Table 1.
Investment options
| Description | Fund A | Fund B | Fund C | Fund D |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Average annual return for the last 1 year | 5,8% | 5,6% | 7,6% | 7,3% |
| Average annual return for the last 5 years | 5,7% | 5,5% | 7,5% | 7,1% |
| Risk Profile (1=low; 6= very high) | 4 (moderate) | 4 (moderate) | 5 (high) | 5 (high) |
| Integrating sustainability (ESG) risk into their investment strategy | No | Yes | No | Yes |
| How much will you allocate your money to: | ||||
| Fund A: ……………….% | ||||
| Fund B: ……………….% | ||||
| Fund C: ……………….% | ||||
| Fund D: ……………….% | ||||
Figure 1.
Experiment Timeline.
Table 2.
Means for literacy
| Index | Mean score (0 to 1) |
|---|---|
| Financial literacy | 0.95 |
| Sustainability literacy | 0.36 |
| Sustainable finance literacy | 0.38 |
Table 3.
Perceived risk and willingness to invest
| Fund A | Fund B | Fund C | Fund D | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Risk (1 - low, 7 - high) | 4,1 | 3,2 | 4,4 | 3,8 |
| Likelihood of investment (1 - low, 7 - high) | 3,8 | 4,1 | 4,2 | 4,6 |
Table 4.
Friedman test results
| Description | Mean Rank | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fund A | Fund B | Fund C | Fund D | |
| Baseline - mean rank | 2.964 | 2.866 | 3.119 | 3.305 |
| Treatment 1 - mean rank | 3.274 | 2.841 | 2.988 | 2.756 |
| Treatment 2 - mean rank | 3.179 | 3.280 | 2.738 | 2.549 |
| Treatment 3 - mean rank | 2.821 | 3.037 | 3.000 | 3.171 |
| Treatment 4 - mean rank | 2.762 | 2.976 | 3.155 | 3.220 |
| Chi-Square (4, N=42) | 6.471 | 3.431 | 2.911 | 10.893 |
| Asymp. Sig. | 0.167 | 0.488 | 0.573 | 0.043** |
Table 5.
Post hoc Wilcoxon signed-rank test results
| Comparisons with the Baseline Condition | Description | N | Mean Rank | Sum of Ranks |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment 1 | Negative Ranks | 19 | 16.16 | 307.00 |
| Positive Ranks | 12 | 15.75 | 189.00 | |
| Ties | 11 | |||
| Total | 42 | |||
| Z | −1.160 | |||
| Asymp. Sig. | 0.246 | |||
| Treatment 2 | Negative Ranks | 22 | 16.30 | 358.50 |
| Positive Ranks | 10 | 16.95 | 169.50 | |
| Ties | 10 | |||
| Total | 42 | |||
| Z | −1.773 | |||
| Asymp. Sig. | 0.076* | |||
| Treatment 3 | Negative Ranks | 16 | 14.91 | 238.50 |
| Positive Ranks | 13 | 15.12 | 196.50 | |
| Ties | 13 | |||
| Total | 42 | |||
| Z | −0.456 | |||
| Asymp. Sig. | 0.648 | |||
| Treatment 4 | Negative Ranks | 13 | 12.12 | 157.50 |
| Positive Ranks | 12 | 13.96 | 167.50 | |
| Ties | 17 | |||
| Total | 42 | |||
| Z | −0.135 | |||
| Asymp. Sig. | .0893 |
Table 6.
Spearman’s correlation test results
| Relationship | Correlation Coefficient | P-value |
|---|---|---|
| ∆T2-T0 and financial literacy | 0.014 | 0.932 |
| ∆T2-T0 and sustainability literacy | 0.084 | 0.597 |
| ∆T2-T0 and sustainable finance literacy | −0.076 | 0.633 |
Appendix A.
Screenshot of video: Negative financial news.
Appendix B.
Screenshot of video: Negative environmental news.
Appendix C.
Screenshot of video: Positive financial news.
Appendix D.
Screenshot of video: Positive environmental news.