The frailty of models, the new era, or a rotten world of consumers' financial behaviour?

Warchlewska, Anna Article The frailty of models, the new era, or a rotten world of consumers' financial behaviour? Central European Economic Journal (CEEJ) Provided in Cooperation with: Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw Suggested Citation: Warchlewska, Anna (2024) : The frailty of models, the new era, or a rotten world of consumers' financial behaviour?, Central European Economic Journal (CEEJ), ISSN 2543-6821, Sciendo, Warsaw, Vol. 11, Iss. 58, pp. 159-177, https://doi.org/10.2478/ceej-2024-0012 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/324610 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ISSN: 2543-6821 (online) Journal homepage: http://ceej.wne.uw.edu.pl To cite this article Warchlewska, A. (2024). The Frailty of Models, the New Era, or a Rotten World of Consumers‘ Financial Behaviour? Central European Economic Journal, 11(58), 159-177. DOI: 10.2478/ceej-2024-0012 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.2478/ceej-2024-0012 The Frailty of Models, the New Era, or a Rotten World of Consumers‘ Financial Behaviour? Anna Warchlewska Open Access. © 2024 A. Warchlewska, published by Sciendo. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Anna Warchlewska Poznań University of Economics and Business, Institute of Finance, Al. Niepodległości 10, 61-875 Poznań, Poland corresponding author: [email protected] The Frailty of Models, the New Era, or a Rotten World of Consumers‘ Financial Behaviour? Abstract The aim of the article is to analyse the structure of consumer behaviour models and their applications to financial behaviour. The paper is theoretical in nature, examining generational breakdowns and selected trends in consumer behaviour. An analysis of the ‚rules‘ significant for types of consumer behaviour is conducted. Despite recently intensified theoretical and empirical analysis of consumer behaviour, a coherent research approach that integrates the issue of consumer behaviour with the specificities of the financial-services market has not yet been developed. Models remain frail, their functionality is still insufficient, and their applicability is constantly being altered by influences on consumer behaviour, including macro and microeconomic factors and the influence of scientific fields such as economics, sociology, psychology, management and anthropology. This article attempts to create a model that takes into account the general factors adopted in models constructed so far, along with the assumption that economic, cultural, social, personal, experiences, and other factors play a role in shaping and stimulating at least five variables: type of consumer from a particular generation (Cy); type of financial products and services (Xy); motivation (My); capacity (Capy); and opportunities (Oy). Keywords consumer behaviour models | generations | personal finance | behavioural trends JEL Codes A14, D10, G4 Introduction The ongoing systemic changes in the financialservices market have not only led to infrastructural transformations, but have also triggered shifts in consumer behaviour. Consumers have evolved into independent participants in the market game, with choices constrained by resources, knowledge, and skills (Gorynia, 2019). Consumer behaviour (in general) is the combination of actions and perceptions constituting the process of preparing for decisions about goods or services; making said decisions; and subsequent consumption. The subjectivity and primacy of consumers in relation to other market participants is crucial in the presented models. The complexity of these models and their apparent lack of exemplification may result from the widely varying types of consumer behaviour. Consumer behaviour models primarily aim to formalize economic, sociocultural, and psychological factors that influence purchasing decisions. Financial behaviours (as a subgroup of consumer behaviours) should be determined by the same factors as general behaviours, plus some factors specific to the discipline. However, the models for financial behaviours can be difficult to apply due to constantly changing conditions in this field. Doubts have therefore arisen about how justified it is to assign patterns and models to market realities, and how universal they can be in the presence of multiple variables in the environment. The theoretical considerations presented in this study serve as the foundation for understanding why, despite the intensification of theoretical and empirical analysis of consumer behaviour, a cohesive research approach, connecting consumer behaviour issues with the specificity of the financial services market, has yet to be developed. It is challenging to find a one-to-one match between model and financial behaviours (Korneta and Lotko, 2021), with only one of them (Guirdham’s model) taking into account factors specific to the financial-services market (after CEEJ • 11(58) • 2024 • pp. 159-177 • ISSN 2543-6821 • DOI: 10.2478/ceej-2024-0012 161 Smyczek, 2014). This model, however, is subject to several limitations and generalisations stemming from the principles adopted during its construction. The models’ functionality of the models is also negatively influenced by the wide spectrum of determinants of consumer behaviour that have been established. This makes the analysis of consumer behaviour much more difficult and the explanation of its specificities more complicated. The primary influencer of factors related to consumer behaviour patterns (e.g., environment, values, needs) is viewed in the literature to be societal and cultural changes (Dolan et al., 2012). All of these factors contribute to the broad range of different consumer behaviours, particularly across different life stages. Despite many developments in the field of consumer behaviour studies, a consistent research approach, combining the issues of consumer behaviour with the specificity of financial service markets, has not been established to date. Theoretical models should, by definition, explain, or at least attempt to explain, consumer behaviour in the market, taking into account conditioning factors. From a theoretical perspective, placing the consumer on a timeline (cohort effect or time effect) should provide a better understanding of their approach to financial decisions, although this is not always the case. The paper delves into the generational divide’s effects on selected trends in consumer financial behaviour, as these areas often reveal shifts in consumer