Content area
The present study investigated the relationship between personality traits, attachment styles, and financial attitudes. Data were collected from 299 adults using an Information Form, Five Factor Personality Scale, Relationship Scales Questionnaire, and Financial Attitude Scale in Istanbul, Türkiye. Findings of the structural equation modeling showed that fearful attachment and dismissive attachment were positively associated with neuroticism, while secure attachment was positively associated with the remaining personality traits. Extraversion and agreeableness had mediating effects in the relationship between secure attachment and financial attitude. Therefore, professionals need to consider attachment style and personality traits if the aim is to improve financial behaviors.
Financial decisions are among the most important decisions individuals make in their lives. This is because individuals need an income and they need to manage this income to sustain their lives. Managing financial assets requires instant, short-term, or long-term decisions, and in doing so, individuals follow certain behavioral patterns. Therefore, it is important to investigate attitudes and behaviors that individuals exhibit when making financial decisions. All of these can be considered as a measure of thoughts, feelings, and behaviors about the world and an aspect of psychological characteristics (Adiputra & Patricia, 2020).
Financial attitudes and financial behaviors are different concepts, although closely related. Financial attitudes refer to individuals’ beliefs and feelings about financial issues including attitudes toward saving, spending, investing, budgeting, debt, risk-taking, and financial planning. Financial attitudes are often shaped by experiences, cultural influences, upbringing (Ullah et al., 2024), education, and social norms. Examples of financial attitudes include beliefs about saving, debts, financial risk, and investment opportunities (Alkaya & Yagli, 2015). In short, financial attitudes include awareness, knowledge, skills, tendencies, and behaviors that require healthy decision-making related to financial matters (Atkinson & Messy, 2012). Therefore, financial attitudes are important factors for shaping financial behaviors. Financial behaviors refer to actions and decisions that individuals take in relation to finances. These include actual choices and behaviors associated with earning, spending, saving, investing, borrowing, budgeting, and financial planning. Indeed financial behaviors are observable and measurable and reflect the ways in which individuals manage their financial resources in daily life. Examples of financial behaviors include saving a portion of income, sticking to a budget, making investment decisions, paying bills on time, using credit responsibly, and seeking financial advice. Financial behaviors also include behaviors such as monitoring financial situations, purchasing and loan management, saving, and investing (Alkaya & Yagli, 2015). According to Hilgert et al. (2003), financial behaviors include four main subfactors: managing cash, managing credits, saving, and investing. Financial behaviors also encompass planning and tracking the ways in which money is spent, taking into account standard expenses, budgeting, and thus the use and management of money (Xiao, 2008).
Although financial attitudes can influence financial behaviors, they are not always perfectly reflected in individuals’ behaviors. Several factors can contribute to differences between financial attitudes and behaviors (Ajzen, 1991). One of which is external constraints. Individuals may face external constraints that limit their ability to align their behaviors with their attitudes. These constraints may include financial constraints such as low income, high debt levels, or unexpected expenses that prevent individuals from acting in accordance with their desired financial attitudes. Another factor includes a lack of personal awareness. Some individuals may not be able to understand their own financial attitudes. Due to a lack of insight into the financial decision-making process, individuals may hold certain beliefs or preferences about money that are not fully reflected in their behaviors. Emotional factors can be another factor. Emotional factors, such as stress, impulsivity, or mood swings, can override rational financial attitudes and lead to behaviors inconsistent with individuals’ beliefs or preferences. For example, individuals may engage in emotional spending during times of stress or anxiety, even if they generally have conservative financial attitudes. Habitual patterns can also account for differences between financial attitudes and behaviors. Financial behaviors are often shaped by habitual patterns and routines that may not always be consistent with conscious financial attitudes. For example, individuals may have established spending habits or investment strategies that persist even when they contradict their financial goals or beliefs. Social and environmental factors can also influence financial behaviors independent of attitudes. Peer pressure, societal norms, and cultural expectations may influence financial decision-making and cause individuals to behave differently from their financial attitudes. Cognitive biases such as overconfidence, loss aversion, or bias can distort individuals’ perceptions and decision-making processes, causing them to deviate from their intended financial behaviors. While financial attitudes in general provide important information about beliefs and preferences regarding money, they do not always perfectly predict financial behaviors. A variety of internal and external factors can contribute to differences between attitudes and behaviors, highlighting the complexity of human decision-making in financial contexts.
Attachment and personality are two innate factors that are closely associated with financial attitudes and financial behaviors. Attachment, an innate drive that begins in infancy and continues throughout life, entails not only observable behaviors but also interactions with other individuals (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991; Bowlby, 1969). Attachment Theory (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991) postulates that adult attachment styles can be examined in four categories: secure, preoccupied, dismissive, and fearful. The Five Factor Theory of Personality (Costa & McCrae, 1992) is a structured framework for analyzing personality traits, emphasizing the existence of five personality traits: neuroticism, openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, and agreeableness.
