Filipa de Almeida , Ian J. Scott , Jerônimo C. Soro , Daniel Fernandes , André R. Amaral , Mafalda L. Catarino , André Arêde , Mário B. Ferreira
{"title":"资金匮乏与认知能力:荟萃分析","authors":"Filipa de Almeida , Ian J. Scott , Jerônimo C. Soro , Daniel Fernandes , André R. Amaral , Mafalda L. Catarino , André Arêde , Mário B. Ferreira","doi":"10.1016/j.joep.2024.102702","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Whereas several studies find that financial scarcity has a detrimental impact on cognitive functioning, some studies find no relationship and others even report beneficial effects. To shed light on this issue we conducted a <em>meta</em>-analysis on the relationship between financial scarcity and cognitive functioning. We went beyond testing the direct relationship between these two concepts and looked at potential moderators, namely education, the moment of scarcity, the severity of scarcity, the type of tasks used to assess cognitive functioning, and the type of study. Our findings suggest that scarcity does have a detrimental effect on cognitive functioning. Across 256 effect sizes from 29 datasets involving 111,852 respondents, we found a detrimental total effect of scarcity on cognitive performance of Hedge’s <em>g</em> = -0.43. We then estimated a <em>meta</em>-regression model of the drivers of the effect of scarcity on cognition. Education strongly explained this relationship, reducing the effect size by 60 % (partial effect of scarcity on cognitive performance is Hedge’s <em>g</em> = -0.15, when accounting for education), to a small effect size. The moment and the severity of scarcity also contribute to this relationship, by moderating the effect, such that lifetime and adulthood scarcity have a larger effect than childhood scarcity, and more extreme levels of scarcity lead to higher cognitive dysfunction. The type of task used to assess cognitive functioning did not moderate the effect. And when controlling for education, higher effect sizes were found for non-correlational designs. We discuss these findings and their implications in light of existing research and theories.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48318,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Psychology","volume":"101 ","pages":"Article 102702"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167487024000102/pdfft?md5=0f7db541af86dd81005ad72f8c8d17a6&pid=1-s2.0-S0167487024000102-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Financial scarcity and cognitive performance: A meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Filipa de Almeida , Ian J. Scott , Jerônimo C. Soro , Daniel Fernandes , André R. Amaral , Mafalda L. Catarino , André Arêde , Mário B. Ferreira\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.joep.2024.102702\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Whereas several studies find that financial scarcity has a detrimental impact on cognitive functioning, some studies find no relationship and others even report beneficial effects. To shed light on this issue we conducted a <em>meta</em>-analysis on the relationship between financial scarcity and cognitive functioning. We went beyond testing the direct relationship between these two concepts and looked at potential moderators, namely education, the moment of scarcity, the severity of scarcity, the type of tasks used to assess cognitive functioning, and the type of study. Our findings suggest that scarcity does have a detrimental effect on cognitive functioning. Across 256 effect sizes from 29 datasets involving 111,852 respondents, we found a detrimental total effect of scarcity on cognitive performance of Hedge’s <em>g</em> = -0.43. We then estimated a <em>meta</em>-regression model of the drivers of the effect of scarcity on cognition. Education strongly explained this relationship, reducing the effect size by 60 % (partial effect of scarcity on cognitive performance is Hedge’s <em>g</em> = -0.15, when accounting for education), to a small effect size. The moment and the severity of scarcity also contribute to this relationship, by moderating the effect, such that lifetime and adulthood scarcity have a larger effect than childhood scarcity, and more extreme levels of scarcity lead to higher cognitive dysfunction. The type of task used to assess cognitive functioning did not moderate the effect. And when controlling for education, higher effect sizes were found for non-correlational designs. We discuss these findings and their implications in light of existing research and theories.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48318,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Economic Psychology\",\"volume\":\"101 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102702\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167487024000102/pdfft?md5=0f7db541af86dd81005ad72f8c8d17a6&pid=1-s2.0-S0167487024000102-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Economic Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167487024000102\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Economic Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167487024000102","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