behaviour across different markets (Potocki & Białowąs, 2022). The nature of a particular generation is determined, among other things, by the passage of time, economic, social, and psychological factors, technological progress, and new trends – but also fashion. In the present work, analysis of the significant ‘rules’ for different types of consumer behaviour has been conducted. Increasingly, two contemporary intertwined consumption trends of excessive and conscious consumption can be observed, where financial behaviours are dependent on how leisure time is spent, evolving needs, and often, visions of unlimited consumption possibilities. Given the interdisciplinary nature of this subject, and the fact that behavioural economics and financial theories were initially developed primarily through experimental observations and survey results, there are theoretical doubts about which theoretical models best fit financial markets and whether they can attempt to explain consumer financial behaviour. The social and material determinants of the formation of cognitive and behavioural patterns are both variable and are therefore subject to the dimension of time. This means that consumption patterns remain characteristic of specific social systems and the corresponding stages of development for societies and civilizations (Senda, 1998). The aim of the article is to analyse the structure of consumer behaviour models and their applications in the area of financial behaviour. The structure of the paper was organized with the research objective in mind and starts with a brief conceptual framework of consumer behaviour. Considerations about models for consumer behaviour provide a basis for conceptualizing a functional model in section 2. Section 3 is a further attempt to answer the question of whether cycles, changes and trends among age cohorts and generational groups affect consumer financial behaviour. Section 4 presents possible rules of consumer behaviour by grouping factors that may influence market behaviours and characterizing models in an attempt to explain consumer financial behaviours and diagnose the components of a functional model for them. This article’s contribution to the literature is an attempt to conceptualize a Consumer Financial Behaviour (CFB) Model, assuming that economic (y1) cultural (y2); social (y3); personal (y4); psychological (y5); and others (y η) factors play a role in shaping and stimulating at least five variables. These are conceptualized as type of consumer (Cy); type of financial product or service (Xy); motivation (My); capacity (Capy); and opportunities (Oy). This CFB model incorporates elements of Roszkowska (2001)’s rule proposal, Smyczek (2007)’s model and Xiao & Kumar (2023)’s model. The final two sections discuss the findings and conclude the article. 1. Theoretical frameworks of consumer behaviour Various approaches to consumer behaviour have emerged over the years. In this study, it has been chosen to present only selected models and theories of consumption and market consumer behaviour, with a focus on those that can explain consumer financial behaviours. Hansen (1972) defines consumer behaviour as a combination of actions and perceptions that constitute the process of preparing for the decision to choose a good, making the choice, and CEEJ • 11(58) • 2024 • pp. 159-177 • ISSN 2543-6821 • DOI: 10.2478/ceej-2024-0012 162 consumption. Fabiunke et al. (1976) indicated a broader perspective on consumer behaviour, believing that it arises from an individual’s perception of their needs; it encompasses the entirety of objectively and subjectively defined, rational and emotional, conscious and unconscious actions during preparations for decision-making in the consumer-goods market, as well as during consumption. The discussion on needs and their hierarchy in consumer behaviour continues with Szczepański (1976) and Pohorille (1980)’s contributions around this topic. Conversely, a more schematic approach was presented by Runyon and Stewart (1987), who defined consumer behaviour as actions related to planning, acquiring, and using market goods and services. A continuation of this type of consideration can be seen in Engel et al. (1993), where the authors characterized behaviour as a set of actions related to obtaining and using products and services, as well as all activities preceding their disposal. The most comprehensive definition is presented by Antonides (2003; Tarde [1903]: 2015), who defines consumer behaviour as both psychological and physical actions encompassing a wide range of elements such as motives, reasons, purchase and usage, and feelings of satisfaction and well-being. Without delving into the specifics of all these particular definitions, three general stages or phases can be distinguished in all of them: the emergence of a need, an acquisition strategy, and post-purchase behaviours (Oszust & Stecko, 2020). Consumer behaviours encompass the habits, actions, and decisions of customers during the search for, ordering, and purchase of products and services (Walters, 1974; Schiffman & Kanuk, 1997), and are often associated with an abstract and challenging-to-identify category. Assuming that “behaviours” consist of reactions to external and/or internal stimuli, they could then be defined as: (a) conscious reactions to stimuli; (b) simple acts, e.g., impulsive actions; and (c) complex acts. Many attempts have been made to explain consumer behaviours using classical economic concepts (Brown, 1972; Williams, 1985; Akerlof & Kranton, 2010a, 2010b). It was assumed that people make rational decisions (the notion of “homo oeconomicus”) and carefully calculate the profits they could achieve and the losses they could incur. From this perspective, consumer choice can primarily be explained by economic and marketing factors, such as price, product specifics, and distribution (Kotler & Armstrong, 2008; Bristow et al., 2002; Clemons, 2008). Factors shaping consumer behaviour can broadly be categorized as dependent on the consumer; influenced by genetics; or independent of the consumer and stemming from the environment. To summarize the classification of the factors in the literature, three major groupings can be distinguished for them: (a) internal/external; (b) endogenous/exogenous; (c) some combination of economic, socio-cultural, marketing, biological, demographic, psychosocial and other types. It is worth noting that in Kieżel’s (2010) studies, the basis for classifying factors is objectivity (economic/ non-economic) and subjectivity. Financial