ferson.

Printed

mdwrd Dif. Vol. 5. No. 5. pp. 501-509. in Greal Britam All rights reserved

1984 Copyright

Ol9I-8869184 $3.00+000 <; 1981 Pergamon Press Ltd

MANY SIDES PSYCHOLOGY

OF THE COIN: THE OF MONEY USAGE

FURNHAM London, Gower Street, London WCI, England

ADRIAN Department of Psychology, University College

(Received 1 March 1984) Summary-The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between various demographic and social belief variables, and peoples attitudes to, and habits of, money usage. Over 250 people from a variety of different backgrounds completed a number of standardized questionnaires, as well as two questionnaires on money. A factor analysis of the Money Beliefs and Behaviour Scale revealed six clearly interpretable factors, which were later computed into six subscale scores. Analysis of variance showed that age, education and Protestant Work Ethic beliefs most differentiated Ss attitudes to money. A canonical correlational analysis revealed three significant variates. There were also a few interesting differences in how Ss viewed the way in which they treated money in the past and in how they expected to do so in the future. The results are discussed in terms of previous literature in the field, and suggestions for further research are considered.

INTRODUCTION

Despite its importance in everyday life there is a surprising paucity of psychological research on money and financial attitudes and habits. There are, no doubt, many reasons for this: a lack of rapprochement between psychology and economics (Simon, 1963; van Raaij, 1981); a lack of standardized instruments for assessment (Yamanchi and Templer, 1982); and a taboo associated with money (Goldberg and Lewis, 1978). It would be wrong however, to suggest that there is no work in this area. Psychoanalysts since Freud, and notably Fenichel (1947), have developed an anal theory of money which associates early experiences with faeces and potty-training with later attitudes to money. Behaviourists have looked at money as a generalized conditioned reinforcement both with animals (Lea, 1978) and humans (Ayllon and Azrin, 1968). Furthermore, anthropologists and economists have investigated aspects of money such as its symbolic value, its usage etc. (Lea and Webley, 198 1). There is also a fairly considerable literature on perceptual biases in the estimation of money (Lea, 1981; Furnham, 1983) and on childrens use and understanding on money (Jahoda, 1979; Furnham and Thomas, 1984). A great part of this literature is thoughtful but not empirical (Neisser, 1960). There have however been a few empirical studies on the psychology of money. Wernimont and Fitzpatrick (1972) used a semantic differential approach to attempt to understand the meaning that different people attach to money. In their sample of over 500 Ss they had such diverse people as secretaries and engineers, nursing sisters and technical supervisors. Factor analysis revealed a number of interpretable factors which were labelled shameful failure (lack of money is an indication of failure, embarrassment and degradation), social acceptability, pooh-pooh attitude (money is not very important, satisfying or attractive), moral evil, comfortable security, social unacceptability and conservative business values. The Ss work experiences, sex and socio-economic level appeared to influence their perceptions of money. For instance employment status showed that employed groups view money much more positively and as desirable, important and useful, whereas the unemployed seemed to take a tense, worrisome, unhappy view of money. Some researchers have looked at personality and money. Luft (1957) found for instance that a persons weekly income determines how he or she is perceived. Hypothetically rich men were seen as relatively healthy, happy and well-adjusted, while the poor person was seen as maladjusted and unhappy. Rim (1982) looked at the relationship between personality and attitudes towards money. He administered the Eysenck Personality Inventory and a number of questions concerning money and found that over half showed significant differences on the Extraversion factor, and a third on the Neuroticism factor. Predictably stable extraverts seemed more open, comfortable and carefree about their money than unstable introverts.
501