Literature Review and Hypotheses
Many studies have shown that attachment styles are associated with personality traits. The basis of these studies is the Five Factor Theory of Personality and Attachment Theory. In particular, studies have shown that secure attachment is related to extraversion, agreeableness, neuroticism, and openness to experience (Deniz, 2011; Fransson et al., 2013). Other studies have shown that fearful attachment is related to introversion (Sümer & Güngör, 1999) and insecure attachment is related to conscientiousness (Fransson et al., 2013). Richter et al. (2022) showed that neuroticism partially mediated the relationship of romantic jealousy with the dimensions of attachment including anxiety and addiction, while agreeableness mediated fully.
Personality plays an important role in financial attitudes (Thomas et al., 2020) and affects financial behaviors (McCrae & John, 1992). In turn, attachment is important for the development of personality traits (Ainsworth, 1989; Hamilton, 2000). Studies (Judge et al., 2012; Nemeth & Huzdik, 2016) have shown that children display various attitudes and emotions toward money, and these affect their financial behavior in adulthood (Luksander et al., 2017). Attitudes toward money are a function of personality (Atkinson & Messy, 2012). Individuals who are high in conscientiousness are more likely to be organized, responsible, and goal-oriented. They are likely to have positive financial attitudes such as focusing on long-term planning, having disciplined savings habits, and adhering to budgeting strategies. High levels of neuroticism are associated with anxiety, worry, and emotional instability. Individuals high in neuroticism exhibit negative financial attitudes, such as a fear of financial insecurity, an excessive worry about money, and an unwillingness to take financial risks. Openness to experience is linked to curiosity, creativity, and a willingness to explore new ideas and opportunities. Individuals high in openness may have positive financial attitudes characterized by a willingness to experiment with different investment options, explore alternative income streams, and seek financial education. Extraverted individuals are social, outgoing, and energetic. They may have positive financial attitudes that include actively engaging with financial matters, such as seeking financial advice, networking for career development, and participating in investment clubs or forums. Agreeable individuals are compassionate, empathetic, and cooperative. They may have financial attitudes that focus on helping others, such as philanthropy, financially supporting family members, and investing in social responsibility initiatives (Jiang et al., 2024). It is known that personality traits and financial attitudes/behaviors are related to one another. Individuals with different personality traits, in accordance with their needs, show different financial behaviors and make different investments (Pinjisakikool, 2018).
In fact, some studies have focused on the relationship between attitudes toward investment options and personality traits. Accordingly, those with extraverted personality traits have been shown to exhibit higher levels of investment and risk-taking behaviors (van de Venter & Michayluk, 2008), to tolerate financial risk (Brooks & Williams, 2021), to adopt others’ advice and instructions (De Bortoli et al., 2019), and to make rational financial decisions (Rzeszutek et al., 2015). Those with agreeable personality traits take a higher risk in their investments, while those with conscientious personality traits are less likely to seek others’ advice and to make informed investments (Durand et al., 2013); they are also more inclined to save (Davey & George, 2011). People with neurotic personality traits adopt others’ advice and instructions while investing (Durand et al., 2013; Fachrudin et al., 2022), to exhibit hasty behaviors (Lin, 2011), and to have high debt and financial dissatisfaction (Fachrudin et al., 2022). In addition, those with open-to-experience personality traits adopt others’ advice and instructions, to exhibit overconfidence (Lin, 2011) and to make more rational financial decisions (Rzeszutek et al., 2015). Sadiq and Khan (2019) showed a positive relationship between intentions for short-term investments and agreeableness, extraversion and conscientiousness, and between intentions for long-term investments and conscientiousness and extraversion.
Attachment Theory suggests that individuals’ attachment styles (e.g., secure, anxious, and avoidant) influence their perceptions of trust, security, and intimacy in relationships, including financial relationships. Securely attached individuals are likely to have positive financial attitudes characterized by trust in financial partners, open communication about money, and collaborative decision-making. Anxiously attached individuals may exhibit negative financial attitudes such as fear of financial abandonment, overdependence on financial partners, and distrust in financial relationships. Avoidantly attached individuals may have financial attitudes characterized by a reluctance to rely on others for financial support. Some studies have reported that compared to individuals with other attachment styles, securely attached individuals make healthier financial decisions (Belcher, 2010). Brown and Brown (2008) showed that individuals with fearful attachment are more dependent on their financial advisors and less inclined to change their advisors. Other studies have shown that individuals with preoccupied attachment have low financial satisfaction and are more likely to display irresponsible financial behavior (Li et al., 2020). Pollmann (2021) showed that individuals with dismissive attachment had difficulty establishing financial communication.
