Monetary Intelligence and Behavioral Economics Across 32 Cultures: Good Apples Enjoy Good Quality of Life in Good Barrels

Abstract

Monetary Intelligence theory asserts that individuals apply their money attitude to frame critical concerns in the context and strategically select certain options to achieve financial goals and ultimate happiness. This study explores the bright side of Monetary Intelligence and behavioral economics, frames money attitude in the context of pay and life satisfaction, and controls money at the macro-level (GDP per capita) and micro-level (Z income). We theorize:Managers with low love of money motive but high stewardship behavior will have high subjective well-being: pay satisfaction and quality of life. Data collected from 6586 managers in 32 cultures across six continents support our

Does Adolescent Popularity Mediate Relationships between Both Theory of Mind and Love of Money and Consumer Ethics?

“…We selected Factors Rich and Success of Love of Money (LoM) (Rose & Orr, ; Tang & Chiu, ; Tang et al, ). Since money is power in the context of materialism, we frame the latent LoM construct (Rich and Success) in the context of youth materialism (Goldberg et al, ).…”

“…In summary, high love‐of‐money individuals are acutely aware of the context and act proactively. Recent studies support the notion of Monetary Intelligence (MI): Individuals use their deeply rooted personal monetary values (love of money) to frame critical concerns in the proximal and distal contexts and strategically select options to maximise expected utility and ultimate happiness (Gentina, Tang, & Gu, ; Sardžoska & Tang, ; Tang, Chen, Zhang, & Tang, ; Tang, ; Tang et al, ).…”

“…To gain additional insights, we must explore both personal values (love of money) and cognitive skills (theory of mind), two highly related constructs on the dark sides, among young adolescents in junior and senior high schools. The key reason to investigate adolescents is that they will become future college students (Tang & Chen, ), managers, and CEOs (Tang et al, ). We ask one theoretical question: Do people in general, or adolescents in particular, become highly corrupt and dishonest when they gain work experience and grow older?…”

“…Researchers developed love of money (LoM) and monetary intelligence construct with affective, behavioural, and cognitive sub‐constructs (Tang, ; Tang et al, ). Attitudes predict behaviour effectively only when there is a high correspondence between the attitude object and the behavioural option (Grant, ; Tang & Baumeister, ).…”

“…Second, in a formative model, indicators are non‐interchangeable defining characteristics of the latent construct and the relationship flows from indicators to latent constructs and outcome variables. To achieve model identification, a formative construct must emit paths to at least two unrelated latent constructs with reflective indicators, theoretically appropriate reflective indicators, or one reflective indicator and one latent construct with reflective indicators (Jarvis, MacKenzie, & Podsakoff, ; Tang et al, ).…”