502

ADRIAN FURNHAM

Other researchers have attempted to devise measures of peoples attitudes towards money. Rubinstein (1980) devised a money survey for Psychofogy Today to investigate readers attitudes and feelings about money, to get an idea of its importance in their lives, what associations it evokes and how it affects their closest relationships. Some of these questions were later combined into a Midas scale but no statistics were presented. Although over 20,000 responses were received from a moderately well-distributed population, the results were only analysed in terms of simple percentages and few individual difference variables were considered. Yamanchi and Templer (1982) on the other hand attempted to develop a fully psychometrized Money Attitude Scale (MAS). A factor analysis of an original selection of 62 items revealed five factors labelled Power-Prestige, Retention Time, Distrust, Quality and Anxiety. From this a 29-item scale was selected which was demonstrated to be reliable. A partial validation+orrelations with other established measures such as Machiavellianism, status concern, time competence, obsessionality, paranoia and anxietyshowed that this questionnaire was related to measures of other similar theoretical constructs. The correlations are in agreement with ostensibly suggested motives such as power and prestige. And, the evidence is viewed as congruent with less surface psychodynamic formulations such as the relationship of money retention to the obsessive-anal character structure. (p. 528) Most interestingly the authors found that money attitudes were essentially independent of a persons income. While Yamanchi and Templers (1982) study is to be welcomed it did appear to have a number of shortcomings. Although the authors obtained a large and fairly heterogeneous sample they failed to investigate any demographic differences (age, sex) save income. Secondly, their partial validation seemed overconcerned with psychopathological correlates of money attitudes rather than on normal social beliefs and attitudes. Finally, the study makes no attempt to trace the aetiology of these beliefs. This study had three aims: firstly, to develop a useful, multifaceted instrument to measure money beliefs and behaviour in Britain; secondly, to look at the relationship between various demographic and social/work beliefs and peoples monetary beliefs and behaviour; and thirdly, to look at the determinants of peoples money beliefs and behaviour in the past and the future. Presumably monetary habits and attitudes are partly determined by early socialization. Both psychoanalytic and behaviourist thinkers stress the importance of early learning experiences on monetary and related beliefs. Hence it seems that money beliefs and behaviours will be related to other socialand work-related beliefs.
METHOD

Subjects In all, 256 Ss took part in this study, of which 132 were male (52;/,) and 124 female (48%). Of this total 147 were between 18 and 30 yr (57x), 75 between 31 and 50 yr (29%) and 34 over 50 yr (14%). Each was required to specify their maximum education level: 43 had left school with some O-levels or equivalent (17%); 31 had some A-levels (12%); 80 had some post-school/college experience (31%); while 102 (40%) had some university/polytechnic experience. As regards voting pattern, 91 voted Conservative (36x), 81 Labour (32%) 35 Liberal/SDP (12%) and 49 for other fringe parties or did not vote (20%). Their incomes varied from less than E2000 per annum to over El 5,000. Just under half (122,48x) were unmarried, while 94 (36%) were or had been married-the remainder were either living with a partner, remarried or widowed. The majority were Christian (37% Church of England, 12% other Protestant, 16% Catholic) but there were some Jews, Hindus and Muslims (5%), yet 37 declared themselves agnostic (14%) and 34 atheist (13%). Most were in regular employment (over 70%) though some were students, unemployed or retired. Because of the insufficient specification of occupation it was not possible to determine social class. The Ss were recruited by three different means: two university S panels provided the bulk; colleges of further education and departments of external studies about a quarter; and the remainder were recruited by post- and undergraduate students in their home towns (in England, Scotland and Wales).