In general, personality traits and attachment styles shape financial attitudes by influencing beliefs, emotions, motivations, and behaviors regarding financial matters. Additionally, it can be argued that emotions such as anxiety, anger, and satisfaction are related to financial well-being (Enete et al., 2022). Understanding these psychological factors can provide valuable insights into how individuals approach financial matters. Few studies have examined the relationship of personality traits with financial attitudes and the relationship of attachment styles with financial attitudes. However, as far as the present authors are aware, no study investigated the relationship of personality traits and attachment styles with financial attitudes together. Studying various internal factors may shed light into problematic aspects of the financial world such as irrational financial behaviors and cognitive biases (Wei & Keqin, 2004). It can be argued that money issues may be deeply rooted in childhood experiences and subsequent psychological processes. Personality traits and attachment styles may be important characteristics affecting financial matters for a number of reasons. First, personality traits and attachment styles may be the main determinants of financial behaviors and attitudes. These traits influence the ways in which individuals evaluate material resources, approach money, and set financial goals. Second, attachment styles shape individuals’ emotional and security needs. In turn, financial decisions are often made to fulfill these needs. For example, individuals with secure attachment styles are likely to think about their financial decisions in a more balanced and long-term manner, while those with insecure attachment styles are likely to spend money in riskier and impulsive manner. Third, personality traits determine the ways in which individuals deal with risk and uncertainty. Individuals with some personality traits may have more risky financial attitudes, while others may be more cautious. This in turn may affect financial behaviors. Fourth, individuals’ past experiences may influence their financial attitudes. These experiences may interact with personality traits and attachment styles and may shape individuals’ financial attitudes and financial behaviors. Fifth, personality traits and attachment styles may influence individuals’ long-term economic well-being. Healthy money-spending habits and financial planning skills may help individuals secure their financial future, while risky behaviors can lead to financial difficulties. For these reasons, personality traits and attachment styles may be important characteristics that influence individuals’ money-spending behavior. Understanding these factors may help better understand individuals’ financial attitudes and behaviors and design psychoeducational programs aiming at improving financial attitudes and behaviors. This assumption has not been examined before. Investigating the relationship of personality traits, attachment styles, and financial attitudes or behaviors is important for understanding the psychological underpinnings of financial attitudes or behaviors.
Examining these relationships may be important in several ways. First, personality traits and attachment styles influence the ways in which individuals perceive and interact in financial situations. By examining these relationships, insights can be gained into ways in which individuals make financial decisions, including spending, saving, and investing. Second, certain personality traits and attachment styles may predispose individuals to risky financial attitudes and behaviors, such as unplanned spending, excessive debt accumulation, or avoidance of financial planning. Understanding these risk factors can help identify individuals at risk and design interventions to reduce financial risks. Third, tailoring financial education and counseling programs according to individuals’ personality traits and attachment styles can increase the effectiveness of these programs. Fourth, by understanding the ways in which personality traits and attachment styles influence financial attitudes and behaviors, psychoeducational interventions can be developed to promote financial well-being. This could include interventions aiming at improving financial literacy, developing healthy financial habits, and addressing underlying psychological factors that contribute to financial difficulties (Graham et al., 2024). Finally, individuals’ financial attitudes and behaviors can have an impact on social and economic dynamics. For example, increased consumption tendencies may support economic growth. However, excessive consumption and borrowing can threaten individuals’ and societies’ financial security. Therefore, the present study examined the relationship between personality traits, attachment styles, and financial attitudes and financial behaviors. The study’s hypotheses are as follows:
H1: Financial attitudes differ significantly on the basis of financial behaviors.
H2: There are significant relationships between personality traits, attachment styles, and financial attitudes.
H3: Personality traits have mediating effects in the relationship between attachment styles and financial attitudes.
Methods
Procedure
The present study was approved by the ethics committee of Istanbul Arel University prior to data collection. A pretest of the survey instrument was conducted with a small sample of 30 participants to ensure the comprehensibility of the questions. The data for the present study were collected face-to-face from 30 participants and online through Google Forms platform from 269 participants between January 2023 and March 2023 in Istanbul, Türkıye. The survey was conducted online due to the COVID-19 pandemic. After signing the informed consent form in the face-to-face or electronic format, participants answered the survey questions face-to-face or online. The link to the present study created on the Google Form was sent to people’s e-mail addresses reached through the presidencies of the public institution where the data were collected. Participants completed the questionnaires in approximately 15–20 minutes. Participants were informed that their participation was voluntary and that they could withdraw at any time. Data were collected and stored in Excel for analysis.
