| FISRI
Factors that affect the decisions to take financial advice in the scottish borders
Research conducted by Louise Speirs, published March 2025.
Contents
- Introduction
- Design and methodology
2.1 Questionnaire design
2.2 Questionnaire methodology - Questionnaire results
3.1 Responses
3.2 Descriptive statistics
3.3 Non-parametric testing - Findings
- Conclusions
- References
Abstract
This paper surveyed consumers residing in the Scottish Borders who were within five years of retirement to find out the factors that impact the decision to take financial advice and understand their usage of both financial advisers and the available free guidance and support from the government. The results show that consumers were generally confident in their understanding of their retirement options, but this was more evident with those who had higher incomes and pension values. Statistically, those with a higher income were also more likely to have financial advisors and those with previous contact with financial advisers were more likely to seek financial advice in retirement. Those who do not seek financial advice choose not to do so primarily due to the cost involved. Other reasons include a lack of clarity and understanding of the overall benefits of financial advice and the service they are paying for.
Keywords
- Financial Advice
- Retirement
- Financial Literacy
- Financial Education
- Scottish Border
- Cost of Financial Advice
- Benefits of Financial Advice
1. Introduction
The UK has an increasingly ageing population with increased life expectancy (ONS, 2021a). The Office of National Statistics (ONS, 2021a) projects that in the UK there will be 7.5 million additional people over the age of 65 years in 50 years and one in four people will be over 65 by the year 2050. This places pressure on the provision of state pensions by the government and on retirees’ pensions and savings. This increase in life expectancy must be taken into account when consumers consider their retirement. According to research, 80% of adults over the age of 50 underestimate their life expectancy (Espadinha, 2018).
Retirement decisions are complex (FCA, 2019) and financial advisers can assist consumers in understanding the options available, ensure consumer objectives are met, and that income remains sustainable. They can provide valuable advice to retirees and those approaching retirement, however, the majority of consumers do not seek financial advice to discuss their retirement. The 2021 Wealth and Wellbeing Monitor (2021) by LV revealed only 39% were planning on obtaining financial advice from an adviser when they retired.
Montmarquette and Viennot-Briot (2019) found that households with a financial adviser can expect to see a positive impact on the value of their assets within four years. In addition, Brancati et al. (2017) demonstrated that clients in retirement who have taken financial advice are likely to have more income than those who do not take advice.
It is therefore important to understand the factors and any barriers to consumers when considering seeking financial advice, so these can be mitigated or removed. Those who are more likely to need advice are less likely to seek this from financial advisers (Calcagno & Monticone, 2015). Whilst those in older age value advice more than younger adults, they are also more likely to value novice advice as much as expert advice (Bailey et al., 2021).
Financial literacy can assist households to effectively plan their retirement (Lusardi & Mitchell, 2014). Gerrans and Hershey (2017) noted that those with increased financial literacy were more likely to seek financial advice. Lusardi and Mitchell (2011) observed that those with financial knowledge were also more likely to use available tools and financial experts to plan for their retirement rather than speak with their family, co-workers or friends. However, Fernandes et al. (2014) showed that there is only a slight improvement in financial behaviours following financial education while Alsemgeest (2015) found no improvement.
The cost of advice is also a factor in deciding whether to take financial advice (Lachance & Tang, 2012), as is trust in financial advisers (Brancati et al., 2017). Lachance and Tang (2012) found that trust decreases with age.
Financial anxiety can also lead to consumers opting not to seek financial advice (Gerrans & Hershey, 2017). Perception on the value of financial advice can also be a factor with households that have not previously taken financial advice believing that they need to have a higher level of assets before they seek advice (Montmarquette & Viennot-Briot, 2015). In line with this, those with lower levels of income are also less likely to use financial advisers (Brancati et al., 2017; Collins, 2010)
In addition, there is a growing use of a form of automated advice for investment decisions, often referred to as robo-advice. Brenner and Meyll (2020) noted that while it tends to be younger investors that use this service, it resonates with those who are concerned about fraud. Those who use this type of service are less likely to seek financial advice from a person.
In this study, we analyse the factors that affect the decisions of those in the Scottish Borders to take financial advice and find out what steps the government and financial industry can take to better encourage financial advice and improve the overall understanding of retirement options.