Psychology of money

503

Whilst this sample cannot be taken as representative of the British population as a whole, there is no reason to believe that they were atypical. They certainly provide useful comparisons for present purposes although it may be unwise to generalize these results to the entire population.
Questionnaires

Each S was required to answer five separate questionnaires order. 1. Money This is a from three (1979) on preliminary 2. Money
Beliefs and Behaviour Scale (MBBS; Furnham,

which were administered in random

1983)

60-item inventory which is rated on a 7-point agree-disagree scale. Items were divided sources: the MAS (Yamanchi and Templer, 1982); items listed in Goldberg and Lewis the psychology of money; items from the Midas scale (Rubinstein, 1980). Some research suggests that the scale was a reliable instrument (r = 0.84 on an N = 33).
in the Past and Future (MPF; Rubinstein, 1980)

This was a simple 7-item scale divided into two sections that was based on questions in Rubinsteins (1980) study. These items were analysed simply in terms of percentages but there is no reason to expect that this questionnaire is invalid. 3. Protestant
Work Ethic (PWE; Mirels and Garrett, 1971)

This is a 19-item inventory which is rated on a 7-point agree-disagree scale. Of the 19 items, 16 are scored in the direction of high PWE and 3 in the direction of low PWE. The scale has been used extensively in studies of work beliefs (Furnham, 1982). 4. Conservative
Beliefs (CB; Wilson and Patterson, 1968)

This is a simple 50-item inventory rated on a 3-point (yes/no) scale. It has been used to measure general conservatism and includes such things as religious fundamentalism, right-wing politics, intolerance of minority groups, conventional preferences, anti-hedonism etc. It has been found to be a reliable, valid and economic instrument and used in many studies (Furnham and Bland, 1983). 5. Anomie
Scale (AS; Srole, 1956)

This is a short 5-item scale containing five statements. It appears to have satisfactory psychometric properties despite its length and has attracted research in sociology and psychology (Furnham, 1984).
Procedure

Subjects were tested either in small groups in psychology departments or completed them in their own time. Because each S had, in effect, to answer 150 questions the task took nearly 1 hr. There was, for the latter, a good response rate (over 80%) and few questionnaires were spoiled. Where possible, Ss were debriefed after completing the questionnaire.
RESULTS

Money Factor analysis

Beliefs and Behaviour

Because it has been shown that attitudes towards money are multidimensional a factor analysis was performed on the MAS. Table 1 shows the factor-analytic results. In all, six factors emerged (scree test) which accounted for 35% of the total variance. The first factor which accounts for over a sixth of the variance, and had 18 items loading 0.40 and above, has been labelled Obsession because the highest-loading items seem to imply that people holding these beliefs are obsessed by all aspects of money. The second factor which accounts for nearly 7% of the variance is labelled Power/Spending and contains items which refer to the giving of money as a means of power. The third factor on the contrary refers to the Retention of money and illustrates the attitudes of the people who are very careful with

504

ADRIAN

FUKNHAM

Table

I. Items

Factor

analysis

(Vanmax)

of the MAS Me 2.61 2.21 2.32 I.71 2.10 2.25 3.10 3.85 3.56 2.29 I .83 3.37 2.19 2.11 3.19 3.23 4.09 4.46 2.67 1.87 2.15 2.62 3.55 4.51 4.28 4.75 3.16 3.34 3.75 3.69 2.32 4.24 Loading 0.46 0.49 0.48 0.52 0.46 0.57 0.48 0.46 0.46 0.71 0.51 0.57 0.58 0.48 0.53 0.47 0.41 0.44 0.52 0.42 0.53 0.41 0.45 0.41 - 0.47 - 0.42 0.41 0.59 0.64 0.58 0.41 0.42 3.00 5.0 3.97 6.6 Eigenvalue 7.49 Variance I2 5