Participants
The nonresponse rate for the survey was 14%, with 299 out of the initial 350 participants completing the survey. The sample of the present study consisted of 299 participants between the ages of 18 and 65 years (mean = 40.93, standard deviation [SD] = 11.95), working full time in a public institution and having a regular monthly income in Istanbul, Türkıye. The lower limit for the target sample size was calculated as 270 with the G*Power program (effect size f = .10, α = .05; Faul et al., 2009). The survey targeted a diverse group from various socioeconomic backgrounds. 50.8% were female and 49.2% were male. A total of 54.5% were married and 45.5% were single. Most participants (80.3%) stated that they monitored their monthly budget regularly. While 47.2% of them had two or more credit cards, the percentage of those who had one credit card was 43.1% and that of those who did not have a credit card was 9.7%. The percentage of those who had debts to banks (49.5%) and those who did not have debts to banks (50.5%) were close to each other. Demographic and financial characteristics are given in Table 1.
Demographic and Financial Characteristics
| n | % | |
|---|---|---|
| Sex | ||
| Women | 152 | 50.8 |
| Men | 147 | 49.2 |
| Marital status | ||
| Single | 136 | 45.5 |
| Married | 163 | 54.5 |
| Regular monitoring monthly budget | ||
| Yes | 240 | 80.3 |
| No | 59 | 19.7 |
| Number of credit cards owned | ||
| No card | 29 | 9.7 |
| One card | 129 | 43.1 |
| Two cards or more | 141 | 47.2 |
| Having debt to banks | ||
| Yes | 148 | 49.5 |
| No | 151 | 50.5 |
| Having debt to individuals | ||
| Yes | 48 | 16.1 |
| No | 251 | 83.9 |
| Following the economic and financial agenda | ||
| Yes | 221 | 73.9 |
| No | 78 | 26.1 |
Measurements
The Information Form included demographic questions (sex, age, marital status, and educational status) and financial status (total working time at the institution, regular monitoring monthly budget, number of credit cards owned, debt to banks, debt to individuals, and economic and financial agenda follow-up). Data were collected using the Big Five Inventory (John et al., 1991), Relationship Scales Questionnaire (Griffin & Bartholomew, 1994), and Financial Attitude Scale (Onur & Nazik, 2014).
Big Five Inventory was developed to examine five dimensions of personality including extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness to experience. Inventory consisted of 44 items rated on a 5-point Likert type. This inventory was adapted into Turkish (Karaman et al., 2010). In the present study, Cronbach’s alpha for neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientious were .78, .82, .72, .81, and .78, respectively. Additionally, McDonald’s ω was calculated for these subscales and was found to be .78 [.74, .82], .81 [.78, .84], .79 [.75, .83], .70 [.65, .75], and .81 [.77, .84], indicating acceptable reliabilities.
On the Relationship Scales Questionnaire (Griffin & Bartholomew, 1994), each item was rated on a 7-point Likert-type scale on the extent to which it described participants’ general attitudes in close relationships. This questionnaire was adapted into Turkish (Sümer & Güngör, 1999). This scale consisted of 30 items and four subdimensions (fearful, preoccupied, dismissive, and secure attachment style). In the present study, Cronbach’s alpha for secure attachment, fearful attachment, preoccupied attachment, and dismissive attachment subscales were .81, .78, .86, and .71, respectively. McDonald’s ω was calculated for these subscales and was found to be .81 [.78, .84], .77 [.74, .80], .84 [.81, .87], and .71 [.68, .74], indicating acceptable reliabilities.
The Financial Attitude Scale used in the present study was developed by Onur and Nazik in 2014. The scale was validated and deemed reliable for measuring financial attitudes (Onur & Nazik, 2014). The scale aimed to measure individuals’ attitudes toward financial planning and management. This scale consisted of 24 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The lowest obtainable total score is 24, and the highest is 120. A high score indicated a highly positive attitude toward individual finance. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were performed to assess the construct validity of the scale. The item-factor loadings ranged from .48 to .69. The results from factor analysis suggested that the scale was unidimensional, capturing a single underlying construct of financial attitude. In the present study, Cronbach’s alpha for the total scale was .88. McDonald’s ω was calculated for this scale and was found to be .88 [.86, .90], indicating acceptable reliability.