behaviours depend not only on level of financial resources but also on many social and psychological factors, such as their general approach to life; level of optimism; sense of control over their destiny; attitude toward money; money management style; and their attitude toward financial institutions. Relating the justification of consumer choices in the literature is related to (ir)rationality (Markin, 1979) is just one way in which the concept of homo oeconomicus has been criticized, especially from a sociological perspective. The relationship between spontaneous social interactions and social structure was conceptualized by Polanyi (1941) as the “dynamic order,” or in his later works, “spontaneous order,” as popularized in the 1960s and 1970s by Hayek. The belief that sociology possesses better tools for explaining economic phenomena was espoused by Granovetter (1985); economic behaviours cannot be explained without considering the components of the social structure, embeddedness in social relationships, and their environment (Czernek, Marszałek, 2015). The classical and neoclassical concept of homo oeconomicus, often criticized in institutional, behavioural, and social economics, seems outdated and insufficient in explaining phenomena related to real market choices made by individual decision-makers in contemporary economies (Galbács, 2017; Szarzec, 2014). Sentimentality, the emotional aspect of human behaviour, is contrasted with rational, cool choices. The nature and specificity of consumer behaviour issues indicate their interdisciplinary character (Butler, 2011). Considerations regarding consumer behaviour can also be rooted in disciplines such as psychology, sociology, philosophy, or cultural anthropology. It is worth remembering that early works of classical economics include numerous references to psychology, ethics, and morality, including Smith’s reflections on the principles of individual behaviour ([1759] cite as CEEJ • 11(58) • 2024 • pp. 159-177 • ISSN 2543-6821 • DOI: 10.2478/ceej-2024-0012 163 2010). Bentham (1781/2000)’s ideology advocated for the measurement of happiness and utility that resulted from consumption. Although the discipline psychology largely disappeared from economic discussions by the early 20th century, economic psychology continued to be studied, with the discourse being revisited at the end of the century. Tomer (2007) argues that behavioural economics is not a homogeneous school, but a collection of different theories, including the Michigan School (G. Katona); psychological economics (C.F. Camerer, R. Thaler, E. Fehr); behavioural macroeconomics (G. Akerlof, R. Kranton); evolutionary economics (R. Nilson, S. Winter); behavioural finance (R. Schiller); and experimental economics (Smith). Despite the convergence between economic analyses and the natural sciences, psychology has continued to provide insights, as evident in the views of J.S. Mill, F. Edgeworth, V. Pareto, I. Fisher, and J.M. Keynes. The strongest scientific connections in the field of consumer behaviour are with psychology. Currently, the stream that combines economics and psychology is referred to as behavioural economics. The trend in the research of considering the irrationality of consumer behaviour and cognitive psychology can be observed in the studies of Tversky & Kahneman (1986), who point out that consumers do not always follow a modellike behaviour because their decisions are influenced by many subjective factors and may be made under conditions of uncertainty. They may be guided by impulses, impressions, personal feelings, and thus are often based on limited rationality. Zackhauser (1986) also highlighted clashes between rationalists and proponents of behavioural economics, concluding that if consumer behaviour violates rationality, it should be treated as non-economic. In contrast, Thaler (1999) argued that neoclassical economics assumes that people are capable of performing complex calculations, devoid of emotions, never lose self-control, and are purely selfish. Camerer and Loewenstein (2004), on the other hand, advocated for incorporating the social factor into behavioural economics to better explain phenomena, arguing that behavioural economics is an attempt to make economic theories more practically useful, primarily by increasing their capacity to explain and predict consumer behaviour in light of realistic assumptions. The foundation of psychology, personality, and emotions, of which the consumer may or may not be aware, plays a significant role in the decision-making process (Maison, 2013). Continuing the research on consumer awareness and consumer psychology, Maison and Stasiuk (2014a; 2014b) indicate where knowledge about consumer behaviour can be gathered, and then determine the significance of fundamental cognitive, emotional, and motivational processes in consumer decision-making. Fennis & Rucker (2023) examined the psychological underpinnings of consumption from the perspective of its impact on well-being and health (2023). Mainstream economics excels in its ability to construct abstract models, while sociology’s strength lies in its focus on the complexity of socio-economic realities. Veblen (1899/1998) believed that human beings act more on the basis of habits and customs than by optimizing all the actions they take. Veblen’s hidden normative point of view is embedded in his idea of human instincts (Ishida, 2021). Sociological theories demonstrate an interest in studying markets, the rationality of actors, and the system of stimuli generated by the interaction of actors. According to the field of sociology, rational behaviour is one in which the actor is guided by a hierarchy of values and preferences recognized within a given social group (Coleman, 1990). The modern way of thinking is much more liberated and individualized and glorifies the consumer’s free choice. Some authors emphasize the requirement of discipline inherent in such consumption, such as in Turner (2010)’s “disciplined hedonism“, Jacyno (2007)’s “development of selfcontrol”, or Szafruga (2021)’s “spontaneous order“. The interdisciplinary nature of the discussed issue is evident from the many attempts to link consumer behaviour with fields such as philosophy or cultural anthropology. These fields connect these consumer behaviours to traditional value systems, beliefs, and customs, which are passed down from generation to generation and vary widely across different cultures and subcultures (De Mooiji et al., 2011; Majeed, 2019). 