Facror I 2. 1 put money ahead of pleasure. IO. I feel compelled to argue or bargain about the cost of almost everything that I buy. 17. I often feel inferior to others who have more money than myself, eve when I know that they have done nothing of worth to get it. 18. I often se money as a weapon to control or intimidate those who frustrate me 19. I sometimes feel superior to those who have less money than myself regardless of the ability and achievements. 20. I firmly believe that money can solve all of my problems 21. I often feel anxious and defensive when asked about my personal finances. is cost. 22. In making any purchase, for any purpose. my first consideration 24. I feel stupid if I pay a little more for something than a neighbour. 28. I feel that money is the only thing that I can really count on. 36. I believe that time not spent in making money is time wasted. 43. I would do practically anything legal for money If it were enough riches, investments, etc -and let my fnends 45. I am proud of my financial victories-pay, know about them. 50. I believe that a persons salary is very revealing I assessing their mtelligence. 55. Compared to most other people that I know, I believe that I think about money much more than they do. 56. I worry about my finances much of the time. 57. I often fantasise about money and what I could do wth it 60. In Britain, money is how we compare each other Factor 2 3. I sometimes buy things that I dont need or want to impress people because they are the right things to have at the time. 15. If I have money left over at the end of the month(week) I often feel uncomfortable until it is all spent. 16. I sometimes buy friendship by being very generous wth those I want to like me. 25. I often feel disdain for money and look down on those who have it 35. I often give large tips to waiters/waitresses that I like 38. I often spend money on myself when I am depressed. 41. I prefer not to lend people money. 58. I very rarely give beggars or drunks money when they ask fot it Facror 3 I. I often buy things that I dont need or want because they are in a sale or reduced in a sale or reduced in price. Even when I have sufficient money I often feel guilty about spending money on 4 necessities like clothes etc. 7. I often say I cant afford it whether I can or not. 9. I often have difficulty in making decisions about spending money regardless of the amount. 17. See above. 26. I prefer to save money because Im ever sure when things will collapse and Ill need the cash Facror 4 8. I know almost to the penny how much money I have in my purse, wallet or pocket at all times. 13. I prefer to se money rather than credit cards. 14. I always know how much I have in my savings account (bank or building society). 23. I believe that it is rude to enquire about a persons wage/salary 26. See above. 32. My attitude towards money is very similar to that of my parents. 34. I always pay bills (telephone, water, electricity, etc.) promptly. 59. I am proud of my ability to save money. Facmr 5 27. The amount of money that I have saved is never quite enough 42. I am better OK than most of my friends think. 46. I am worse ofT than most of my friends think. 49. I often argue with my partner (spouse, lover, etc.) about money. 52. Most of my friends have more money than I do. 56. See above. 59. See above. Factor 6 33. I believe that the amount of money ability and effort. 51. I believe that my present income is 53. I believe that my present income is 54. I believe that I have very little control to change it. that a person earns is closely related to his/her

3.26 5.27 4.34 4.71 4.24 3.94 4.27 3.37 4.84 2.99 3.51 3.12 3.71 3.23 3.32 2.75 3.51 4.35 4.48

0.50 0.40 0.64 0.48 0.42 0.46 0.40 0.59 0.58 -0.53 0.56 0.42 0.61 -0.42 - 0.42 0.45 0.67 -0.60 -0.58

2.62

4.4

2.12

3.5

2.02

3.4

about what I deserve, given the job I do. far less than I deserve given the job I do. over my financial situation in terms of my power

Psychology

of money

505

Table 2. ANOVA

results

for the MBBS

---__ Factor
I.

Demographic Variables F-levels Sex Age I.50 6.43 3.56 6.68** 0.47 11.30*** Education 8.48* 3.34. 1.53 3.33 1.18 8.55.. Vote 1.13 6.2S* 0.79 1.13 I .39 1.87
IllCOllle

2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Obsession Power Retention Security Inadequacy Effort/Ability

17.61*** 0.39 2.80 4.54 0.94 10.19***

6.16** 4.43*** 2.41 1.24 0.21 3.09*

Belief Variables F-levels Factor ______.~~~~ .~~_ I. Obsession 2. Power/Spending 3. Retention 4. Security/Conservative 5. Inadequacy 6. Effort/Ability P < 0.05; l < 0.01; ***p < 0.001 *P Ahenatlon 24.53*** 2.42 4.37 0.00 2.29 0.16

