Understanding Individual Attitude to Money: A Systematic Scoping Review and Research Agenda

Abstract

In the last decades, several disciplines have started to investigate the heterogeneous meanings attributed to money, contributing to defying the classic vision of money as a purely neutral object through an interdisciplinary perspective. Notably, the construct of money attitude, defined as a mirror of perceptions, beliefs, and feelings about money, has captured attention. Considering the richness and fragmentation of previous literature around the construct, a systematic scoping review was conducted to (1) inquire into how money attitude was measured from a methodological perspective and (2) map its connections with key correlates, such as demographics, macro-economic factors, personality, financial practices, and job-related variables. Through a systematic search in four databases, 226 articles were selected, including studies from both economic and social sciences. From a methodological perspective, several validated scales exist, which only partially overlap, outlining the heterogeneity of the construct of money attitude. Furthermore, the relationship between money attitudes and key correlates emerges as complex and occasionally blurred. Based on these results, an integrative framework is proposed and directions for future research are outlined, discussing methodological specificities of validated scales and alternative methodologies. Additionally, overlooked topics deserving further examination are highlighted, including the investigation of emotional underpinnings of money, antecedents of money attitudes and their relationship with unsound behaviors. Implications for practitioners are also discussed, from the need to recognize the role of money attitude in the client–financial advisor relationship to the importance of consumers’ segmentation.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 37 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.