2. From simple to complex models – approaches to modelling consumer behaviour Conceptualising a model of consumer financial behaviour requires embedding assumptions into existing models of consumer behaviour in general. Consumer behaviour models are often mistakenly equated with behaviour patterns. Despite many CEEJ • 11(58) • 2024 • pp. 159-177 • ISSN 2543-6821 • DOI: 10.2478/ceej-2024-0012 164 developments in the field of consumer behaviour sciences, a coherent research approach that integrates the issue of consumer behaviour with the specificity of the financial-services markets has not yet been developed. For this reason, only selected models whose assumptions fit the characteristics of financial behaviour will be presented in detail. As Smyczek (2007) finds, consumer behavioural patterns in the market should be defined as reflecting currently functioning regularities and regularities in a holistic manner. Behaviours reflect systems of preferences, whilst patterns are not constant and uniform. Despite their limitations, models are helpful in understanding complex relationships, consumer-market relationships, and the decisionmaking processes of consumers. As Krzyżanowski (1999) points out, models serve several functions: (a) descriptive-analytical; (b) explanatory; (c) predictive; and (d) utilitarian. In the literature, there are many quantitative and qualitative models aimed at explaining consumer behaviour (Zalega, 2012). There have also been efforts to explain behaviour using the analysis of conditioning determinants (Rampl & Eberhardt, 2012). Focus on behavioural aspects in various fields is evident in Roszkowska (2001)’s classification, where the models created are most often used to explain purchasing behaviours in relation to different groups of products. The classifications of models presented in Smyczek (2007), Masion & Stasiuk (2014a; 2014b), Korneta & Lotko (2021), and partially Moitala (2007), despite establishing numerous criteria and divisions, focus primarily on the complexity simple and complex models, due to the broadest-division criterion (Figure 1). Mazurek-Kusiak (2019) division further classifies models into behavioural models, which, in the case of the Fishbein and Ajzen, Bettmen, and Mowen models, are also part of complex models. The framework for further analysis will be the division into simple and complex models. Simple models, in a general sense, attempt to explain and characterise consumer behaviour. They present one aspect of consumer behaviour and do not explain the relationships between individual factors. The simplest example of such a model is the stimulusresponse (SR) model (Phipps & Simmons, 1997) – traditionally illustrated by Pavlov’s experiment, which from the perspective of consumer behaviour would indicate that information about a price reduction of a product or service would influence its purchase. A more complex model is the “black box” model, which is based on the SR construction. A set of factors (price, quality, availability, reviews, image) directly influences a consumer or a given population’s decisions (Smyczek & Sowa, 2005). Another “black box” model is Kotler’s purchase process model (1994), which identifies factors at the input and output of the process. It verifies a broader range of factors that stimulate purchases and cause decision outcomes. Since “black box” models focus solely on the action of external factors, they can be useful (from a marketing perspective) only when internal factors are insignificant or have only a minor role in shaping consumer behaviour (Smyczek, 2007). In contrast to “black box” models, decision process models depict individual stages in the consumer decision-making process (Przybyłowski et al., 1998). These models examine whether consumers can make favourable decisions based on past and new information. The model consists of multiple stages: recognizing a need; searching for options; evaluating options; making a choice; and finally, taking action. It does not take into account factors influencing consumer decisions, nor does it specify the values or significance of a consumer’s individual options. Korneta & Lotko (2021) identified a third category of models within simple models, which are those based on a person’s internal aspects, such as their attitudes, needs, and motivation. Among the most popular theories in this group of models are Maslow’s hierarchy of needs; McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y; Herzberg’s two-factor theory; McClelland’s achievement motivation theory; goal-setting theory; and reinforcement theory. Within the category of simple models, one can identify a hybrid of two types of models: “personal variables“, which focus on processes within the individual (perception, attitudes, motivation), and “decision process” models – Rice’s Perceived Value/Perceived Probability of Satisfaction (PV/PPS) model. The main premise of the PV/PPS model is to consider two elements: the perceived value of the product for the consumer, and their perception of their probability of achieving satisfaction. The model assumes the subjective utility (SU) of the consumer, calculated through the value attached to the decision outcomes (PV) and the perception of the probability of each outcome (PPS). Based on this model, it can be concluded that the greatest benefits are achieved for the consumer when the outcomes of their choices are highly rated by them and are also more satisfying (SU = PV x PPS). The aforementioned simple models focus on identifying stimuli influencing consumers CEEJ • 11(58) • 2024 • pp. 159-177 • ISSN 2543-6821 • DOI: 10.2478/ceej-2024-0012 165 and determining the results of these factors; as Smyczek (2007)’s considerations suggest, the decision process model and hybrid models provide the most comprehensive picture of consumer behaviour, although they still do not explain the reasons behind behaviours. Complex models consider at least two aspects related to consumer behaviour. Smyczek (2007) categorizes models into three groups: structural models, stochastic models, and simulation models. Korneta & Lotko (2021) present a slightly different classification of complex models, dividing them into structural and simulation models. Within the structural category, they further differentiate them into integrated and empirical models. For the purposes of this discussion, this paper adopts Korneta & Lotko’s classification as the basis for further considerations. Integrated-structural models illustrate the relationships and elucidate the psychological processes that explain consumer behaviour outcomes. The