~~ ~~__ PWE
15.90** 0.43 4.46* 13.97*** 0.17 8.43*

Conservatism 10.20*** 0.33 7.5511 48.66** 0.17 0.03

money. The fourth factor is not unlike the third and is labelled Security/Conservative because high-loading items refer to a somewhat old-fashioned approach to money. The fifth, bipolar, factor is labelled Inadequate because high positively-loading items refer to feelings that one has not got enough money. Finally, the sixth factor refers to how one gets money and is labelled Effort/Ability. Items which loaded on these six factors were then computed (arithmetically) to form six separate scores for each individual S.
Analysis of variance

In order to determine how each of the independent variables related to each of the various factors, a number of one-way ANOVAs were computed. It was not possible to do two-, three- or more way ANOVAs because of uneven cell size. Table 2 shows the results for the ANOVAs on the demographic and the belief independent variables. There were three sex differences. Males tended to be more obsessed with money (Factor 1) while females were more conservative and security-conscious (Factor 4) than males. Females also believed more than males that they had little control over their financial situation and got less money then they deserved (Factor 6). Age revealed four significant differences: younger people used money as a means of power (Factor 2), were less careful and retentive with money (Factor 3), less security-minded (Factor 4) than older people who in turn believed the amount of money that a person earns or possesses is a function of their effort and ability. Education also revealed four significant differences: less well educated people tended to be more obsessed with money (Factor 1) than the better educated. The second least educated group (completed secondary schooling) more than any of the other groups tended to use money as a means of power over others (Factor 2), while the two intermediary groups were most conservative/security-minded (Factor 4) than the least and most educated group. The better educated tended to believe that a persons wealth (Factor 6) is less under his/her control (or a function of their effort or ability) than the less well educated groups. Vote only yielded one significant difference. Labour voters more than Liberals/SDP or Conservatives used money as a source of power over people (Factor 2). Income showed three significant differences: people on lower incomes were more obsessed by money (Factor I), and more likely to use money for power (Factor 2). Predictably higher income people, rather than lower income groups, believed that the ability to earn money was due to effort and ability. Alienation revealed only one significant difference. More alienated people appeared much more obsessed by money than less alienated people. The PWE yielded four significant differences: high scorers were more obsessed by money, more retentive, more security-minded and believed wealth to be due to effort and ability more than low scorers. Similarly people with conservative social attitudes and beliefs were more obsessed by money, more retentive and much more securityminded.

506
Table 3. Canonical Vanate I 2 3 Eigenvalue 0.3 1 0.21 0.14

ADRIAN

FURNHAhl

correlations Canonical correlation 0.55 0.46 0.37

of the independent Wilks i 0.42 0.61 0.78

wth

the dependent x2 212.90 120.41 58.95

variables Significance level 0.001 0.001 0.001

Canonical 2
Demographic S.3 Age

variate 3 * .x0.68 *z 0.06 0.37 -0.25 -0.25 0.12 0.23 0.00 * zo.47 * 0.1 I

oJ3
-0.29 0.35 0.04 0.17 -0.13 * - 0.02 -0.85 0.27 0.20 -0.18 0.06 -0.57

Educatmn Vote Income f?&/ Alienatron PWE Conservatism M0ne.v Allirudes I. Obsession 2. Power/Spending 3. Retention 4. SecuntyjConservative 5. Inadequacy 6. Effort/Abilitv

-0.28 -0.33 0.17 0 14 %I

0.44

0.01 -0.25 0.47 0.63 - 0.04 -0.22 0.10 - 0.49

Canonical

correlation

In order to perform the second major aim of this study, a canonical correlation was computed in which the five demographic and three belief variables were entered as independent variables while the six money factors were entered as dependent variables. As can be seen from Table 3, three significant canonical variates emerged. Following Levine (1977), the canonical variates are to be interpreted in terms of the strength of the loadings of items on them. The first significant variate being that sex and PWE are strongly associated with money obsessions and beliefs about the effort/ability in obtaining money. Specifically females, who endorse the PWE, tend to be more obsessed by money which they believe is obtained primarily through effort and ability. The second variate being that low-income highly alienated people tend not to believe that the accumulation of money is due to effort and ability and tend not to be as obsessed by money or see it as a way of influencing others. The final variate indicates that older, better educated, females tend to be very conservative and retentive about money and tend on the whole to feel inadequate about how much they possess. Money in the Past and Future