The Scottish Borders is in the South East of Scotland and is a predominantly rural area. The current population is approximately 115,000 with the largest age group 45-64 year olds at 35,136 (Scotland, 2021). The gross disposal household income for the region is £20,421 and is below the UK average of £21,433 (ONS, 2021b). The Office of National Statistics ONS (2021a) data shows that higher proportions of the older population live in rural and coastal areas. Focusing on the Scottish Borders can therefore bring greater insight into the factors that impact on taking financial advice for those approaching retirement.
A questionnaire was issued to those residing in the Scottish Borders and within five years of retirement. This study has focused on those approaching retirement on the basis that they are more likely to be more engaged in the planning for retirement and may have started to look into what their pension assets will be able to provide them. Based on the respondents this study has found that those with a higher level of income were more likely to currently have an adviser in place. Those with a higher current pension fund value were also more likely to currently have an adviser in place and intend to speak with a financial adviser regarding their retirement.
Having a higher income level and current pension fund value was also more likely to lead to confidence in understanding pensions, the various options for taking pension benefits and their taxation treatment and making decisions regarding their income needs in retirement. They are also more prepared to pay for financial advice.
The rest of this paper is structured as follows, the design of the questionnaire is outlined in section 2, in section 3 the data from the questionnaire is detailed, in section 4 the findings are discussed, and in section 5 conclusions are presented.
2. Design and methodology
2.3 Questionnaire design
The data for this study is from a structured questionnaire with respondents self-completing this through a link issued via social media. The questions include a variety of different styles. There were structured questions to ensure the respondents met the targeted sample of being residents in the Scottish Borders and retiring within the next five years. These initial questions ensure that those completed in error are excluded from the final analysis.
Questions surrounding the classification of the respondents by age, gender, education level, income and industry they work in were also provided. Alyousif and Kalenkoski (2017) used eight different bands for income, a higher number was used in this study to accommodate the likely lower earnings expected in the Scottish Borders region as identified by the Office of National Statistics (2021b). Further structured closed questions regarding the types of pensions they hold, their value, and their intentions towards seeking financial advice and their retirement plans provide a basis for comparing the data.
The questionnaire then moved on to a series of questions using Likert scales to assess the respondent’s understanding of how pensions operate and their attitude to paying for and trusting financial advice.
The questionnaire concluded with open questions inviting further clarification on the reasons for respondents not seeking advice and what could change their minds in respect of this.
2.2 Questionnaire methodology
To analyse the results from the questionnaire the software SPSS was utilised. The data was extracted from Survey Monkey and loaded into the program and then SPSS was used to analyse and correctly present the appropriate report’s analysis (Levesque, 2007).
Descriptive statistics were applied to reach conclusions with respect to the respondents. This analysis included determining the Mode, the most frequently occurring value, the Median, the centre value, the Mean, and the average value (Newbold et al., 2003).
Non-parametric tests are found to be more relevant where there are short response scales (3,4 or 5) and allow for two or more variables to be tested (Salcedo & McCormick, 2020). In order to assess the impact of both the current income and the current value of the pension funds a non-parametric test that allows for more than two distinct groups was required. The Kruskal-Wallis one way analysis of variance can assess differences where there are two or more groups and the data is not at set intervals, i.e. the data is not normally distributed, (McKnight & Najab, 2010). This has therefore been used to analyse the results for this study.
3. Questionnaire results
3.1 Responses
A total of 106 responses were received. Of these 5 did not reside in the Scottish Borders and 21 were not planning to retire within the next five years. These responses have therefore been excluded from the analysis leaving a total of 84.
The data for current income per annum and current pension fund value are detailed below.
