International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)

ISSN: 2319-7064
SJIF (2022): 7.942

A Study on Effect of Demographic Variables on

Attitude of Investors in Personal Finance
Management
Priyanka Patel1, Dr. Keyur Nayak2
1
Research Scholar, Gujarat Technological University
2
Director, Laxmi Institute of Management, GTU.

Abstract: Investment is one of the important term in the day to day life of every people. Mainly, people with saving enter into the world
of investment. Investors invest their savings for the purpose of getting more money in order to finance their future consumption..
Nowadays individuals are increasingly expected to take command of their financial decisions. Such decisions are taken based on
different factors, among which demographic variables play important role on attitude of Investors. The study is about exploring into the
effect of demographic variables on attitude of investors in Personal finance management. Attitude of Investors include investment
pattern, investment choices, risk tolerance, perception of risk etc. The objective of the study is to identify the relationship between
demographic variables and attitude of investors. The findings of the study shows that demographic variables like age, gender,
occupation and marital status do not have significant relationship with investment pattern. It is identified that majority of respondents
are willing to take risk after adequate research. Only marital status has significant relationship with risk tolerance. Majority of
respondents perceive risk as an opportunity, they want to take risk and get more return after adequate research. It is observed from the
study that only age has significant relationship with perception of risk.

Keywords: Personal Finance Management, Demographic variable, Attitude, Risk Tolerance

1. Introduction management, retirement planning, tax planning, and estate

planning” (Altfest, 2004, p. 54).
Everyone has to manage personal finance in one way or
another. Some tend to save a lot, some like to collect Taking charge of finances does not only mean establishing a
information before each purchase, some like to follow their daily household budget but also saving and investing in
gut feelings. Personal finance behaviour concerns how building a shield for future expenses, either predictable
people manage the financial resources available to them and (buying a house, car or education) or unpredictable (loss of a
their households (Narges and Laily, 2011). job or health issues) along with assuring stress-free post-
retirement years through a blanket financial plan (Kidwell
Financial behaviour of individuals refers to people’s and Turrisi, 2004; Copur and Gutter, 2019).
spending and saving habits, such as living on a monthly
budget, having monthly savings, creating emergency funds The study is about exploring into the effect of demographic
and retirement packages, investing excess cash and variables on attitude of investors in Personal finance
monitoring financial situations periodically (Hilgert et al., management. There are various factors which effect the
2003; LaBorde and Mottner, 2013). financial decision making of investors of which
demographic variables like age, gender, occupation, income,
In recent years, personal finance behaviour has gained education and marital status are the most important one.
attention from almost all governments around the globe, Attitude of Investors include risk tolerance, investment
development organisations and the World Bank pattern, investment choices etc. Risk tolerance is a crucial
(OECD/INFE, 2016). This stems from the fact that nations factor that influences a wide range of financial decisions
gradually appreciate the role personal finance decisions have (Roszkowski and Snelbecker, 1990). Risk tolerance is
on the individual, family, society and the economy (Gidighi defined as individual’s willingness to engage in a financial
and Donga, 2020; Nguyen et al., 2017). activity whose outcome is uncertain (Duda et al.,
2010).Individual’s financial risk taking capabilities play a
Individuals who practice proper financial behaviour stand vital role in making his/her investment decision, and hence
better positioned to meet future financial obligations and in recent years, the Financial Risk Tolerance (FRT) topic has
emergencies (Narges and Laily, 2011). Good financial gained much importance among investment managers,
behaviour also enhances the financial well-being of the financial planners/advisors, and academicians.
individual and their families (Fluellen, 2013). Families that
save frequently create resilience against financial shocks and In reality it is observed that many a times there is a gap
thereby promote financial well-being. “Personal Financial between individual’s perceived return and actual return. The
Management Behavior (PFMB) is a process which mistake lies in the decision making process which is
assimilates all components of individuals’ financial interest. influenced by the risk tolerance of an individual. Research
These include cash flow management, investments, risk indicates that people tend to overestimate their actual level

Volume 12 Issue 2, February 2023

www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: SR23201115119 DOI: 10.21275/SR23201115119 186
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN: 2319-7064
SJIF (2022): 7.942
of risk tolerance because of the desire to appear socially irrelevant and did not have any impact in determining
acceptable. investor’s attitude towards risk.