In order to establish which variables discriminated peoples perception of their monetary habits in the past and the future, a number of ANOVAs were calculated. The results of the ANOVAs are presented in Table 4. There were only four sex differences. Females believed significantly more than males that money was unimportant to their mother, siblings and self, while males more than females worried about having to sell their house or car in the future. Age differences showed a number of highly significant effects: older people perceived their families financial position to be significantly poorer than that of middle-aged or younger people, yet they (the older people) believed money to be less important to their father and mother than the other groups; older people were more pessimistic about their personal financial future and were more worried about having to sell their house or car, not being able to save up for old age and not giving their family all that they had hoped to. Education only revealed one significant difference: less well educated people perceived themselves as being significantly poorer in their childhood than better educated people. There were a few voting pattern differences. Labour voters claimed that their parents discussed their finances more often and that money was more important to their mother than Conservative voters. On the other hand, Conservatives believed that both their own and their countrys future was going to get better and as a result they worried less about the possibility of having to sell their house and car and losing all their savings.

Table 4. F-levels Sex

from the MPFS

Age
Income

Education Alienation -. 0.67 0.19 0.12 4.22.. 0.09 I.81 0.84 0.17 0.80 0.43 3.23 0.19

vote

PWE 0.49 0.02 0.17

Conservatism 2.17 2.28 0.80

0.01 0.98 0.12

19.67*** 1.68

I .72
4.55.. 6.14 1.49 2.66 2.92. I .42 0.17 0.60 2.90 24.24*** 17.23 0.94 1.26 2.12 0.24 0.03 0.90 I 47 0.14 I .oo 0.40 0 20 1.37 0.79

Money in rhe Pas: I. While a child, what was your familys financial position (Rich-Poor)? 2. While a child, was there a noticeable change in your familys economic situation (Much Richer-Much Poorer)? 3. How often did your parents discuss family finances with you (Often-Never)? 4. When a child, how important was money to the following people (Important-Unimportant)? Mother Father Siblings Self 6.02. 2.33 4.92 4 57 0.85 0.15 0.68 0.00 0.05 0 83 0.37

0.05 0.43 0.69 0.55 2.05

0.05 0.97 0.76 0.68 7.16..

I 29
8.71*** 13.1 I*** I .68 2.81. I .36 4.65. 5.68. a.09** 0.96 0.01 0.05

19.24

Il.63***

1.62
77
1.__

Money in the Furwe HOW do you expect your economic situation to change in the next 5 years (Much Better-Much Worse)? How do you expect your counfrys economic situation to change in the next 5 years (Better-Worse)? To what extent do you worry about the following things happening to you? Losing your job Having to sell your house/car Losing all your savings Not being able to maintain living standard Not being able to make ends meet Not being able to save for old age Not giving your family all you had hoped to I .24 3.73 2.25 0.05 3.07 0.56 0.68 2.75 3.69. 0.41 2.78 0.87 9.21** 4.52 2.64 0.95 0.30 0.27 2.82 I .65 1.45

0.32 5.80** 3.29 0.95 0.34 0.89 2.85

..,u

I 7ll

0.03 I .87 4.62 0.02 0.90 2.57 I .a4

I .59 2.50 0.00 3.82 6.06 2.25 4.13

l <o.os: P

**P

<0.01;

***p

<O.OOl.