In the present study, CFA were also computed for all measurement instruments. For the Big Five Inventory, the CFA results indicated an acceptable fit with the following indices: χ2/Standard devıatıon (3135.55/892) = 3.52, p = .001, goodness-of-fit index (GFI) = .90, adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI )= .89, comparative fit index (CFI) = .84, standardized root-mean-square residual (SRMR) = .092, and root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) = .092 (95% confidence interval [CI] [0.088, 0.095]). These indices supported the scale’s validity. For the Financial Attitude Scale, the CFA results showed χ2/Sd (1664.69/252) = 6.06, p = .001, GFI = .93, AGFI = .92, CFI = .86, Tucker–Lewis index (TLI )= .85, SRMR = .096, and RMSEA = .137 (95% CI [0.131, 0.143]). Although the RMSEA value was higher than the conventional threshold, the other fit indices (GFI, AGFI, and CFI) suggested that the scale remained reasonably valid. However, for the Relationship Scales Questionnaire, the CFA resulted in a “nonpositive definite” error, which was attributed to the low number of observations (299), making it challenging to run CFA for this particular scale. These analyses, along with reliability assessments, demonstrated that the scales used in the present study were generally suitable for their intended measurements. The figures related to CFA are available from the authors upon request.
Statistical Analysis
Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS 25 and AMOS software. Cronbach’s alpha and McDonald’s ω were computed to examine the internal consistency of the scales. Pearson product–moment correlation coefficients were used to evaluate the relationships between variables. Path analysis was employed to test the mediation hypothesis, and bootstrapping techniques were used to assess the significance of indirect effects.
Results
Table 2 presents the descriptive information. Skewness values varied between 0.07 and −1.53, and kurtosis values ranged between 0.00 and −0.71. These values were within normal distribution limits.
Descriptive Analyses
| Variables | Min. | Max. | Mean | SD | Skewness | Kurtosis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Big Five Inventory | ||||||
| Neuroticism | 9 | 37 | 22.39 | 5.52 | 0.22 | −0.26 |
| Extraversion | 12 | 40 | 29.20 | 5.72 | −0.43 | −0.25 |
| Openness to experience | 18 | 50 | 38.44 | 6.32 | −0.44 | 0.00 |
| Agreeableness | 18 | 45 | 35.40 | 4.93 | −0.57 | 0.41 |
| Conscientiousness | 18 | 45 | 35.24 | 5.91 | −0.17 | −0.71 |
| Relationship Scales Questionnaire | ||||||
| Secure attachment | 1.2 | 7 | 4.22 | 1.04 | −0.09 | 0.03 |
| Fearful attachment | 1 | 6.5 | 4.08 | 0.91 | −0.10 | 0.34 |
| Preoccupied attachment | 1.5 | 6 | 3.89 | 0.82 | 0.07 | −0.19 |
| Dismissive attachment | 1 | 7 | 4.24 | 1.17 | 0.24 | −0.24 |
| Financial Attitude Scale | ||||||
| Financial attitude | 24 | 120 | 97.92 | 14.44 | −1.53 | 0.17 |
SD = standard deviation.
Differentiation of Financial Attitudes in Terms of Financial Behaviors
Table 3 presents these findings. The average scores obtained from the Financial Attitude Scale of those who monitored the monthly budget were higher than those who did not monitor budget. The average scores on the Financial Attitude Scale did not differ in terms of the number of credit cards, indebtedness to banks and individuals, and following the economic and financıal agenda. These findings partially supported H1.
T-Test and Analyses of Variance
| Financial attitude | n | Mean | S | t | SD | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Monitoring budget | ||||||
| Yes | 240 | 99.41 | 13.02 | 3.68 | 297 | .000 |
| No | 59 | 91.85 | 18.04 | |||
| n | Mean | SD | F | p | ||
| Credit card | ||||||
| No card | 29 | 98.90 | 15.82 | 1.069 | .345 | |
| One card | 129 | 96.52 | 17.09 | |||
| Two cards and more | 141 | 99.00 | 11.11 | |||
| n | Mean | S | t | SD | p | |
| Debts to the banks | ||||||
| Yes | 148 | 97.45 | 14.42 | −0.55 | 297 | .581 |
| No | 151 | 98.38 | 14.49 | |||
| Credit card debts | ||||||
| Yes | 48 | 97.38 | 14.60 | −0.29 | 297 | .776 |
| No | 251 | 98.02 | 14.43 | |||
| Following agenda | ||||||
| Yes | 221 | 98.59 | 13.88 | 1.35 | 297 | .178 |
| No | 78 | 96.03 | 15.84 | |||
SD = standard deviation.
Relationships Between Personality Traits, Attachment Styles, and Financial Attitudes
Table 4 presents the results of the correlation analyses. There were positive associations between neuroticism and fearful and between preoccupied and dismissive attachment and a negative association between neuroticism and secure attachment. There was also a positive association between extraversion and secure attachment and a negative association between extraversion and dismissive attachment. However, no associations were found for other insecure attachment styles. Moreover, there was a positive association between openness to experience and secure attachment. However, this personality trait was not associated with any of the insecure attachment styles.