The study has adopted the financial risk tolerance scale Bajtelsmit and Bernasek (1996) examined the existing
proposed by Grable and Lytton (1999). The objective of the literature regarding gender differences in investment. As per
study is to identify the attitude of investors in Personal the study, women allocate their portfolios differently than
Finance Management which include investment pattern of men and may differ in their attitudes towards risk taking.
investor, investment choices between alternatives and risk Gender differences in investing and risk taking can be
tolerance level of investors. And then effect of demographic attributed to differences in individual preferences. These
variables on attitude of investors. Demographic variables factors influence risk aversion directly or through outcomes
include Age, Gender, Occupation, Marital status, Income such as gender differences in wealth, income and
and Education. employment.

2. Literature Review Kavita & Mohanraj (2016) examined impact of demographic

variables & Risk Tolerance on Investment Decision. The
A study conducted by Hallahan, Faff, and McKenzie (2004) study explore investment pattern of Individuals and
concluded that only 4% of respondents accurately estimated investment decisions are influenced by demographic
their tolerance for risk while 73% and 23% of respondents variable and measure risk tolerance by using Grable &
under-estimated and over-estimated their risk tolerance Lytton scale. Author have been identified that gender is the
respectively. Hsee and Weber (1997) argued that investors only demographic variable which have impact on investment
have a tendency to under-estimate their own risk tolerance pattern. And also identified that age and occupation of the
level. respondent has an impact on the risk tolerance and
respondents perception of risk.
Kabra et al. (2010) examines the factors that influence
behaviour and investment risk tolerance and decision Sireesha & Laxmi (2013) present the study on impact of
making process. The target customers are the investors who demographic factors on investment avenues. It is found that
invest regularly. These respondents were classified based on gender, age and friends are mostly influencing the
the factors like age, gender, profession and annual income. investment decisions of the respondents. Authors have been
Risk-averse investors consider multiple factors and seek concluded that the respondents of the study are conservative
diversified information before executing investment in nature and show less concern for money multiplication
transaction. This study concludes that the investors’ age and and liquidity.
gender predominantly influences the risk taking capacity of
the investors. Subramaniam & Athiyaman (2016) analysed effect of
demographic factors on investor's risk tolerance. It is found
Gilliam and Grable (2010) analyzed how well married men that demographic factors such as age, education, investment
and women were able to estimate their financial risk experience and income of the investors are correlated with
tolerance. The author examines gender based estimation bias their risk tolerance and; gender, occupation and civil status
which relates to household decisions that involves financial are not related with risk tolerance.
risk. The author identifies that older respondents were more
likely to underestimate their financial risk tolerance because Dhananjay Bapat (2020) examine Antecedents to
of past experience. responsible financial management behavior among young
adults: moderating role of financial risk tolerance. Study
Brigitte & Mei Wang (2008) analysed Attitude & Behaviour found that financial attitude fully mediates the relationship
in everyday Finance. The author demonstrates that by between financial knowledge and responsible financial
segmenting private investors on the basis of their self-stated management behavior, and locus of control influences
financial attitudes and behavior, a yield of clearly responsible financial management behavior. Financial risk
interpretable profiles can be realised. Cluster analyses, based tolerance moderates the relationship. Among demographic
on the results of factor analysis, indicate that private factors, age and occupation influence responsible financial
investors can be divided into five clusters with specific management behavior.
characteristics in their financial day-to-day behaviour and
certain related socio demographic variables (e.g., gender, Samreen Lodhi (2014) study Factors Influencing Individual
age, and education). Socio-demographic variables show Investor Behavior: An Empirical Study of City Karachi. The
patterns of distribution in the clusters, e.g. men are found obtained results show that financial literacy and accounting
more in the rational clusters, less in the more irrational ones. information helps investors in lowering in formation
In contrast, women are found to fall more into both asymmetry and allows investors to invest in risky
extremes. instruments. But as age and experience increase investors
preference changes to less risky investments, it does not
Heena (2015) examined the relationship between mean that investor does not prefer to invest in shares, he will
demographic variables and personality traits on investors’ but with the intension of getting dividend return rather than
attitude towards risk. The author ascertained that there is a capital gain.
positive relationship between income and risk tolerance
level. Education and personality types were found to be Yosra Mefteh Rekik, Younes Boujelbene (2013) study
Determinants of Individual Investors’ Behaviors: Evidence
Volume 12 Issue 2, February 2023
www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: SR23201115119 DOI: 10.21275/SR23201115119 187
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN: 2319-7064
SJIF (2022): 7.942
from Tunisian Stock Market. The study try to find out to Hypothesis 9(H0): There is no significant relationship
whether some psychological as well as demographic factors between Age and Perception of risk.
affect Tunisian individual investors’ behavior and then try to Hypothesis 10(H0): There is no significant relationship
examine the factors that are more influencing than others. between Gender and Perception of risk.
Results have indicated that the Tunisian investors’ behaviors Hypothesis 11(H0): There is no significant relationship
are subject to five behavioral biases: representativeness, between Occupation and Perception of risk.
herding attitude, loss aversion, mental accounting, and
anchoring. Apart from these biases, when attempting to 3. Methodology
categorize Tunisian investors on the basis of demographic
variables, authors have also found that gender, age and The study adopt descriptive and cross sectional research
experience have an interaction with behavioral financial design. Sampling technique is Non Probability Sampling
factors in investment decisions. Technique and sample respondents are regular investors.
Data collection technique is through Structured
SelimAren, Sibel Din, Aydemir (2015) analysed factors Questionnaire. Questionnaire is administrated in
influencing given investment choice of individuals in Ahmedabad, Gujarat. Sample size for study is 100
Turkey. The study aims to examine the effect of respondents. The responses are collected through 5 point
demographic variables, investment decision criteria and Likert Scale. Data analysis is done through SPSS. Chi
financial literacy level on more preferred investment Square tests, Cross Tabulation and Frequency distribution
alternative in Turkey. Results indicate that age, marital are adopted to analyze the data. Risk tolerance scale
status and society criterion (i.e., considerating socially developed by Grable and Lytton is adopted for this study.
beneficialness of an investment) make no difference in the The dimensions measured in the Questionnaire related to
choice of all investment alternatives. investments are preferred investment options, Purpose
behind Investment. The dimensions measured in the
Research Objectives & Hypothesis Questionnaire related to risk tolerance are general risk
The study shows insights into investors’ psyche which choice, perception about risk, risk as a level of comfort and
influence their investment pattern and investment decision. Prospect Theory.
The study demonstrates relationship between demographic
variables and investment decisions. This study also measures Data Analysis
the extent of risk tolerance of individual investors. Risk Data analysis is done in two parts. The first part looks at the
tolerance often varies with age, gender, income and preferred investment options of investors, demographic
occupation. It can be determined by questionnaire designed variables and investment decisions and testing of hypothesis.
to revel risk tolerance. The second part looks at investor risk tolerance.