508

ADRIAN FUKNHAM

Interestingly, a persons income made no difference to how they perceived money in the past. However, quite predictably the better off a person was the less they tended to worry about losing their job, selling their house or car and losing all their savings. The three Social and Work Attitude scales did not differentiate any of the questions referring to money in the past. However, people with conservative social attitudes tended to believe that their personal as well as their countrys economic future would improve. People who strongly endorsed the PWE, more than those who did not, also believed that the countrys economic situation would change for the better. More alienated, significantly more than less alienated people, worried about losing their job, having to sell their house and car and losing all their savings. The fear of losing all ones savings was also felt significantly more by high rather than low PWE endorsers. People with conservative social attitudes were also concerned with not being able to maintain their living standards and make ends meet in the future.
DISCUSSION

The results of this study are not dissimilar from related American studies (Rubinstein, 1980; Yamanchi and Templer, 1982). It was demonstrated that attitudes towards money are by no means unidimensional. The factor-analytic results yielded six clearly interpretable factors that bore many similarities to the factors found in Yamanchi and Templer (1982) such as Power, Retention and Inadequacy as well as the hypothetical factors derived from psychoanalytic theory (Fenichel, 1947). Whereas some of the factors are clearly linked to clinical traits of anxiety and obsessionality, others are more closely related to power and the way in which one obtains money. Some factors more than others proved to be clearly related to the demographic and belief variables. For instance, obsession (Factor 1) showed significant differences on three out of the five demographic variables, and all the belief variables, whereas the Inadequacy factor revealed no significant differences on either set of variables. The ANOVAs showed an interesting and predictable pattern of results with age, education and PWE values discriminating most strongly. These differences would not have been predicted by psychoanalytic theory. It should also be noted that feelings of alienation did not discriminate very clearly, so casting doubt on a narrowly clinical approach to money beliefs and attitudes. From a social psychological perspective these results are quite sensible-as one gets older and ones needs change so money takes on new meanings. Furthermore, as one might predict, education makes a difference to ones beliefs about money. PWE beliefs were also quite in accordance with psychological research in that area (Furnham, 1982). The canonical correlation yielded three significant variates which described the relationship between the independent and dependent variables. The first two significant variates both showed a relationship between specific independent variables and two of the dependent factors namely obsession with money (Factor l), and beliefs about whether one gets money through ability or effort (Factor 6). Females more than males, high PWE scorers rather than low, low- rather than high-income earners and less rather than more alienated people tend to be obsessed by money and to believe that the accumulation of money is due to effort and ability. The third significant variate showed that age, education and sex were related to conservative monetary beliefs as well as feelings of inadequacy about money. Case studies on people with money obsessions indeed point to the importance of the above factors (Goldberg and Lewis, 1979). The importance of the demographic and belief determinants of money beliefs and attitudes lies partly in the clues it gives to the aetiology of these beliefs. Clearly, primary and secondary socialization has important effects on peoples monetary habits and beliefs. Parental factors such as income and education, as well as social and political conservative beliefs and PWE values no doubt determine certain child-rearing practices of independence, saving, achievement motivation etc. (Furnham and Bland, 1983). Studies on childrens pocket-money and allowances suggests that factors such as class and age have very important effects on childrens spending and saving habits, even before they reach the age of 10 (Furnham and Thomas, 1984). A third aim of the study was to investigate SS perceptions of the way in which they had experienced money in the past and anticipated using it in the future. Although there may be various memorial and attribution errors involved in such a procedure-so casting doubt on the usefulness