Correlation Analyses
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Financial Attitude Scale | |||||||||
| 1. Financial attitude | |||||||||
| The Big Five Inventory | |||||||||
| 2. Neuroticism | −.01 | ||||||||
| 3. Extraversion | .22** | −.39** | |||||||
| 4. Openness to experience | .19** | −.19** | .59** | ||||||
| 5. Agreeableness | .29** | −.20** | .41** | .29** | |||||
| 6. Conscientiousness | .19** | −.39** | .42** | .37** | .35** | ||||
| Relationship Scales Questionnaire | |||||||||
| 7. Secure attachment | .10 | −.13* | .36** | .17** | .41** | .12* | |||
| 8. Fearful attachment | .13* | .23** | .11 | .04 | .19** | −.05 | .31** | ||
| 9. Preoccupied attachment | .04 | .13* | −.06 | −.04 | .02 | .00 | −.02 | .29** | |
| 10. Dismissive attachment | .10 | .35** | −.19** | −.03 | −.11 | −.05 | −.37** | .31** | .25** |
*p < .05.**p < .01.
There was a positive association between agreeableness and secure attachment. In addition, there was a positive association between this personality trait and fearful attachment. This was not the case for other insecure attachment styles. There was also a positive association between conscientiousness and secure attachment. However, this personality trait was not associated with any of the insecure attachment styles.
There was a positive association between financial attitude and all personality traits except for neuroticism. In addition, there was a positive association between financial attitude and fearful attachment. However, financial attitude was not associated with secure attachment and other insecure attachment styles. These findings partially supported H2.
Mediation Effects of Personality Traits on Relationships Between Attachment Styles and Financial Attitude
The results of the model (Figure 1) showed that secure attachment had a significant effect on extraversion (β = .31, p < .05), openness to experience (β = .19, p < .05), agreeableness (β = .40, p < .05), and conscientiousness (β = .19, p < .05). Similarly, dismissive (β = .26, p < .05) and fearful attachment had a significant effect on neuroticism (β = .18, p < .05). In addition, agreeableness (β = .24, p < .05) and extraversion (β = .13, p < .05) had a significant effect on financial attitude. The model results indicated an acceptable fit with the following indices: χ2/Sd (26.71/15) = 1.78, p = .001, GFI = .98, AGFI = .94, CFI = .98, TLI = .96, and RMSEA = .051 (95% CI [0.015, 0.082]).
Following the removal of the insignificant paths from the model, the analysis was renewed (Figure 2). Fearful attachment and dismissive attachment had a positive effect on neuroticism. In addition, these two variables explained 14% of the variance in neuroticism. Secure attachment had a positive effect on openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, and agreeableness. In addition, secure attachment explained 3% of the variance in openness to experience, 2% in conscientiousness, 13% in extraversion, and 17% in agreeableness.
According to the results of the model, extraversion and agreeableness had a full mediating effect in the relationship between secure attachment and financial attitude. These two variables explained 8% of the variance in financial attitude. However, there was no mediation effect of other personality traits. These findings partially supported H3.
Discussions
Differentiation of Financial Attitudes by Financial Behaviors
The average scores on the Financial Attitude Scale of those who monitored monthly budget were higher than those who did not. The average scores on the same scale did not differ in terms of the number of credit cards, debt status to banks and individuals, and following economy and financıal agenda. It is not surprising that financial attitude only differed in terms of monitoring monthly budget. This may indicate that monitoring monthly is the most important financial behavior. If not considered, arguably, engaging in other financial behaviors would not make much difference. Some studies (Akben-Selcuk, 2015; Arniati et al., 2019; Farrell et al., 2016) have shown the positive relationship of monitoring budget with financial attitude. This positive relationship may be due to the fact that conscious buying and managing credits (Arniati et al., 2019); paying bills and budgeting (Akben-Selcuk, 2015); managing money, planning retirement, and buying insurance (Farrell et al., 2016); and planning investments, saving, and spending (Ozer & Mutlu, 2019) require monitoring monthly budget.
In addition to financial information, other factors underlying financial decisions need to be recognized. This present finding suggests that financial attitudes shape financial behaviors. The most important behavior related to financial attitude may be monitoring monthly budget. Future studies may clarify this issue, and financial attitude can emerge as the driving force behind financial behavior.