The objectives of the study are: Table 1: Shows the Preferred Sector for Investment
 To identify investment pattern and investment choices Responses
Sector Percent of Cases
between alternatives of investors in Personal Finance N Percent
Management. IT Sector 52 24.1% 52.0%
 To identify factors influencing investment decision of Automobile Sector 33 15.3% 33.0%
investors. Banking Sector 65 30.1% 65.0%
 To find out relationship between different demographic Pharmaceutical Sector 35 16.2% 35.0%
variables and investment pattern and financial decision Petroleum Sector 17 7.9% 17.0%
Other 14 6.5% 14.0%
making in Personal Finance Management.
Total 216 100.0% 216.0%
 To identify the investors risk tolerance using various
dimensions proposed by Grable and Lytton.
Table 1 reveals that majority of respondent select Banking
sector for investment as it is considered that they perceive it
The following hypotheses are developed for the study:
as the safest investment option. IT sector is the next
Hypothesis 1(H0): There is no significant relationship
preferred sector for investment as now a day there is
between age and investment pattern.
revolutionary changes has been done in IT sector.
Hypothesis 2(H0): There is no significant relationship
Respondent choose other option also and they specify some
between gender and investment pattern.
sectors like Building materials, Manufacturing and FMCG.
Hypothesis 3(H0): There is no significant relationship
Least preferred sector for investment is Petroleum sector.
between occupation and investment pattern.
Chi square test is carried out to identify the relationship
Hypothesis 4(H0): There is no significant relationship
between the investment patterns of investors and their
between marital status and investment pattern.
demographic variables like age, gender, occupation and
Hypothesis 5(H0): There is no significant relationship
marital status.
between Gender and risk tolerance.
Hypothesis 6(H0): There is no significant relationship
Hypothesis 1(Ho): There is no significant relationship
between Age and risk tolerance.
between age and investment pattern.
Hypothesis 7(H0): There is no significant relationship
between Occupation and risk tolerance.
Hypothesis 8(H0): There is no significant relationship
between Marital Status and risk tolerance.

