Development of a behavioral intention instrument for predicting dysfunctional family financial management
MetadataShow full item record
This study addressed the need for a scale to aid in identifying and predicting dysfunctional financial management behaviors in families. The resulting scale is intended as a research instrument and as an intake scale for use in financial counseling and family therapy settings. The extended Fishbein Behavioral Intention Model, based on the theory of reasoned action, with the addition of a moral norm component, was the conceptual framework for the study. The research instrument consisted of two questionnaires, a demographic form and the Fishbein form, with separate but identical units coded for husband and wife. The 67-item Fishbein questionnaire was based on 7-point semantic differential scales. Focusing procedures and two pilot studies preceded the formulation of the final research instrument. Questionnaire sets were distributed to 225 couples in seven church and marriage enrichment groups in Lubbock, Texas; 114 sets (50.6%) were returned. The resulting quota research sample consisted of a homogeneous group of 100 white married couples (200 spouses) in which at least one spouse was 25 to 45 years of age. Mean age of respondents was 34.9 years; mean number of years married was 10.3 years; mean number of children was 1.9; and mean annual gross income was $35,000 to $39,999. About three-fourths of the sample had completed a Bachelor's or more advanced degree. Results of a t-test showed that responses of husbands (n = 100) and wives (n = 100) were not substantially different and were entered as individuals (n = 200) into the Fishbein model. Reliability of the multi-item subscales of the model ranged from alpha = .73 to alpha = .91. All correlation coefficients (r) prerequisite for regression analysis of the model were positive and significant at p = .05 or lower. Multiple regression analysis revealed that the model was statistically significant at p = .001, but not substantively significant, R^ = .15. The subjective norm component of the model was not significant (Beta = -.0152). The attitude component (Beta = .3407) and the moral norm component (Beta = .1560) were significant at p = .001 and .05, respectively. Recommendations were made for further revisions and testing of the scale.