Relationships Between Personality Traits, Attachment Styles, and Financial Attitudes
There was a positive association between neuroticism and insecure attachment styles and a negative association between neuroticism and secure attachment. Moreover, there was a positive association between extraversion and secure attachment and a negative association between extraversion and dismissive attachment. However, this was not the case for other insecure attachment styles. There was a positive association between openness to experience and secure attachment. This personality trait was not associated with any of the insecure attachment styles. There was also a positive association between agreeableness and secure attachment. In addition, there was a positive association between this personality trait and fearful attachment. This was not the case for other insecure attachment styles. There was a positive association between conscientiousness and secure attachment. This personality trait was not associated with any of the insecure attachment styles. These findings partially support H2 and are consistent with previous findings indicating that secure attachment is related to neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, and agreeableness (Deniz, 2011; Fransson et al., 2013). However, these findings are inconsistent with previous findings indicating that preoccupied attachment style is the most important predictor of conscientiousness (Deniz, 2011) and that insecure attachment is associated with conscientiousness (Fransson et al., 2013). These findings emphasize the importance of attachment styles in shaping personality traits (Ainsworth, 1989; Hamilton, 2000). Attachment includes a series of interactions with other individuals (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991; Bowlby, 1969), which unsurprisingly determines the ways in which personality traits develop.
Personality has an impact on people’s attitudes, behaviors, and decisions that they make throughout their lives. Individuals make many decisions throughout their lives and display different attitudes, and attitudes impact behaviors and decisions. Financial attitudes also form the basis of financial decisions and behaviors necessary for individuals to sustain their lives. Positive attitudes toward financial matters can bring financial success, and negative attitudes can create financial difficulties (Onur & Nazik, 2014). A positive association was found between financial attitude and all personality traits except neuroticism. These findings which partially supported H1 are consistent with previous studies showing that extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness to experience are related to intentions for short-term or long-term investments, taking financial risks, tolerance for these risks, financial decision-making, asking for financial advice, and saving (Brooks & Williams, 2021; De Bortoli et al., 2019; Liu et al., 2023; Rzeszutek et al., 2015; Sadiq & Khan, 2019). These findings are also consistent with the view that financial behaviors are a function of personality (Atkinson & Messy, 2012; Pearson et al., 2023). However, these findings are inconsistent with previous findings showing the relationship between neuroticism and different financial behaviors such as acquiring high debts (Fachrudin et al., 2022). As far as the authors are aware, no other international study addressed financial attitudes underlying such behaviors rather than financial behavior itself.
The present findings are also partially consistent with the findings of some national studies. For example, using the Personality Inventory Scale (Goldberg, 1990) and Financial Behavior Scale (Potrich et al., 2016), Ozer and Mutlu (2019) found that personality traits such as conscientiousness, agreeableness, and openness to experience had positive effects on financial attitude (financial behavior). However, extraversion and neuroticism did not have a significant effect on financial attitude. In another national study, Dayı and Çetin (2021) showed that while conscientiousness had an effect on financial attitudes, extraversion, openness to experience, and neuroticism did not have an effect on financial attitudes. This study used the Financial Attitude Scale to examine individuals’ financial attitudes. The Financial Attitude Scale (Parrotta & Johnson, 1998) was translated into Turkish; scale items were adapted based on expert opinions before the six-question scale was used. Hi̇tay and Anbar (2020) examined the relationship between the personality traits and their financial risk tolerance. The study sample consisted of 327 3rd- and 4th-year students studying at the faculty of economics and administrative sciences of a state university. Data obtained from the Five Factor Personality and Financial Risk Tolerance scales showed that only openness to experience had a linear and significant effect on financial risk tolerance, and there was no significant effect of the other personality traits.
Cultural factors may influence the relationship between financial attitude and personality traits. Future studies could examine this possible relationship in a large multicultural sample. On that basis, there is a need for more studies focusing on this relationship.
Fearful attachment increased as positive financial attitude increased. However, financial attitude was not associated with secure attachment or other insecure attachment styles. These findings that partially supported H2 are also partially consistent with previous findings focusing on financial behavior rather than financial attitude. For example, Brown and Brown (2008) showed that individuals with fearful attachment are more attached to their financial advisors and less inclined to change their advisors. However, these findings are inconsistent with previous studies (Belcher, 2010) that linked secure attachment to healthier financial decisions and fewer financial mistakes compared to other attachment styles. These findings are also inconsistent with previous findings indicating the association of preoccupied attachment with financial satisfaction and negative financial behavior (Li et al., 2020) and of dismissive attachment with financial communication (Pollmann, 2021). These inconsistencies may be related to cultural differences, but in the absence of national studies, it is difficult to make comparisons. Also, to the knowledge of the present authors, there are no studies focusing on the relationship of financial attitude with attachment styles. Therefore, there is a need for future cross-cultural studies.
Mediating Effects of Personality Traits
Findings showed that extraversion and agreeableness fully mediated the relationship between secure attachment and financial attitude. However, there was no mediating effect of other personality traits. These findings partially supported H3. According to these findings, sensitivity to external stimuli and adaptation to the external environment play an important role in the relationship between financial attitude and secure attachment. The present study also showed that neuroticism, openness to experience, and conscientiousness did not play a role on the relationship between insecure attachment styles and financial attitude, except for preoccupied attachment.