Volume 12 Issue 2, February 2023

www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: SR23201115119 DOI: 10.21275/SR23201115119 188
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN: 2319-7064
SJIF (2022): 7.942
Table 2: Chi-Square Test to see relationship between age Hypothesis 4(H0): There is no significant relationship
and investment pattern between marital status and investment pattern.
Asymp. Sig.
Age and Investment pattern Value df
(2-sided) Table 5: Chi square Tests to see relationship between
Pearson Chi-Square 4.381a 3 .223 marital status and investment pattern
Likelihood Ratio 5.251 3 .154 Marital Status and investment Asymp. Sig.
Linear-by-Linear Association .975 1 .323 pattern Value df (2-sided)
N of Valid Cases 100 Pearson Chi-Square 2.584a 1 .108
a. 4 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The Continuity Correctionb 1.886 1 .170
minimum expected count is .99. Likelihood Ratio 2.519 1 .112
Fisher's Exact Test
In Table 2 Chi Square test is performed between age and Linear-by-Linear Association 2.558 1 .110
investment pattern and test the hypothesis. The chi square N of Valid Cases 100
value is 0.223 which is more than 0.05. So we accept the
null hypothesis. Hence we conclude that there is no In Table 5 Chi Square test is performed between Marital
significant relationship between age and investment option. status and investment pattern and test the hypothesis. The
chi square value is 0.108 which is more than 0.05. So it can
Hypothesis 2(Ho): There is no significant relationship be concluded that there is no significant relationship
between gender and investment pattern. between marital status and Investment options. Accept the
Null hypothesis.
Table 3: Chi-Square Test to see relationship between gender
and investment pattern Hypothesis 5(H0): There is no significant relationship
Asymp. Sig. between Gender and risk tolerance.
Gender and Investment pattern Value df
(2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square .065a 1 .798 Table 6: Chi-Square Tests to see relationship between
Continuity Correctionb .001 1 .978 Gender and risk tolerance
Likelihood Ratio .066 1 .798 Asymp. Sig.
Fisher's Exact Test Gender and risk tolerance Value df
(2-sided)
Linear-by-Linear Association .065 1 .799 Pearson Chi-Square 2.866a 3 .413
N of Valid Cases 100 Likelihood Ratio 2.889 3 .409
a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected count less than 5. The Linear-by-Linear Association 1.480 1 .224
minimum expected count is 10.56. N of Valid Cases 100
b. Computed only for a 2x2 table a. 1 cells (12.5%) have expected count less than 5. The
minimum expected count is 3.52.
In Table 3 Chi Square test is performed between Gender and
Investment pattern and test the hypothesis. The chi square In the study, majority of respondents are willing to take risks
value is 0.798 which is more than 0.05. So we accept the after completing adequate research. In the sample, male and
null hypothesis. Hence it can be concluded that there is no female both are willing to take risks after completing
significant relationship between gender and investment adequate research. Now a day, there is so many information
options. available for investors so they have enough platform to
analyze all investment options.
Hypothesis 3(Ho): There is no significant relationship
between occupation and investment pattern. Chi square test is performed between Gender and Risk
tolerance and test the hypothesis. The chi square value is
Table 4: Chi-Square Tests to see relationship between 0.413 which is more than 0.05. so there is no significant
occupation and investment pattern relationship between gender and risk tolerance.
Occupation and investment Asymp. Sig.
Value df
pattern (2-sided) Hypothesis 6(H0): There is no significant relationship
Pearson Chi-Square .939a 2 .625 between Age and risk tolerance.
Likelihood Ratio .904 2 .636
Linear-by-Linear Association .137 1 .711 Table 7: Chi-Square Tests to see relationship between Age
N of Valid Cases 100 and risk tolerance
a. 1 cells (16.7%) have expected count less than 5. The Asymp. Sig.
minimum expected count is 3.63. Age and Risk Tolerance Value df (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 9.225a 9 .417
In Table 4 Chi Square test is performed between Occupation Likelihood Ratio 9.158 9 .423
and Investment pattern and test the hypothesis. The chi Linear-by-Linear Association .829 1 .363
square value is 0.625 which is more than 0.05. So we accept N of Valid Cases 100
the null hypothesis. It can be concluded that there is no a. 11 cells (68.8%) have expected count less than 5. The
significant relationship between occupation and investment minimum expected count is .33.
pattern.
In the study, it is observed that majority of the respondents
are willing to take risk after completing adequate research.
Chi square test is performed between age and risk tolerance