Psychology

of money

509

of this approach to collect valid information about the past-a number of very interesting findings arose. Predictably, older less well educated people believed their early childhood to be poorer than younger, better educated people, reflecting both the average increased standard of living and the class structure of society. Overall there were few differences in the Ss perception of money in the past, but a large number regarding money in the future. Older people seemed more worried about the future than younger people. Curiously, richer people seemed more concerned about the future than poorer people. Conservative voters believed that the countrys economic future was bright, while Labour voters and those with high alienation and those with conservative social attitudes believed that it would get worse. Although these questions may seem vague they are not trivial because presumably people act on their beliefs about future trends (Rubinstein, 1980). That is, if one believes that future economic trends mean that one might be substantially worse off one might take steps to ensure that this does not happen. Certainly research on saving has shown that the more optimistic one is about the general economic situation, the more people expect and try to save. As Lea and Webley (1981) have noted: although for economists and politicians money is something which measures the value of everything but which cannot be measured itself, psychologists have long understood that money is a complex symbol imbued with meaning and symbolism. Either because money is still a taboo topic of conversation or research, or else because they have felt the task too difficult, few psychologists have attempted any empirical work in this field. This study has demonstrated that peoples attitudes towards, and habits of, money usage are complex and multifaceted. Furthermore, there are a number of specific variables-particularly sex, age and education-which discriminate between peoples beliefs and behaviours. Although there is some evidence of personality and psychopathological correlates of money attitudes, this study has concentrated more on demographic and social belief variables which have been shown to be very important. Future research in this neglected area would do well to investigate the way in which money-usage habits and beliefs are determined, but also change over a life-time. REFERENCES
Ayllon T. and Azrin N. (1968) The Token Economy. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York. Fenichel 0. (1947) The drive to amass wealth. In The Collected Papers of Otto Fenichel (Edited by Fenichel H. and Rapaport 0.). Norton, New York. Furnham A. (1982) The Protestant Work Ethic and attitudes towards unemployment. J. occup. Psychol. 55, 277-286. Furnham A. (1983) Inflation and the estimated sizes of notes. J. econ. Psychol. 4, 349-352. Furnham A. (1984) Value systems and anomie in three cultures. Inf. J. Psychol. In press. Furnham A. and Bland K. (1983) The Protestant Work Ethic and conservatism. Person. individ. D& 4, 205-206. Furnham A. and Thomas P. (1984) Pocket Money: a study of economic education. Br. J. dev. Psychol. In press. Goldberg H. and Lewis L. (1979) Money Madness: The Psychology of Saving, Spending, Loving and Hating Money. Springwood, London. Jahoda G. (1979) The construction of economic reality by some Glaswegian children. Eur. J. sot. Psychol. 9, 115-127. Lea S. (1978) The psychology and economics of demand. Psychol. Bull. 85, 441466. Lea S. (1981) Inflation, decimalization and the estimated sizes of coins. J. econ. Psychol. 1, 79-81. Lea S. and Webley P. (1981) Theorie psychologique de la monnaie. Paper given at the Economic Psychology Conference, Paris. Levine M. (1977) Canonical Analysis and Facfor Comparison. Sage, Beverly Hills, Calif. Luft J. (1957) Monetary value and the perception of persons. J. sot. Psychol. 46, 245-251. Mirels fi. and Garrett j. (1971) The Prbtestant Ethic-as a personality variable. J. consulf. clin. Psychol. 36, 40-44. Neisser E. (1960) Emotional and social values attached to money. Marr. Fam. Living 22, 132-138. van Raaij w. (1981) Economic psychology. J. econ. Psychol. 1, i-24. Rim Y. (1982) Personality and attitudes connected with money. Paper given at the Economic Psychology Conference, Edinburgh. Rubinstein C. (1980) Your money and your life. Psychol. Today 12, 47-58. Simon H. (1963) Economics and psychology. In Psychology: a Study of a Science (Edited by Koch S.). McGraw-Hill, New York. Srole L. (1956) Social integration and certain corollaries: an exploratory study. Am. social. Rev. 21, 709-716. Wernimont P. and Fitzpatrick S. (1972) The meaning of money. J. appl. Psychol. 56, 218-226. Wilson G. and Patterson J. (1968) A new measure of conservatism. Br. J. sot. clin. Psychol. 7, 264-269. Yamanchi K. and Templer D. (1982) The development of a Money Attitude scale. J. Person. Assess. 46, 522-528.