These findings are consistent with previous findings showing that people who are extraverted make higher levels of investment and take more risks (van de Venter & Michayluk, 2008), have a higher tolerance for financial risk (Brooks & Williams, 2021), adopt others’ advice and instructions (De Bortoli et al., 2019), and make more rational financial decisions (Rzeszutek et al., 2015). However, previous studies are concerned with financial behaviors, not financial attitudes. These findings are also consistent with previous studies showing that individuals with secure attachment make healthier financial decisions (Belcher, 2010) compared to people with other attachment styles.
These findings point to the importance of considering and adapting to external stimuli in the management of money. They also indicate that considering and adapting to external stimuli can shape financial attitude only in the case of secure attachment. In general, present findings indicate that insecure attachment styles will likely inhibit this process. While people spend money, they may not be aware that they are acting emotionally, even though their personality traits come to the fore. It is well-known that the emotional bond established with the caregiver during childhood influences the choice of romantic partners in the future; similarly, adults’ habits of handling money are influenced by the caregiver attachment and through which individuals develop their model of money use.
To the knowledge of the authors, there is no other study showing this mediating effect. Psychoeducational programs aiming at developing positive financial attitudes need to consider the mediating effects of extraversion and agreeableness. That is, these programs need to pay attention to the finding that secure attachment, extraversion, and agreeableness play a role as predictors of money-spending behavior.
Implications for Practitioners
The average scores on the Financial Attitude Scale did not differ in terms of the number of credit cards, debt status to banks and individuals, and following the economy and financıal agenda. However, the average scores of those who monitored monthly budget were higher than those who did not monitor budget. This is unsurprising and may indicate that monitoring monthly budget is the most important financial behavior. If absent, other financial behaviors would not make much difference. Financial counselors, planners, and educators may consider monitoring monthly budget as an important target of financial consultations.
Findings showed that neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness were associated with secure and/or insecure attachment styles. These findings, partially consistent with previous findings, emphasize the importance of attachment styles in shaping personality traits. Financial attitude was associated with all personality traits, except for neuroticism. In addition, there was an association between financial attitude and fearful attachment. However, financial attitude was not associated with secure attachment or other insecure attachment styles. These findings are only partially consistent with previous findings. These inconsistencies may be related to cultural differences. There is a need for more studies.
Extraversion and agreeableness fully mediated the relationship between secure attachment and financial attitude. However, there was no mediating effect of other personality traits. These findings suggest that considering and adapting to external stimuli play an important role on the relationship between financial attitude and secure attachment. Meanwhile, neuroticism, openness to experience, and conscientiousness do not play a role in the relationship between all insecure attachment styles and financial attitude, except for preoccupied attachment. These findings indicate that psychological aspects such as attachment styles and personality traits that are developed in relatively early years tend to have an effect on adult financial attitudes or financial behaviors. If the aim is to improve financial behaviors/attitudes, future psychoeducational interventions or financial consultations offered by financial counselors, planners, and educators need to promote extraversion and agreeableness as well as secure attachment. Future studies need to examine this effect.
Limitations
While the present study provides valuable insights into the relationships between personality traits, attachment styles, and financial attitudes and behaviors, it has some limitations. First, the present study was quantitative. Mixed-model research methods including both quantitative and qualitative methods may allow participants to express feelings, thoughts, and behaviors and provide more insight. Second, the sample size was larger than that identified by the power analysis. However, a relatively small sample may not be representative of a larger population, potentially limiting the findings’ external validity. Similar relationships/effects can be examined in quantitative studies with larger samples. Third, the present study was cross-sectional. Similar associations/effects can be investigated by adopting a longitudinal approach. Fourth, while the present study identified full mediation effects of extraversion and agreeableness, mediation analyses have limitations in establishing causal relationships. There may be other alternative explanations for observed mediating effects. Fifth, while the present study examined the effects of personality traits and attachment styles on financial attitudes, financial attitudes also influence personality traits and attachment styles, suggesting bidirectional relationships that were not explored in the present study. Sixth, the present study collected data by using self-report measures. Although these scales are widely used in social research, they may introduce social desirability or response biases, which may affect data accuracy. Seventh, present findings may be influenced by cultural or contextual factors. Therefore, generalization of the findings to different cultural or demographic groups needs to be made with caution. Finally, present findings indicated that focusing on attachment styles and personality traits may improve financial attitudes. Future studies could explore the ways in which these findings can be translated into targets for financial education or counseling.
© 2025 Association for Financial Counseling and Planning Education®