and test the hypothesis. Chi square value is 0.417 which is
Volume 12 Issue 2, February 2023
www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: SR23201115119 DOI: 10.21275/SR23201115119 189
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN: 2319-7064
SJIF (2022): 7.942
more than 0.05. So accept the null hypothesis. It can be that there is significant relationship Age and perception of
conclude that there is no significant relationship between risk.
Age and risk tolerance.
Hypothesis 10(H0): There is no significant relationship
Hypothesis 7(H0): There is no significant relationship between Gender and Perception of risk.
between Occupation and risk tolerance.
Table 11: Chi-Square Tests to see relationship between
Table 8: Chi-Square Tests to see relationship between Gender and Perception of risk
Occupation and risk tolerance Gender and perception of risk Value df
Asymp. Sig.
Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Occupation and Risk Tolerance Value df Pearson Chi-Square 3.912a 3 .271
(2-sided)
a
Pearson Chi-Square 7.969 6 .240 Likelihood Ratio 3.854 3 .278
Likelihood Ratio 8.369 6 .212 Linear-by-Linear Association .025 1 .875
Linear-by-Linear Association .045 1 .832 N of Valid Cases 100
N of Valid Cases 100 a. 3 cells (37.5%) have expected count less than 5. The
a. 4 cells (33.3%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 1.60.
minimum expected count is 1.21.
In table 11, chi square test is performed between Gender and
Chi square test is performed between Occupation and risk perception of risk and test the hypothesis. Chi square value
tolerance and test the hypothesis. Chi square value is 0.240 is 0.271 which is more than 0.05. So it can be concluded that
which is more than 0.05. So it can be concluded that there is there is no significant relationship between gender and
no significant relationship between occupation and risk perception of risk.
tolerance.
Hypothesis 11(H0): There is no significant relationship
Hypothesis 8(H0): There is no significant relationship between Occupation and Perception of risk.
between Marital Status and risk tolerance.
Table 12: Chi-Square Tests to see relationship between
Table 9: Chi-Square Tests to see relationship between Occupation and Perception of risk
Marital status and risk tolerance Occupation and perception of
Value df
Asymp. Sig.
Asymp. Sig. risk (2-sided)
Marital status and risk tolerance Value df Pearson Chi-Square 8.704a 6 .191
(2-sided)
a
Pearson Chi-Square 15.007 3 .002 Likelihood Ratio 9.467 6 .149
Likelihood Ratio 19.667 3 .000 Linear-by-Linear Association 1.553 1 .213
Linear-by-Linear Association 1.500 1 .221 N of Valid Cases 100
N of Valid Cases 100 a. 6 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The
a. 1 cells (12.5%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is .55.
minimum expected count is 3.19.
In table 12, chi square test is performed between occupation
Chi square test is performed between marital status and risk and perception of risk and test the hypothesis. Chi square
tolerance and test the hypothesis. Chi square value is 0.002 value is 0.191 which is more than 0.05. So it can be
which is less than 0.05. Reject the Null hypothesis. So it can concluded that there is no significant relationship between
be concluded that there is significant relationship between occupation and perception of risk.
marital status and risk tolerance.
Purpose of Investment:
Hypothesis 9(H0): There is no significant relationship In the study, respondents had been asked to choose any of
between Age and Perception of risk. purpose for investment. Purpose of investments like For
retirement, For Tax saving, For Assets purchase, To meet
Table 10: Chi-Square Tests to see relationship between Age contingencies, For children education, Growth & Income
and perception of risk and other. Majority of the respondents are invest because of
Asymp. Sig. their Growth and Income. Second most preferred purpose
Age and perception of risk Value df (2-sided) for investment is for retirement.
Pearson Chi-Square 24.307a 9 .004 Table 13: Purpose of investment
Likelihood Ratio 17.434 9 .042 Responses
Linear-by-Linear Association 7.271 1 .007 Percent of Cases
N Percent
N of Valid Cases 100 For Retirement 60 20.80% 60.00%
a. 11 cells (68.8%) have expected count less than 5. The For Tax Saving 38 13.20% 38.00%
minimum expected count is .15. For Assets purchase 45 15.60% 45.00%
To meet contingencies 26 9.00% 26.00%
In the study, majority of respondents take a risk as an For Children education 42 14.60% 42.00%
opportunity. They are ready to take risk and get more return Growth & Income 76 26.40% 76.00%
after adequate research of particular investment. Chi square Other 1 0.30% 1.00%
test is performed between Age and Perception of risk and Total 288 100.00% 288.00%
test the hypothesis. Chi square value is 0.004 which is less
than 0.05. Reject the Null hypothesis. So it can be concluded