| Income per annum | Number | Percentage | Code |
|---|---|---|---|
| £0-£15,000 | 19 | 22.89% | 1 |
| £15,001-£20,000 | 7 | 8.43% | 2 |
| £20,001-£25,000 | 7 | 8.43% | 3 |
| £25,001-£30,000 | 11 | 13.25% | 4 |
| £30,001-£40,000 | 4 | 4.82% | 5 |
| £35,001-£40,000 | 4 | 4.82% | 6 |
| £40,001-£45,000 | 7 | 8.43% | 7 |
| £45,001-£50,000 | 5 | 6.02% | 8 |
| £50,001-£55,000 | 4 | 4.82% | 9 |
| £55,001-£60,000 | 1 | 1.20% | 10 |
| £60,001-£65,000 | 2 | 2.41% | 11 |
| £65,001-£70,000 | 0 | 0.00% | 12 |
| £70,001-£80,000 | 4 | 4.82% | 13 |
| £80,001-£100,000 | 5 | 6.02% | 14 |
| £100,000+ | 3 | 3.61% | 15 |
| Total | 83 | 100% |
| Pension Value | No | Percentage | Code |
|---|---|---|---|
| £0 | 3 | 3.6% | 1 |
| £1-£30,000 | 21 | 25.0% | 2 |
| £30,001-£50,000 | 7 | 8.3% | 3 |
| £50,001-£100,000 | 9 | 10.7% | 4 |
| £100,001-£150,000 | 8 | 9.5% | 5 |
| £150,001-£200,000 | 4 | 4.8% | 6 |
| £200,001-£300,000 | 4 | 4.8% | 7 |
| £300,001-£400,000 | 4 | 4.8% | 8 |
| £400,001-£500,000 | 4 | 4.8% | 9 |
| £500,001-£600,000 | 4 | 4.8% | 10 |
| £600,001-£700,000 | 3 | 3.6% | 11 |
| £700,001-£800,000 | 1 | 1.2% | 12 |
| £800,001-£900,000 | 1 | 1.2% | 13 |
| +£1,000,000 | 3 | 3.6% | 14 |
| Other – Don’t know | 5 | 6.0% | 0 |
| Other – Defined benefit | 1 | 1.2% | 0 |
| Other – £23,000 pa | 1 | 1.2% | 0 |
| Other – £33,000 pa | 1 | 1.2% | 0 |
| Total | 84 | 100.00% | |
3.2 Descriptive statistics
The first question asked if the respondent resided in the Scottish Borders and existed as a control question, should they have completed this in error having not read the introduction. This allowed for those completed in error to be removed.
Question 2 was used to ascertain the respondent’s age. The following question asked for gender and coded Female as ‘1’, Male as ‘2’, Other as ‘3’ and, Prefer not to say as ‘4’. Question 4 related to the time to retirement and coded the response Within six months as ‘1’, 6 months to 1 year as ‘2’ and then in yearly increments until 5+ years. The last option was added as a further control question and when selected the respondents were removed from the final analysis. The questions 5, 6 and 7 were designed to find out more information on the respondent’s background and current position. The table below details the mean, median, mode and standard deviation for the responses.
| Question | Mean | Median | Mode | Std Deviation |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| How old are you? | 56-65 (5.3929) | 56-60 (6.0000) | 56-60 (6.00) | 1.00622 |
| What is your gender? | Female (1.3214) | Female (1.00) | Female (1.00) | 0.54132 |
| When do you plan on retiring? | 1-3 yrs (3.6905) | 2-3 yrs (4.0000) | 4-5 yrs (6.00) | 1.82338 |
| What is the highest level of education you have completed? | HND – Deg (3.6786) | HND (3.0000) | H Sch (1.00) | 2.54672 |
| What industry do you work in? | Hosp / Health (6.4643) | Hosp/Health (6.5000) | Health (7.00) | 4.62952 |
| What is your current income per annum before tax? | £30k – £40k (5.6145) | £25k – £30k (4.0000) | £0-£15k (1.00) | 4.38075 |
In question 26 respondents were asked, if they were not going to use a financial adviser, to outline the reasons for this in a free text box. Only 32 respondents of the 39 (82.05%) who confirmed they would not use an adviser completed this. The most common themes were the cost (9), they would use the support of family/friends (7), they had sufficient knowledge themselves (7), and they did not consider their pension asset values were worth it (7).
These reasons have also been highlighted in previous research. According to the Association of British Insurers (ABI, 2020) 72% of the individuals they surveyed do not wish to pay for financial advice. Bailey et al. (2021) highlighted that older consumers were more likely than younger consumers to obtain support from family and friends than professionals.
Calcagno and Monticone (2015) found that those without financial knowledge may not appreciate they need support. Lastly, Montmarquette and Viennot-Briot (2015) determined that households that have not previously received financial advice can believe that they need to have a higher level of assets before they can obtain this.
When respondents were asked what would encourage them to seek financial advice (Q27), 24 (28.57%) respondents completed the free text box. In line with the answers to Q26 if costs were lower or the advice was free was the most common answer (eight at 33.33%). However, five (20.83%) respondents confirmed that nothing would encourage them to seek financial advice. Larger assets would encourage three (12.5%) respondents while three (12.5%) others would be keen to better understand the costs involved.
