TABLE 3A.
Financial Literacy Regressions, Overall and by Gender
| (1) Level
|
(2) Interactions with Years in Relationship
|
(3) Interactions with Years Since Relationship
|
|||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All | Female | Male | All | Female | Male | All | Female | Male | |
| Female | −0.538*** (0.043) | ||||||||
| Age | |||||||||
| 36–50 | 0.324*** (0.065) | 0.380*** (0.086) | 0.312*** (0.100) | ||||||
| 51–65 | 0.563*** (0.075) | 0.674*** (0.100) | 0.463*** (0.100) | ||||||
| 66+ | 0.790*** (0.099) | 0.946*** (0.140) | 0.645*** (0.140) | ||||||
| White | 0.303*** (0.074) | 0.271*** (0.095) | 0.246** (0.120) | ||||||
| Black | −0.0113 (0.094) | 0.0486 (0.120) | −0.0845 (0.160) | ||||||
| High school graduate | 0.213 (0.110) | −0.0644 (0.140) | 0.550*** (0.180) | ||||||
| Some college | 0.399*** (0.110) | 0.158 (0.150) | 0.710*** (0.180) | ||||||
| College graduate | 0.807*** (0.120) | 0.589*** (0.150) | 1.108*** (0.180) | ||||||
| Income | |||||||||
| $35–60K | 0.287*** (0.063) | 0.226*** (0.082) | 0.315*** (0.099) | ||||||
| $60–90K | 0.417*** (0.065) | 0.363*** (0.086) | 0.475*** (0.099) | ||||||
| >$60K | 0.635*** (0.076) | 0.521*** (0.100) | 0.748*** (0.110) | ||||||
| Married | 0.119 (0.077) | 0.237** (0.100) | −0.0832 (0.120) | −0.002 (0.003) | −0.000 (0.004) | −0.002 (0.003) | |||
| Cohabiting | −0.135 (0.150) | −0.0467 (0.170) | −0.411 (0.290) | −0.008 (0.013) | −0.015 (0.016) | 0.007 (0.026) | |||
| Divorced | −0.302** (0.140) | −0.162 (0.180) | −0.467 (0.240) | 0.001 (0.007) | 0.005 (0.008) | −0.005 (0.011) | 0.022*** (0.006) | 0.019*** (0.007) | 0.025*** (0.010) |
| Widowed | 0.213 (0.310) | −0.129 (0.330) | 2.638*** (0.980) | −0.003 (0.007) | −0.004 (0.007) | −0.043** (0.019) | −0.021 (0.012) | −0.000 (0.015) | −0.079*** (0.028) |
| Constant | −1.412*** (0.130) | −1.817*** (0.160) | −1.506*** (0.210) | ||||||
| Observations | 1,504 | 830 | 674 | ||||||
| R2 | 0.40 | 0.34 | 0.36 | ||||||
Notes: Standard errors in parentheses. Data are weighted. Dependent variable is standardized financial literacy index. We also control for being separated but do not report due to very small sample size. p-values for joint tests of significance for age, race, education and income groups were all less than 0.01 in all specifications. Marital status was jointly significant overall and for men only (p < .01), but not for women (p = .13). Interactions in (2) were jointly significant (p = .091) for men only and insignificant overall (p = .92) and for women only (p = .50). Interactions in (3) were jointly significant for all groups: p < .01 overall and for men only, and p = .05 for women only.
p < .01,
p < .05.