Volume 12 Issue 2, February 2023

www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: SR23201115119 DOI: 10.21275/SR23201115119 190
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN: 2319-7064
SJIF (2022): 7.942
Experience, knowledge and perception of investment risk
as a dimension of risk: As study already revealed that respondents are willing to
take risk after adequate research, In Table 13, 52%
Table 14: Dimension of Risk respondents want to invest in stocks or in stock mutual fund
If you unexpectedly received Rs.20,000 to invest, what would if they unexpectedly received Rs. 20,000. Respondents are
you do? risk tolerance investors. Respondents are not risk averse,
Valid Cumulative they want to take risk after complete research about
Options Frequency Percent
Percent Percent particular investment.
Deposit it in a bank
18 18 18 18
account
Dimension of financial risk tolerance: Prospect Theory
Invest it in safe high
quality bonds or bond 30 30 30 48
Prospect theory is a behavioural finance theory propounded
mutual funds by Kahneman and Tversky (1979). It is also called as “loss
Invest it in stocks or aversion theory”. It is the way people make decisions that
52 52 52 100 involves risk. This theory explains how people perceive
stock mutual funds
Total 100 100 100 gains and losses differently. Prospect theory states that
investors evaluate their choice in terms of potential gains
Table 14 measures dimensions of risk tolerance – risk as and losses relative to some reference point Shefrin and
experience, knowledge and investment risk. These identify Statman (1993).
the attributes of knowledge of investors and its assessment
of risk tolerance and dealing with risk. Investment risk can In the study first explain Prospect theory in terms of gain
be defined as the probability or likelihood of occurrence of and then Prospect theory in terms of loss. How investors
losses relative to the expected return on any particular perceive gain and loss differently with some reference point
investment. is explain in this part.