有几项研究发现,资金匮乏会对认知功能产生不利影响,但也有一些研究发现两者之间没有关系,还有一些研究甚至报告了有利影响。为了揭示这个问题,我们对财务稀缺与认知功能之间的关系进行了元分析。我们不仅测试了这两个概念之间的直接关系,还研究了潜在的调节因素,即教育程度、匮乏的时刻、匮乏的严重程度、用于评估认知功能的任务类型以及研究类型。我们的研究结果表明,稀缺性确实会对认知功能产生不利影响。在涉及 111,852 名受访者的 29 个数据集的 256 个效应大小中,我们发现稀缺性对认知能力的总效应为 Hedge's g = -0.43。然后,我们对稀缺性对认知影响的驱动因素进行了元回归模型估计。教育对这一关系有很强的解释作用,使效应大小减少了 60%(考虑教育因素后,稀缺性对认知表现的部分效应为 Hedge's g = -0.15),效应大小很小。匮乏的时间和严重程度也会对这种关系产生影响,因为它们会调节效应,比如终生和成年匮乏比童年匮乏的影响更大,而更极端的匮乏水平会导致更严重的认知功能障碍。用于评估认知功能的任务类型并不能调节这种效应。在控制教育程度的情况下,非相关设计的效应大小更高。我们将根据现有的研究和理论来讨论这些发现及其影响。
Financial scarcity and cognitive performance: A meta-analysis
Whereas several studies find that financial scarcity has a detrimental impact on cognitive functioning, some studies find no relationship and others even report beneficial effects. To shed light on this issue we conducted a meta-analysis on the relationship between financial scarcity and cognitive functioning. We went beyond testing the direct relationship between these two concepts and looked at potential moderators, namely education, the moment of scarcity, the severity of scarcity, the type of tasks used to assess cognitive functioning, and the type of study. Our findings suggest that scarcity does have a detrimental effect on cognitive functioning. Across 256 effect sizes from 29 datasets involving 111,852 respondents, we found a detrimental total effect of scarcity on cognitive performance of Hedge’s g = -0.43. We then estimated a meta-regression model of the drivers of the effect of scarcity on cognition. Education strongly explained this relationship, reducing the effect size by 60 % (partial effect of scarcity on cognitive performance is Hedge’s g = -0.15, when accounting for education), to a small effect size. The moment and the severity of scarcity also contribute to this relationship, by moderating the effect, such that lifetime and adulthood scarcity have a larger effect than childhood scarcity, and more extreme levels of scarcity lead to higher cognitive dysfunction. The type of task used to assess cognitive functioning did not moderate the effect. And when controlling for education, higher effect sizes were found for non-correlational designs. We discuss these findings and their implications in light of existing research and theories.
期刊介绍:
The Journal aims to present research that will improve understanding of behavioral, in particular psychological, aspects of economic phenomena and processes. The Journal seeks to be a channel for the increased interest in using behavioral science methods for the study of economic behavior, and so to contribute to better solutions of societal problems, by stimulating new approaches and new theorizing about economic affairs. Economic psychology as a discipline studies the psychological mechanisms that underlie economic behavior. It deals with preferences, judgments, choices, economic interaction, and factors influencing these, as well as the consequences of judgements and decisions for economic processes and phenomena. This includes the impact of economic institutions upon human behavior and well-being. Studies in economic psychology may relate to different levels of aggregation, from the household and the individual consumer to the macro level of whole nations. Economic behavior in connection with inflation, unemployment, taxation, economic development, as well as consumer information and economic behavior in the market place are thus among the fields of interest. The journal also encourages submissions dealing with social interaction in economic contexts, like bargaining, negotiation, or group decision-making. The Journal of Economic Psychology contains: (a) novel reports of empirical (including: experimental) research on economic behavior; (b) replications studies; (c) assessments of the state of the art in economic psychology; (d) articles providing a theoretical perspective or a frame of reference for the study of economic behavior; (e) articles explaining the implications of theoretical developments for practical applications; (f) book reviews; (g) announcements of meetings, conferences and seminars.