ahn, and Soyeon Shim, “Who says ‘I Do’? Financial Resources and Values on Relationship Choices of Emerging Adults,” Accepted.

The post #ResearchWednesday: Your money or your values? Young Adults’ Relationship Choice appeared first on AFCPE.

 

At times financial counseling with culturally diverse clients may seem daunting and counselors may be unsure of how best to connect with their clients and help them effectively. This was true for some of the counselors we interviewed as part of our research, “Financial Counselors’ Experiences Working with Clients of Color: Lessons of Cultural Awareness”. Even with years of experience, counselors still expressed how complex it could be.

Our study asked nine experienced financial counselors to recount in-depth their experience working with clients of color in order to learn lessons from their journey.

Our findings: Financial counselors reported that their work with clients of color required a commitment to exploring and understanding the complexities of culture, acculturation to mainstream culture, race, ethnicity, familial values, and religion, and how these concepts intersect with money.

Theme 1: Beyond the Numbers

Counselors need to take the time to understand the client’s context and values, their family situation beyond just the nuclear family, their cultural practices, and also their experience migrating to the US as it both directly and indirectly affect financial decision-making. This is done by curbing their biases, being tentative with suggestions, being curious and asking questions, and educating themselves about other cultures.

Theme 2: Building a Bridge

Counselors need to invest in their relationship with their clients of color. This is done by building respect and appreciation for the client. In doing so, counselors should not push the client too far too fast, lecture the client, or assume what the client needs or wants.

Theme 3: Switching Gears

Counselors need to have the flexibility to shift their approach and interventions to provide culturally relevant financial counseling to their clients. This can be done by providing practical adjustments to make counseling more welcoming, such as lengthening the sessions, slowing down the sessions, and tailoring the curriculum.

Our study unearthed many valuable nuggets of knowledge. Download the article to read more about the counselors’ experiences in their own words, and share your insights below.

Guest contributors: Blendine P. Hawkins & Virginia S. Zuiker

Continue the Conversation:

Tell us what you think in the comments below or on Twitter.

Download the research (available to AFCPE members or by request from the authors): Blendine Perreire Hawkins and Virginia S. Zuiker, “Financial Counselors’ Experiences Working With Clients of Color: Lessons of Cultural Awareness,” JFCP, Vol 30(1)

The post #ResearchWednesday: Counselors share lessons about working with diverse clients appeared first on AFCPE.

 

What makes people unhappy with their credit cards?  Surprisingly, it’s not the interest charges.  This paper finds that what causes people stress and dissatisfaction with their credit cards has to do with how they use the cards more than how much the cards actually wind up costing.  Being late on payments, carrying a balance (regardless of the size of that balance), going over their borrowing limit, getting cash advances, and using the card even when there is no need to do so are the factors that cause some people to be unhappy with their cards.  Another key finding of this paper is that these factors bring dissatisfaction only to those who are risk averse.

This is useful to financial counselors and planners because it suggests that showing a client the financial costs of credit card overuse and mismanagement is unlikely to be effective at motivating change in behaviors for clients.  Rather, this study suggests that planners and counselors should point out to their clients how improving their credit card usage can relieve the stress of late notices and other unpleasant notifications from the credit card company.

Continue the Conversation:

Tell us what you think in the comments below or on Twitter.

Download the research (available to AFCPE members or by request from the authors): Patrick Payne, Charlene M. Kalenkoski, and Christopher Browning, “Risk Tolerance and the Financial Satisfaction of Credit Card Users,” JFCP, Vol 30(1)

The post #ResearchWednesday: Risk Tolerance and the Financial Satisfaction of Credit Card Users appeared first on AFCPE.