Table 15: Prospect Theory – in terms of gain

In addition to whatever you own, you have been given Rs.1,000. You are now asked to choose between:
Options Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
A sure gain of Rs.500 44 44.0 44.0 44.0
A 50% chance to gain Rs.1,000 and a 50% chance to gain nothing 56 56.0 56.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0

In table 15 examine about Prospect theory in terms of gain. 44% of respondents prefer sure gain but 56% of respondents are
ready to take some risk if Rs1,000 is given to them.

Table 16: Prospect Theory – in terms of Loss

In addition to whatever you own, you have been given Rs.2,000. You are now asked to choose between:
Options Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cumulative Percent
A sure loss of Rs.500 19 19.0 19.0 19.0
A 50% chance to lose Rs.1,000 and a 50% chance to lose nothing 81 81.0 81.0 100.0
Total 100 100.0 100.0

In table 16 examine about Prospect theory in terms of loss. risk after adequate research. Only marital status has
19% of respondents prefer sure loss of Rs. 500 if additional significant relationship with risk tolerance. Majority of
Rs 2,000 is given to them. But 81% of respondents want to respondents perceive risk as an opportunity, they want to
take risk in going for 50 % chance to lose Rs. 1,000 and take risk and get more return after adequate research. It is
50% chance to lose nothing. observed from the study that only age has significant
relationship with perception of risk. In terms of gain which
According to prospect theory, people prefer larger losses is identified by Prospect theory 56% of respondents have
which are uncertain rather than smaller losses which are been take risk in going for 50% chance to gain Rs.1,000 and
certain. In the study investors are risk tolerant that’s why a 50% chance to gain nothing. In terms of loss which is
81% of the respondents have taken risk. identified by Prospect theory 81% of respondents want to
take risk in going for 50 % chance to lose Rs. 1,000 and
4. Findings 50% chance to lose nothing. According to prospect theory,
people prefer larger losses which are uncertain rather than
The significant findings of the study is Banking sector and smaller losses which are certain. In the study investors are
IT sector are most preferred sector by investors. Study risk tolerant that’s why 81% of the respondents have taken
observed that main objective and purpose of investment is risk.
for growth and income and for retirement. It is revealed
from the study that demographic variables like age, gender, 5. Conclusions
occupation and marital status do not have significant
relationship with investment pattern. Investment pattern is Evaluating the investment pattern and decision making
independent from demographic variables. From the study it behavior of investors is always have been great opportunity
is identified that majority of respondents are willing to take for any researchers. Identify the attitude of investors with the