most popular models in this category are the Nicosia model (1966), the Howard-Sheth model (1970), and the Engel-Blackwell-Kollat (EBK 1968) model (Blackwell et al. 2001; Engel et al., 1968). The Nicosia model is the oldest one describing consumer behaviour and focuses on the relationships • Consumer Behaviour Theories in Economic Sciences •Simple decision-making models •Complex Consumer Behaviour Models •Behavioural Models of Consumer Behaviour Division according to Mazurek-Kusiak (2019) •Consumer Decision-Making Model (EKB - Engel-Kollat-Blackwell) •Fishbein and Ajzen's Multi-Attribute Attitude Model •AIDA Model (Attention, Interest, Desire, Action) •DAGMAR Model (Defining Advertising Goals for Measured Advertising Results) Division according to Maison & Stasiuk (2014)* •Simple/complex •Macro/micro Scale •Theoretical/empirical • Low-, medium-and high-level •Descriptive (historical and current)/normative/predictive • Dynamic/dichotomous •Functional/intellectual •Behavioural/statistical •Quantitative/qualitative •Mathematical/sequential/typological •General/ad hoc Divisions according to Smyczek (2007) •Quantitative •Qualitative Division according to Moital (2007)** •Economic (Javoson, Manger, Walras, Pareto, Samualson •Psychological (Pavlov) •Motivational (Fraud, Maslov, Harzberg) •Social (Veblen) Division according to Raszkowska (2001)*** Figure 1. Selected models of consumer behaviour Source: own elaboration, based on Mazurek-Kusiak (2019); Maison & Stasiuk (2014a; 2014b); Smyczek (2007); Moital (2007); and Raszkowska (2001). Notes: *models are based on the rationality of the decisions made; **quantitative and qualitative classification does not differentiate models well, as hybrid models cannot be excluded. Moreover, both very simple and very complex models are included in one group; ***these models confirm the interdisciplinarity of the topic of consumer behaviour, as they embed behaviour in different sciences but do not combine elements of different disciplines. CEEJ • 11(58) • 2024 • pp. 159-177 • ISSN 2543-6821 • DOI: 10.2478/ceej-2024-0012 166 between businesses and potential consumers. It depicts the interactions and connections between the two main participants in the market game, and relates to four areas in the consumer decisionmaking process: (a) consumer attitudes based on market-derived information; (b) customer product search and evaluation; (c) the act of purchase; and (d) feedback, in the form of experience acquired by both the consumers and the business. It’s worth noting that this model finds applications in identifying and assessing consumer responses to stimuli. In the Howard-Sheth model, four types of variables are distinguished: (a) inputs; (b) perpetual and learning constructs (psychological); (c) learning constructs (external); (d) outputs. Input variables include sources of information, stimuli, and the environment. A significant part of the Howard-Sheth model assumes that psychological factors determine consumer actions when making decisions, which present a series of output factors (such as the decision to make a purchase or abstain from it, which may reveal an individual’s interests and opinions). External variables include the significance of the purchase, intentions, personality traits, time pressure, and the consumer’s financial status. The most comprehensive consumer behaviour model, which focuses on both information processing and purchase decision-making, is the Engel-BlackwellKollat (EBK) model. It served as a starting point for subsequent models: Engel-Blackwell-Miniard (1993) and Andearsen, Hansen (cited by Schiffman & Kanuk, 1997). The EBK model based on a five-stage decision-making process – (a) recognition of the problem/need; (b) information search; (c) evaluation of choice alternatives; (d) decision/purchase; and (e) post-purchase consequences, which are influenced by external factors. A central control unit plays a crucial role, receiving external stimuli and evaluating them. The EBK model more flexibly and consistently illustrates consumer behaviour than the HowardSheth model, and highlights both positive and negative shopping outcomes. Importantly, it takes into account the human information processing process, which is overlooked in other models. The EBK model comprehensively explains consumer behaviours and decision outcomes, making it potentially the most useful in practice, even though it doesn’t fully account for information processing and consumer involvement. Among the fundamental empirical-structural models, we can include the Fishbein and Ajzen model (1974), Bettman’s model (1979), and Peter and Olon’s model (2004). Referring to the previously described connections between economics and other sciences with the subjectivity of decisions, Fishbein and Ajzen‘s (1982) concept of attitude (also known as the theory of planned behaviour) seems to combine elements from various fields of study. The practical applications of this model are controversial because they assume that an individual’s attitude towards an object/product results from their beliefs about the attributes and evaluation of the object/product, provided that a given attribute is important to the consumer (Figure 2). This model is based on external variables, including personality, emotions, experiences, age, gender, knowledge, education, religion, income, beliefs, attitudes, intention, behaviour, and actual sense of control. It also assumes that from a consumer’s evaluation of a given product’s characteristics, one can calculate their overall attitude towards the product and make conclusions about which product the individual has a more positive attitude towards (Maison & Stasiuk, 2014a; 2014b). Model A0 is criticised by Salomon et al. (2006) for its complexity and the multitude of factors it considers to be influences upon consumer behaviour, as well as the model’s optimistic assumptions. It is worth agreeing with the latter criticism; the assumption of a comprehensive thought process, with the selection of optimal solutions, contradicts the notion that consumers may make decisions based on emotions, habits, or momentary impulses, and that a consumer’s decision may result from a direct stimulus-response rather than from an attitudinal assessment. Peter & Olson’s model analyses how information from the environment is processed in consumer behaviour and the significance of knowledge, beliefs, and intentions for the entire process. According to their assumptions, consumers interpret information using two related cognitive processes: (a) attention (identifying