Artificial Intelligence Use and Financial Behaviour among Students: Evidence from an Empirical Survey
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58966/JCM2026534Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence, Financial Literacy, Financial Behaviour, Students, Digital LearningAbstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools have become essential components of students’ academic and independent learning activities, particularly in the acquisition of financial concepts. Given that AI-generated financial information may be incomplete, inaccurate, or lack sufficient context, responsible engagement with these tools is especially critical in this field. This study examines students’ awareness and use of AI tools and analyses the associations of perceived AI value, AI trust and perceived reliability, verification behaviour, AI usage frequency, and finance-related AI use with self-reported financial behavioral outcomes. An empirical survey of 179 higher-education students was conducted, with 172 complete cases used for construct-level and regression analyses. Descriptive statistics, reliability and item-level measurement diagnostics, correlation analysis, common-method-variance screening, and multiple regression with diagnostic and robustness checks were employed. The regression model was statistically significant (R² = 0.548, adjusted R² = 0.534). Perceived AI value (β = 0.240, p < 0.001), AI trust and perceived reliability (β = 0.359, p < 0.001), verification behaviour (β = 0.184, p = 0.003), and AI usage frequency (β = 0.240, p < 0.001) were positively associated with self-reported financial behavioral outcomes, whereas finance-related AI use was not statistically significant after the other predictors were included (β = 0.114, p = 0.085). These findings suggest that the quality and criticality of students’ engagement with AI-generated financial information may be more relevant than the mere use of AI for financial topics. Because the study is cross-sectional and self-reported, the findings are interpreted as associations rather than causal effects. AI should therefore be treated as a guided learning support tool rather than a replacement for teachers, verified sources, or professional financial advice.
References
Allgood, S., & Walstad, W. B. (2016). The effects of perceived and actual financial literacy on financial behaviors. Economic Inquiry, 54(1), 675–697. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecin.12255
Atkinson, A., & Messy, F.-A. (2012). Measuring financial literacy: Results of the OECD/International Network on Financial Education (INFE) pilot study (OECD Working Papers on Finance, Insurance and Private Pensions No. 15). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5k9csfs90fr4-en
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. (2023, June 6). Chatbots in consumer finance.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., & Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149.
Fernandes, D., Lynch, J. G., Jr., & Netemeyer, R. G. (2014). Financial literacy, financial education, and downstream financial behaviors. Management Science, 60(8), 1861–1883. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2013.1849
Glikson, E., & Woolley, A. W. (2020). Human trust in artificial intelligence: Review of empirical research. Academy of Management Annals, 14(2), 627–660. https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2018.0057
Hastings, J. S., Madrian, B. C., & Skimmyhorn, W. L. (2013). Financial literacy, financial education, and economic outcomes. Annual Review of Economics, 5, 347–373. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-economics-082312-125807
High-Level Expert Group on Artificial Intelligence. (2019). Ethics guidelines for trustworthy AI. European Commission.
Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications for teaching and learning. Center for Curriculum Redesign.
Huston, S. J. (2010). Measuring financial literacy. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 44(2), 296–316. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6606.2010.01170.x
Kaiser, T., Lusardi, A., Menkhoff, L., & Urban, C. J. (2022). Financial education affects financial knowledge and downstream behaviors. Journal of Financial Economics, 145(2), 255–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2021.09.022
Kasneci, E., Seßler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., Stadler, M., Weller, J., Kuhn, J., & Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
Lee, J. D., & See, K. A. (2004). Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors, 46(1), 50–80. https://doi.org/10.1518/hfes.46.1.50_30392
Lim, W. M., Gunasekara, A., Pallant, J. L., Pallant, J. I., & Pechenkina, E. (2023). Generative AI and the future of education: Ragnarök or reformation? A paradoxical perspective from management educators. The International Journal of Management Education, 21(2), Article 100790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2023.100790
Lusardi, A., & Mitchell, O. S. (2014). The economic importance of financial literacy: Theory and evidence. Journal of Economic Literature, 52(1), 5–44. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.52.1.5
OECD. (2018). G20/OECD-INFE policy guidance on digital financial literacy. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/effe2693-en
OECD. (2019). Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence (OECD/LEGAL/0449). OECD Legal Instruments.
OECD. (2020). Recommendation of the Council on Financial Literacy (OECD/LEGAL/0461). OECD Legal Instruments.
OECD. (2021). Digital delivery of financial education: Design and practice. OECD.
OECD. (2024). PISA 2022 Results (Volume IV): How financially smart are students? OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5a849c2a-en
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
Shim, S., Xiao, J. J., Barber, B. L., & Lyons, A. C. (2009). Pathways to life success: A conceptual model of financial well-being for young adults. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30(6), 708–723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2009.02.003
UNESCO. (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. UNESCO.
Xiao, J. J. (2008). Applying behavior theories to financial behavior. In J. J. Xiao (Ed.), Handbook of consumer finance research (pp. 69–81). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-75734-6_5
Yan, L., Sha, L., Zhao, L., Li, Y., Martinez-Maldonado, R., Chen, G., Li, X., Jin, Y., & Gašević, D. (2024). Practical and ethical challenges of large language models in education: A systematic scoping review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(1), 90–112. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13370
Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education: Where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16, Article 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0
