가계 주 소득 원천과 소득 분위에 따른 가계 유형별 심적 회계 분석 (Analysis of Households’ Mental Accounting According to Main Income Source and to Income Quintile)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국소비자학회
· 수록지 정보 : 소비자학연구 / 25권 / 1호 / 115 ~ 144페이지
· 저자명 : 박종선, 황덕순

초록

본 연구는 Shefrin과 Thaler의 행동학적 생애주기가설을 배경으로 한국 가계의 심적 회계 양상을 규명하여 실생활에 적용 방안을 모색코자 한다. 연구에 사용된 자료는 한국조세연구원의 재정패널조사 1-4차년도 자료이며, 표본 분할을 통해 가계 유형별로 분석하였다. 표본은 가계 주 소득원천에 따라 근로소득가계, 사업소득가계, 그리고 근로소득과 사업소득이 모두 있는 가계로 분할하였고, 가계소득규모에 따라 균등화 소득 4분위로 분할하였다. 분석은 균형패널을 구축한 후 확률효과모형을 이용하여 회귀분석과 회귀계수 차이검정을 실시하였으며, 분석결과를 토대로 가계 유형별 심적 회계 양상을 추론하였다. 연구의 결과를 요약하면 다음과 같다. 첫째, 회귀분석결과 유형별 소득과 자산이 소비지출에 미치는 영향이 서로 다르며, 이러한 특성은 가계 유형별로도 다른 양상을 보였다. 둘째, 회귀계수 차이검정결과 ‘유형별 소득과 자산간 한계소비성향에 차이가 없다’는 영가설이 기각되어 유형별 소득과 자산이 소비지출에 미치는 영향에 차이가 있으며, 이러한 특성은 가계 유형별로도 서로 다른 양상을 보였다. 셋째, 회귀분석과 차이검정 결과를 토대로 가계의 심적 회계 양상을 추론한 결과 연구대상 가계는 심적 회계를 하고 있으며, 심적 회계 양상은 가계 유형별로 서로 다른 것으로 밝혀졌다. 이러한 연구 결과는 재무설계를 할 때 객관적 재무구조와 함께 가계의 심적 회계 양상을 고려해야 하며, 특히, 가계 소득 특성에 따른 가계 유형별 심적 회계 양상을 반영하여 재무설계 전략을 수립해야 함을 시사한다.

영어초록

Financial planning is a popular method of household financial management, and the life- cycle/ permanent income hypothesis is an excellent normative theory of financial planning in the field of financial management. However, because of strict rationality assumptions, empirical tests have shown that many cases have been dismissed.
This study considers an aspect of mental accounting in Korean households, based on Shefrin and Thaler’s behavioral life-cycle hypothesis.
For this study, households were classified into the following types: 1) wage income household, business income household, and household with both types of incomes, according to main income source and 2) quintile, according to the scale of household income. Following the classification, each type of household was then analyzed.
The National Survey of Tax and Benefit for 1st–4th wave were used to form a balanced panel. Then, a one-way random effects model was used for the analysis. The results were used to make inferences about the aspects of mental accounting in different types of households.
The results are as follows:First, the results of the regression analysis indicate that assets and income, which are explanatory variables, have different characteristics in terms of their influence on consumer expenditure. In addition, these characteristics showed different aspects for different types of households.
Second, the results of the test for mean difference in the regression coefficient indicated that the null hypothesis (there is no difference between the marginal propensity to consume out of variables) was dismissed. Therefore, there is a difference in the amount of influence on consumer expenditure. Once again, these characteristics showed different aspects for different types of households.
Finally, an inference about the mental accounting of households was made from the above analysis. This indicated that the households in the study were carrying out mental accounting, and that the aspects of mental accounting were different for different types of households.
The discussions based on the results are as follows:First of all, financial planning may fail if the mental accounting and book accounting do not match in terms of financial management. Therefore, the financial planner must be able to understand the mental accounting of the clients. To achieve this, a separate subject for “behavioral finance” should be examined, with the Financial Planning Standard Board conducting a CFP certification program. In addition, the financial institution needs to develop educational programs to help financial planners understand the mental accounting of their clients.
In addition, the aspects of mental accounting differ by type of household, and thus, the sources of main household income and the scale of household income should be considered when conducting financial planning.

참고자료

· 없음