relevant and irrelevant information) and (b) comprehension (determining the meaning of information; interpretation based on existing knowledge, memory, meanings, and beliefs). The result of integrating these outcomes is the behavioural intention. As reported by Cenon & Ong (2012), Peter & Olson’s model has been used by researchers in three countries – Japan, Thailand, and the Philippines – to research the impact of a product’s country of production on consumer perceptions of its quality and price. CEEJ • 11(58) • 2024 • pp. 159-177 • ISSN 2543-6821 • DOI: 10.2478/ceej-2024-0012 173 assuming that financial behaviours are influenced by economic factors, and to a marginal extent, by social or psychological factors, should be considered insufficient and even questionable, requiring further research and analysis. Efforts should thus be made to create a model that explains consumer financial behaviours. The model should be characterised by simplicity while also having heuristic power. Such a constructed model of financial consumer behaviours can find applications in many markets, objectives (payment, savings, investment, credit, insurance, retirement) and in studying and forecasting behaviours that have been poorly described so far by models and rules. Generational changes and new trends give reasons to believe that the constant evolution of the environment necessitates the continuation of research on rules and models of consumer financial behaviours. The proposed CFB model can serve as a framework for further modifications depending on market needs. The author of the article is aware of the inexhaustibility of the topic, as the spectrum of theories, models, and components influencing consumer financial behaviour is vast, and the dynamics of the consumer are difficult to predict. Selecting the most important ones to highlight is a challenge that needs to be acknowledged. References Akerlof, G. A. & Kranton, R.E. (2010a). Identity Economics. The Economists’ Voice, 7(2), 1-3, https://doi. org/10.2202/1553-3832.1762 Akerlof, G.A. & Kranton R.E. (2010b). Identity Economics. How our Identities Shape our Work, Wages, and Well-Being, Princeton University Press. Antonides, F. & van Raaij, W.F. (2003). Consumer Behaviour. European Perspective. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Assael, H. (1987). Consumer Behaviour and Marketing Action (2nd ed.), Boston, MA: Kent Publishing Company. Bentham, J. (1781). An Introduction to the Principles of Moral and Legislation. Batoche Books. Kitchener 2000 Retrieved from https:// historyofeconomicthought.mcmaster.ca/bentham/ morals.pdf Bettman, J.R. (1979). An Information Processing Theory of Consumer Choice. Boston: Addison-Wesley. Blackwell, R., Miniard P.W., Engel J.F. (2001). Consumer Behaviour (9th ed.), Harcourt College Publishers, Ft. Worth, Tex. Blut, M., Beatty, S.E. & Northington, W.M. (2022). Cultural Personal Values and Switching Costs Perceptions: Beyond Hofstede. Journal of Business Research, 150(2), 339-353, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jbusres.2022.06.005 Bristow, D., Schneider, K.C. & Schuler, K.D. (2002). The Brand Dependence Scale: Measuring Consumers‘ Use of Brand Name to Differentiate Among Product Alternatives. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 11(6), 343-356, https://doi. org/10.1108/10610420210445488 Brown, A. (1972). Surveys in Applied Economics: Models of Consumer Behaviour. Economic Journal, 82(328), 1145-1236, https://doi.org/10.2307/2231303 Butler, E. (2011). The Condensed Wealth of Nations and the Incredibly Condensed Theory of Moral Sentiments. UK: Adam Smith Research Trust, 7-77, Retrieved from https://static1.squarespace.com/ static/56eddde762cd9413e151ac92/t/56fbaba840261d c6fac3ceb6/1459334065124/Condensed_Wealth_of_ Nations_ASI.pdf Bylok, F. (2017). Intricacies of Modern Consumption: Consumerism vs. Deconsumption, Annales. Etyka w Życiu Gospodarczym, 20(8), 61-74, https://doi.org/10.18778/1899-2226.20.8.06 Cenon, P.D. & Ong, J. (2012). Colonial Mentality in Decline? Country of Manufacture and Consumer Perceptions of Motor Vehicle Quality and Price. Journal of Global Business, 1(1), 1-13. Clemons, E.K. (2008), How Information Changes Consumer Behavior and How Consumer Behavior Determines Corporate Strategy. Journal Management Information Systems, 25(2), 13-40, https://doi. org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222250202 Coleman, J. (1990). Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Czernek, K., Marszałek, P. (2015). Koncepcja zakorzenienia społecznego i jej przydatność w badaniach ekonomicznych, Ekonomista, 5, 625-649. Davidson, A.F. (1968). Ortega Y Gasset and the Theme of our Time, Indianapolis: Butler University. CEEJ • 11(58) • 2024 • pp. 159-177 • ISSN 2543-6821 • DOI: 10.2478/ceej-2024-0012 174 De Mooiji, M. & Hofstede, G. (2011). Crosscultural Consumer Behaviour: a Review of Research Findings. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 23(3), 181-192, DOI: 10.1080/08961530.2011.578057 Dimock, M. (2019). Defining Generations: Where Millennials end and Generation Z Begins, Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/ short-reads/2019/01/17/where-millennials-end-andgeneration-z-begins/ Dolan, P., Elliot, A., Metcalfe, R. & Vlaev, I. (2012). Influencing Financial Behaviour: From Changing Minds to Changing Contexts. Journal of Behavioural Finance, 13(2), 126-142, https://doi.org/10.1080/15427 560.2012.680995 Duflo, E., Banerjee, A. (2019). Good Economics for Hard Times. Better Answers to Our Biggest Problems. Allen Lane. Engel, J.F., Blackwell, R.D. & Miniard, P.W. (1993). Consumer Behaviour. New York: Dryden Press. Engel, J., Kottal, D. i Blackwell, R. (1968). Costumer Behiaviour. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Wii Suon. Fabiunke, H., Fischer, H., Jäger, J. & Koppert, W. (1976). Badania Ankietowe Popytu Konsumpcyjnego. Warszawa: PWE. Fatyga, B. (2005). Pokolenie. In W. Kwaśniewicz (Ed.), Encyklopedia Socjologii. Suplement. Warszawa: Oficyna Naukowa. Fennis, B. M., & Rucker, D. D. (2023). The Coin of Consumption: Understanding the Bright and Dark Sides. Current Opinion in Psychology, 49, 101518, Consumer Psychology, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. copsyc.2022.101518 Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (2009). Predicting and Changing Behavior. The Reasoned Action Approach (1st ed.). New York: Psychology Press, 2-26, http://doi. org/10.4324/9780203838020 Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (1974). Attitudes Towards Objects as Predictors of Single and Multiple Behavioral Criteria. Psychological Review, 81(1), 59-74, https://doi. org/10.1037/h0035872 Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (1982), Acceptance, Yielding, and Impact: Cognitive Processes in Persuasion. In R. Petty, T. M. Ostrom. and T. C. Brock (Eds.), Cognitive Responses in Persuasion (1st ed.). New York: Psychology Press, https://doi. org/10.4324/9781315803012 Folta, M. (2020). X, Y, Z. Strauss-Howe’s Theory of Generational Cycles in the Light of Former Theories. Social Contexts, 8, 2(16) 23-37, http://doi.org/10.17951/ ks.2020.8.2.23-37 Gajewski, S. (1994). Zachowanie się Konsumenta a Współczesny Marketing. Łódź: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego. Galbács, P. (2017). Methodology...?! Why? Some Methodological Aspects of the Controversy Between Mainstream Economics and Institutionalism. Economics and Business Review, 3(3), 112-134, https:// doi.org/10.18559/ebr.2017.3.7 Garewicz, J. (1983). Pokolenie jako Kategoria Socjofilozoficzna. Studia Socjologiczne, 1, 75-87. Gorynia, M. (2019). Competition and Globalisation in Economic Sciences. Selected aspects. Economics and Business Review, 5(3), 118-133, https://doi.org/10.18559/ ebr.2019.3.7 Grabarski, L. (1998), Zachowania Nabywców. Warszawa: PWE. Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481-510. Gray, R. (1967). Ortega y Gasset and Modern Culture. Salmagundi, 35, 6–41. Guirdham, M. (1987). How to Market Unit Trusts: A Consumer Behaviour Model. Marketing Intelligence and Planning, 5(2), 15-19, https://doi.org/10.1108/ eb045747 Hansen, F. (1972). Consumer Choice Behavior. A Cognitive Theory. New York: The Free Press. Howard, J.A. i Sheth, J.N. (1970). The Theory of Buyer Behavior. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 65(331), strony 1406-1407. Ishida, N. (2021). Thorstein Veblen on Economic Man: Toward a New Method of Describing Human Nature, Society, and History. Evolutionary and Institutional Economic Review, 18, 527-547, https://doi. org/10.1007/s40844-020-00194-x Jacyno, M. (2007). Kultura Indywidualizmu, Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. Karashchuk, O.S., Mayorova E.A., Nikishin, A.F. & Kornilova, O.V. (2020). The Method for Determining Time-Generation Range. Sage Open, 10(4), https://doi. org/10.1177/2158244020968082 CEEJ • 11(58) • 2024 • pp. 159-177 • ISSN 2543-6821 • DOI: 10.2478/ceej-2024-0012 175 Katona, G. (1951). Psychological Analysis of Economic Behaviour. McGraw-Hill. Kieżel E. (2010). Czynniki Kształtujące Zachowania Rynkowe Konsumentów. In E. Kieżel (Ed.), Konsument i Jego Zachowania na Rynku Europejskim (pp. 104-143). Warszawa: PWE. Klein, J.F., Merfeld, K., Wilhelms M.P., Falk, T. & Henkel S. (2022). Buying to Share: How Presumption Promotes Purchases in Peer-to-Peer Asset Sharing. Journal of Business Research, 143, 171-183, https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.01.047 Korneta, P. i Lotko, A. (2021). Determinanty i modele zachowań konsumenta. Wnioski z przeglądu literatury. Marketing i Rynek/ Journal of Marketing and Market Studies, 28(9). doi: 10.33226/1231-7853.2021.9.1 Kotler, P. & Armstrong, G. (2008). Principles of Marketing (12th ed.). Pearson. Prentice Hall. Kotler, P. (1994). Marketing Managemen: Analysis, Planning, Implementation, and Control (8th ed.), Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River. Kowalska, M. (2015). Wpływ Wirtualizacji Zachowań Konsumenckich na Rozwój Domocentryzmu. Handel Wewnętrzny, 6(359), 64-73. Krzyżanowski, L.J. (1999). O Podstawach Kierowania Organizacjami Inaczej: Paradygmaty - Modele - Metafory. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. Life Course Associates. (2023). Generation in history. Website Resource Library, 866, Retrieved from https://www.lifecourse.com/assets/files/gens_ in_history(1).pdf Lim, W. M. & Kumar, S. (2022). Evolution and Trends in Consumer Behaviour: Insights from Journal of Consumer Behaviour. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 22(1), 217-232, https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.2118 Maison, D. & Stasiuk, K. (2014a). Psychologiczne Podejście do Rozumienia Postaw Konsumenckich, Problemy Zarządzania, 1(45), 18-29, https:// doi.10.7172/1644-9584.45.2 Maison, D. (2013). Polak w Świecie Finansów. O Psychologicznych Uwarunkowaniach Zachowań Ekonomicznych Polaków. Warszawa: PWN. Majeed, M.H. (2019). Pragmatist Inquiry in to Consumer Behaviour Research. Philosophy of Management, 18, 189-201, https://doi.org/10.1007/ s40926-018-0103-4 Malinvaud, E. (1987). The Overlapping Generation Model in 1947. Journal of Economic Literature, 25(1), 103105. Mannheim, K. (1952). The Problem of Generations. In P. Kecskemeti (Ed.), Essays on the Sociology of knowledge (pp. 276-322). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Markin, R.J. (1979). The Role of Rationalization in Consumer Decision Process: A Revisionist Approach to Consumer Behavior. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 7, 316-334, https://doi.org/10.1007/ BF02729682 Marszałek, P. & Ratajczak-Mrozek M. (2022). Introduction: Digitalization as a Driver of the Contemporary Economy. In M. Ratajczak-Mrozek, P. Marszałek, (Eds.). Digitalization and Firm Performance. Examining the Strategic Impact (pp. 1-15). Palgrave Macmillan, http://doi:10.1007/978-3030-83360-2_1 Mazurek-Kusiak, A.K. (2019). Model Zachowań Konsumentów na Rynku Turystycznym, Spatium. Mishra, S., Shukla, Y., Malhotra, G. & Arora, V. (2023). Investigating the Impact of Consumers’ Patriotism and Ethnocentrism on Purchase Intention: Moderating Role of Consumer Guilt and Animosity. International Business Review, 32(4), 102076, https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2022.102076 Mowen, J.C. (1993). Consumer Behaviour (3rd ed.). New York-Toronto: Macmillan. Nicosia, K.M. (1966). Consumer Decision Processes. Marketing and Advertising Implications, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Oszust, K. & Stecko, J. (2020). Theoretical Aspects of Consumer Behaviour Together with an Analysis of Trends in Modern Consumer Behaviour. Modern Management Review, 25, 27(4), 113-121, https:// dx.doi. org/10.7862/rz.2020.mmr.32 Patrzałek W. (2019). Między Konsumpcjonizmem a Dekonsumpcją – w Poszukiwaniu Nowego Modelu Społeczeństwa. Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu, 63(10), 221-234, https://org.doi:10.15611/pn.2019.10.16 Peter. J.P. & Olson, J.C. (2004). Consumer Behaviour and Marketing Strategy (7th ed.), McGrawHill, Education-Europe. Petty, R.E. & Cacioppo, J.T. (1983a). Central and Peripheral Routes to Persuasion: Application CEEJ • 11(58) • 2024 • pp. 159-177 • ISSN 2543-6821 • DOI: 10.2478/ceej-2024-0012 176 to Advertising. In L. Percy i W.G. Woodside (Eds.). Advertising and Consumer Psychology (pp. 3-23). Lexington, MA: Lexington Books. Petty, R.E., Cacioppo J.T., Schumann, D. (1983b). Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: the Moderating Role of Involvement. Journal of Consumer Research, 10, 135-146, https://org. doi.10.1086/208954 Phipps R. & Simmons C. (1998). Understanding customers. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford. Pinder, W. (1928). Das Problem der Generation in der Kunstgeschichte Europas. Leipzig: Seemann. Pohorille, M. (1980). Mechanizm i Kierunki Zmian w Konsumpcji Społeczeństwa Polskiego. In: J. Lewandowski, J.J. Wiatr (Eds) Systemy Wartości a Wzory Konsumpcji Społeczeństwa Polskiego, Warszawa: Uniwersytet Warszawski. Polanyi, M. (1941). The Growth of Thought in Society, Economica 8(32), 428-456, https://doi. org/10.2307/2550108 Przybyłowski, K., Hartley, S.W., Kerin R.A. & Rudelius, W. (1998). Marketing. Warszawa: Dom Wydawniczy ABC. Rabin, M. (1998). Psychology and Economics. Journal of Economic Literature, 36(1), 11-46. Rabin, M. (2002). A Perspective on Psychology and Economics. European Economic Review, 46(4-5), 657685, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0014-2921(01)00207-0 Rampl, L. V. & Eberhardt, T. (2012). Consumer Trust in Food Retailers: Conceptual Framework and Empirical Evidence. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 4(40), 254-272, https://doi. org/10.1108/09590551211211765 Roszkowska, E. (2001). Typy Zachowań Konsumenta na Rynku – Ujęcie w Teorii Kompleksów Reguł. In A. F. Bocian (Ed.) Rozwój Regionalny Cele i Metody (pp. 143-158). Białystok: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku. Runyon, K.E. & Stewart, D.W. (1987). Consumer Behavior and the Practice of Marketing. Merrill Publishing Company. Rydell, I. (2005). Equity, Justice, Interdependence: Intergenerational Transfers and the Ageing Population, Arbetsrapport, 5, Institute for Futures Studies, 1-48, Retrieved from https://www.iffs.se/ media/1113/20051201134827filM52PM23TL7s8cRxdz95J.pdf Samuelson, P.A. (1958). An Exact ConsumptionLoan Model of Interest With or Without the Social Contrivance of Money. The Journal of Political Economy, 66(6), 467-482. Schiffman, L.G. & Kanuk, L.L. (1994). Consumer Behavior. Englewood Cliffs. Schiffman, L.G. & Kanuk, L.L. (1997). Consumer Behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Senda, J. (1998). Podstawowe Aspekty Racjonalności Zachowań Konsumenckich. Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny, 2, 159-170. Sha, Z. (2023). The Effect of Globalisation, Foreign Direct Investment, and Natural Resource Rent on Economic Recovery: Evidence from G7 Economies. Resources Policy, 82, May, 103474, 1-8, https://doi. org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.103474 Smyczek, S. & Sowa, I. (2005). Konsument na Rynku. Zachowania, Modele, Aplikacje. Warszawa: Difin. Smyczek, S. (2007). Modele Zachowań Konsumentów na Rynku Usług Finansowych, Katowice: Prace Naukowe. Akademia Ekonomiczna w Katowicach. Smyczek, S. (2012). Consumer Behaviour on International Market, Warszawa: Placet. Solomon, M., Bamossy, G.J., Askegaard, S. & Hogg, M. K. (2006). Consumer Behaviour: A European Perspective (6th ed.). Harlow: Pearson. Stasiuk, K. & Maison, D. (2014b). Psychologia Konsumenta. Warszawa: PWN. Strauss, H. & Howe, N. (1997). The Fourth Turning: an American Prophecy – What the Cycles of History Tell us About America’s Next Rendezvous With Destiny, Crown. Światowy, G. (2006). Zachowania Konsumentów. Warszawa: Polskie Wydawnictwo Ekonomiczne S.A. Szafruga, P. (2021). Politics and the Theory of Spontaneous Order (1st ed.), Routledge Frontiers of Political Economy, New York: Routledge. Szarzec, K. (2014). Model Homo Oeconomicus w Teorii Makroekonomii Głównego Nurtu, Studia Ekonomiczne. Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Katowicach, 180, cz. 1. Dokonania Współczesnej Myśli Ekonomicznej: Racjonalność - Efektywność - Etyka. Problemy Teoretyczne, 195-204. CEEJ • 11(58) • 2024 • pp. 159-177 • ISSN 2543-6821 • DOI: 10.2478/ceej-2024-0012 177 Szczepański, J. (1976). Wydajność Pracy a Konsumpcja. Nowe drogi: Czasopismo SpołecznoPolityczne, 330(11), 116-122. Tarde, G. (2015). Psychologie Économique. Essai. Createspace Independent Publishing Platform. Thaler, R. H. (1999), Mental Accounting Matters. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12, 183-206. Tomer, J. F. (2007). What is Behavioral Economics? The Journal of Socio-Economics, 36(3), 463-479, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2006.12.007 Triandis, H.C. (1980). Values, Attitudes, and Interpersonal Behaviour, Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 195-259, University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln. Turner, J.H. (2010). Struktura Teorii Socjologicznej. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1986). Rational Choice and the Framing of Decision. The Journal of Business, 59(2), Part 2: The Behavioral Foundations of Economic Theory, 251-278. Veblen, T. (1998), Teoria Klasy Próżniaczej, Warszawa: MUZA. Waliszewski, K. & Warchlewska, A. (2022). Modern Technologies in Financial Advice and Personal Financial Planning. Warszawa: CeDeWu. Waliszewski, K., Cichowicz, E., Gębski, Ł., Kliber, F., Kubiczek, J., Niedziółka, P., Solarz, M. & Warchlewska, A. (2023). The role of Lendtech Sector in the Consumer Credit Market in the Context of Household Financial Exclusion, Oeconomia Copernicana, 14(2), 609-643, https://doi.org/10.24136/oc.2023.017 Walter, C.G. (1974). Consumer Behaviour: Theory and Practice, Homerwood: Richard D. Irwin. Williams R. (1985), Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society (revised ed.). Oxford University Press. Wijaya, B. (2012). The Development of Hierarchy of Effects Model in Advertising. Internatonal Research Journal of Business Studies, 5(1), 73-85. Xiao J.J. & Kumar S. (2023). Introduction to a Research Agenda for Consumer Financial Behaviour. In J.J. Xiao, & S. Kumar (Eds), A Research Agenda for Consumer Financial Behavior (pp.1-15). Elgar Research Agendas. Zackhauser, R. (1986). Behavioral Versus Rational Economics: What You See is What You Conquer. The Journal of Business, 59(4), Part 2: The Behavioral Foundations of Economic Theory. The University of Chicago Press, 435-449. Zalega, T. (2012). Konsumpcja. Determinanty. Teorie. Modele. Warszawa: Polskie Wydawnictwo Ekonomiczne.