Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Changes in the inflation expectations of consumers and professionals during the Russian invasion of Ukraine: The case of Ukraine and Poland Cover

Changes in the inflation expectations of consumers and professionals during the Russian invasion of Ukraine: The case of Ukraine and Poland

International Journal of Management and Economics
Volume 61 (2025): Issue 4 (December 2025)
By: Magdalena Szyszko,  Agata Kliber and  Olena Motuzka  
Open Access
|Dec 2025

Figures & Tables

Figure 1

Inflation and expectations in Ukraine.
Inflation and expectations in Ukraine.

Figure 2

Inflation and expectations in Poland.
Inflation and expectations in Poland.

Figure 3

Consumer inflation expectations in Ukraine. Note: During the post-war-outbreak period, the response variable had an average value of approx. 11.79. In the absence of the war, we would have expected an average response of 12.95. The 95% interval of this counterfactual prediction is [6.98, 19.36]. The causal effect (obtained by subtracting the prediction from the response) is −1.16, with a 95% interval of [−7.57, 4.81]. In relative terms, the response variable decreased by −3%. The 95% interval of this percentage is [−39%, +69%]. The probability of obtaining this effect by chance is p = 0.367. This means that the effect may be spurious.
Consumer inflation expectations in Ukraine. Note: During the post-war-outbreak period, the response variable had an average value of approx. 11.79. In the absence of the war, we would have expected an average response of 12.95. The 95% interval of this counterfactual prediction is [6.98, 19.36]. The causal effect (obtained by subtracting the prediction from the response) is −1.16, with a 95% interval of [−7.57, 4.81]. In relative terms, the response variable decreased by −3%. The 95% interval of this percentage is [−39%, +69%]. The probability of obtaining this effect by chance is p = 0.367. This means that the effect may be spurious.

Figure 4

Consumer inflation expectations in Poland. Note: During the post-intervention period, the response variable had an average value of approx. 10.49. In the absence of an intervention, we would have expected an average response of 8.27. The 95% interval of this counterfactual prediction is [4.75, 11.66]. The causal effect (obtained by subtracting the prediction from the response) is 2.22, with a 95% interval of [−1.17, 5.75]. In relative terms, the response variable showed an increase of +33%. The 95% interval of this percentage is [−10%, +121%]. The probability of obtaining this effect by chance is p = 0.091.
Consumer inflation expectations in Poland. Note: During the post-intervention period, the response variable had an average value of approx. 10.49. In the absence of an intervention, we would have expected an average response of 8.27. The 95% interval of this counterfactual prediction is [4.75, 11.66]. The causal effect (obtained by subtracting the prediction from the response) is 2.22, with a 95% interval of [−1.17, 5.75]. In relative terms, the response variable showed an increase of +33%. The 95% interval of this percentage is [−10%, +121%]. The probability of obtaining this effect by chance is p = 0.091.

Figure 5

Professional inflation expectations in Ukraine. Note: During the post-war outbreak period, the response variable had an average value of approx. 15.11. In contrast, we would have expected an average response of 7.69 without an intervention. The 95% interval of this counterfactual prediction is [5.66, 9.65]. The causal effect (obtained by subtracting the prediction from the response) is 7.42, with a 95% interval of [5.45, 9.45]. The above results are given in terms of absolute numbers. In relative terms, the response variable showed an increase of +100%. The 95% interval of this percentage is [+56%, +167%]. The probability of obtaining this effect by chance is very small (Bayesian one-sided tail-area probability p = 0.001).
Professional inflation expectations in Ukraine. Note: During the post-war outbreak period, the response variable had an average value of approx. 15.11. In contrast, we would have expected an average response of 7.69 without an intervention. The 95% interval of this counterfactual prediction is [5.66, 9.65]. The causal effect (obtained by subtracting the prediction from the response) is 7.42, with a 95% interval of [5.45, 9.45]. The above results are given in terms of absolute numbers. In relative terms, the response variable showed an increase of +100%. The 95% interval of this percentage is [+56%, +167%]. The probability of obtaining this effect by chance is very small (Bayesian one-sided tail-area probability p = 0.001).

Figure 6

Professional inflation expectations in Poland. Note: During the post-intervention period, the response variable had an average value of approximately 8.98. In contrast, we would have expected an average response of 6.65 in the absence of war. The 95% interval of this counterfactual prediction is [5.35, 7.96]. The causal effect (obtained by subtracting the prediction from the response) is 2.33, with a 95% interval of [1.02, 3.63]. In relative terms, the response variable showed an increase of +36%. The 95% interval of this percentage is [+13%, +68%]. This means that the positive effect observed during the intervention period is unlikely to be due to random fluctuations.
Professional inflation expectations in Poland. Note: During the post-intervention period, the response variable had an average value of approximately 8.98. In contrast, we would have expected an average response of 6.65 in the absence of war. The 95% interval of this counterfactual prediction is [5.35, 7.96]. The causal effect (obtained by subtracting the prediction from the response) is 2.33, with a 95% interval of [1.02, 3.63]. In relative terms, the response variable showed an increase of +36%. The 95% interval of this percentage is [+13%, +68%]. This means that the positive effect observed during the intervention period is unlikely to be due to random fluctuations.

Descriptive statistics of stationary differences in inflation and expectations and p-values of the Wilcoxon test and Snedecor–Cochrane F-test for equality of variances before and during the war outbreak_

Variable UkrainePoland
BeforeDuring p-ValueBeforeDuring p-Value
InflationMean−0.0311−0.03000.00730.1115−0.26000.0850
SD0.91251.9607<0.0010.46730.2600<0.001
Consumer expectationsMan−0.0672−0.17200.01570.1291−0.22410.0196
SD1.17631.82790.00600.57621.2493<0.001
Professional expectationsMean−0.0322−0.03690.00010.0765−0.09720.0247
SD0.33293.1434<0.0010.19810.75120.0030

Results of the Chow test for a structural break at the outbreak of the war_

CountryExpectationsTest statistic p-Value
UkraineConsumers0.2480.620
Professionals3.0390.085
PolandConsumers5.2720.024
Professionals13.0640.001
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/ijme-2025-0012 | Journal eISSN: 2543-5361 | Journal ISSN: 2299-9701
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 14 - 24
Submitted on: Oct 7, 2024
|
Accepted on: Jun 8, 2025
|
Published on: Dec 30, 2025
Published by: Warsaw School of Economics
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year
Keywords:
Inflation expectations,
Structural breaks,
Causal interference analysis,
War
Related subjects:
Business and economics,
Political economics,
Economic theory, systems and structures,
Business management,
Management accounting, financial controlling, cost calculation, investment

© 2025 Magdalena Szyszko, Agata Kliber, Olena Motuzka, published by Warsaw School of Economics
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 61 (2025): Issue 4 (December 2025)Next article