Volume 12 Issue 2, February 2023

www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: SR23201115119 DOI: 10.21275/SR23201115119 191
 International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR)
ISSN: 2319-7064
SJIF (2022): 7.942
help of Investment pattern, preferred sector for investment, Issues ISSN: 2146-4138 available at http:
risk tolerance, perception of risk have been studied in this www.econjournals.com
paper. Attitude of investors are always affected by [14] M. Maschendargoud, (2021), a study on the saving and
demographic variables and risk tolerance. The study is investment Behaviour of individual investors, journal
analyzed in this context and measure risk tolerance by using of commerce & accounting research, volume 11 issue
Grable and Lytton scale. Study concludes that demographic 1 january 2022
variables do not have significant relationship with [15] Michael, J.R., Glenn, E.S. (1990), Effects of framing
investment pattern. on measures of risk tolerance: Financial planners are
immune. Journal of Behavioural Economics, 19, 3237-
On the basis of study, it can be conclude that investors are 3246.
not risk averse but investors are risk tolerant. Now a day, [16] Rana, Murtaza, Noor (2011), Effects of Demographic
there are so many information available for investors so Factors on Risky Decision-Making Behavior,
investors can compare with different alternatives and take a European Journal of Social Sciences
risk. That’s why majority of respondents perceive risk as an [17] SIREESHA, SREE LAXMI, (2013), Impact Of
opportunity. Demographics On Select Investment Avenues: A Case
Study Of Twin Cities Of Hyderabad And
References Secunderabad, India, International Journal of
Marketing, Financial Services & Management
[1] Abhijeet, C., Dinesh, S. (2010), Investment Research, Vol.2, No. 6, June (2013).
management by individual investors: A behavioural [18] Subramaniam VA, Athiyaman T, (2016), The effect of
approach. IUP Journal of Behavioural Finance, 7 demographic factors on investor's risk tolerance
(1&2), 7-18 International Journal of Commerce and Management
[2] Ajzen, I. (1991), “The theory of planned behavior”, Research
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision [19] Thanki, H., & Baser, N. (2019). Interactive impact of
Processes, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 179-211. demographic variables and personality type on risk
[3] Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1980), Understanding tolerance. Emerging Economy Studies, 5(1), 42–54.
Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior, Prentice- doi:10.1177/2394901519825924
Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. [20] Wilbur G Lewellen, Ronald C Lease and Gary G
[4] Bajtelsmit, V.L., Bernasek, A. (1996), Why do women Schlarbaum (1997), Patterns of Investment Strategy
invest differently than men? Financial Counselling and and Behaviour Among Individual Investors, The
Planning, 7, 1-10. Journal of Business ,50(3),59-67.
[5] Brigitte Fu¨nfgeld, Mei Wang, (2008), Attitudes and [21] SelimAren, Sibel Din, Aydemir (2015), Factors
behaviour in everyday finance: evidence from influencing given investment choice of individuals in
Switzerland, International Journal of Bank Marketing Turkey, Procedia Social and Behavioral Science,
[6] Deavicris Ari Senda,CaeciliaWahyuEstiningRahayu, Elsevier.
Christina Heti Tri Rahmawati, (2020), The Effect Of
Financial Literacy Level And Demographic Factors On
Investment Decision
[7] Duda, H.F., Bruhin, A., Epper, T., Sehubert, R. (2010),
Rationality on the rise: Why relative risk aversion
increases with stake size. Journal of Risk and
Uncertainty, 40(2), 147-180.
[8] Gilliam, J., Grable, J.E. (2010), Risk-tolerance
estimation bias: Do married women and men differ?
Journal of Consumer Education, 27,45-58
[9] Grable, J.E., Joo, S.H. (2000), A cross-disciplinary
examination of financial risk tolerance. Consumer
Interests Annual, 46, 1-7.
[10] Grable, Lytton (1999), Financial risk tolerance
revisited: the development of a risk assessment
instrument, Financial Service Review
[11] Heena, T. (2015), Risk tolerance dependent on what?
Demographics or personality type: Findings from an
empirical research. Journal of Marketing and
Consumer Research, 6, 48-56.
[12] Kabra, G., Mishra, P.K., Dash, M.K. (2010), Factors
influencing investment decision of generations in
India: An econometric study. Asian Journal of
Management Research, 1(1), 308-326.
[13] KavitaChavali, M. PrasannaMohanraj, (2016),Impact
of Demographic Variables and Risk Tolerance on
Investment Decisions: An Empirical Analysis,
International Journal of Economics and Financial
Volume 12 Issue 2, February 2023
www.ijsr.net
Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY
Paper ID: SR23201115119 DOI: 10.21275/SR23201115119 192