The final question (Q28) encouraged respondents to confirm what other resources they might use if they were available. Free online workshops followed by call centre support from the Scottish Borders Council or the government were selected the most. There is a clear preference for free support and that provided either online, in booklets or by call centres rather than face-to-face workshops or paid-for services.
3.3 Non-parametric testing
Kruskal-Wallis has been used to analyse the impact of current income levels. The results from this on questions 11-16 and 18-25 are detailed in the table below.
| Question | Kruskal-Wallis H | Degree Of Freedom | Asymptotic Sig.(2-sided test) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do you know the forecasted amount of your state pension that will be available at state pension age? | 11.891a,b | 13 | 0.537 |
| Do you need to access your pensions in order to fund your retirement? | 6.894a,b | 13 | 0.908 |
| Do you know how you intend to access your pension(s) in retirement? | 12.466a,b | 13 | 0.490 |
| Have you ever received financial advice from a professional financial adviser? | 14.345a,b | 13 | 0.350 |
| Do you currently have a financial adviser? | 23.286a | 13 | 0.038* |
| Do you plan to discuss your retirement with a financial adviser? | 19.219a,b | 13 | 0.116 |
| I understand how pensions work | 32.020a | 13 | 0.002* |
| I understand the various different options for accessing my pensions | 24.314a | 13 | 0.028* |
| I am confident in making decisions regarding accessing my pension benefits | 22.598a | 13 | 0.047* |
| I understand how my pension will be taxed under the option(s) I choose for accessing this | 32.629a | 13 | 0.002* |
| I have a good understanding of the level of income I will need throughout my retirement | 29.047a | 13 | 0.006* |
| I am confident that I will be financially secure throughout my retirement | 32.572a | 13 | 0.002* |
| I would be prepared to pay for financial advice to assist with my retirement planning | 25.964a | 13 | 0.017* |
| I would trust the advice of a professional financial adviser in regards to my retirement planning | 19.983a,b | 13 | 0.096 |
Based on only 83 respondents
* Statistical significance p<0.05
a. The test statistic is adjusted for ties.
b. Multiple comparisons are not performed because the overall test does not show significant differences across samples.
There is a statistical significance (p<0.05) based on income on eight of these questions. Those with a higher level of income were more likely to currently have an adviser in place, in line with the studies by Brancati et al. (2017) and Collins (2010). However, there was no statistical significance based on income levels and the intention to use a financial adviser in retirement.
Those with a higher level of income were also more likely to answer positively to the Likert scale questions on; understanding pensions, understanding the various options for taking pension benefits, confidence in making decisions regarding their income, understanding how pension benefits would be taxed, understanding the level of income they would need in retirement, confidence in being financially secure, and prepared to pay for financial advice.
Normative decision making theory supports consumers making rational choices (Peterson, 2017). In line with this, consumers who are more likely to incur tax charges, such as those with higher income levels, should have a good understanding of the pension options and the impact on their taxes.
The table below shows the results of the tests of the current value of the pensions against the same questions and using the Kruskal-Wallis test.
| Question | Kruskal-Wallis H | Degree Of Freedom | Asymptotic Sig.(2-sided test) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do you know the forecasted amount of your state pension that will be available at state pension age? | 13.098a,b | 14 | 0.519 |
| Do you need to access your pensions in order to fund your retirement? | 9.491a,b | 14 | 0.798 |
| Do you know how you intend to access your pension(s) in retirement? | 16.729a,b | 14 | 0.271 |
| Have you ever received financial advice from a professional financial adviser? | 21.453a,b | 14 | 0.091 |
| Do you currently have a financial adviser? | 24.582a | 14 | 0.039* |
| Do you plan to discuss your retirement with a financial adviser? | 39.246a | 14 | 0.000* |
| I understand how pensions work | 34.193a | 14 | 0.002* |
| I understand the various different options for accessing my pensions | 29.325a | 14 | 0.009* |
| I am confident in making decisions regarding accessing my pension benefits | 22.034a,b | 14 | 0.078 |
| I understand how my pension will be taxed under the option(s) I choose for accessing this | 29.355a | 14 | 0.009* |
| I have a good understanding of the level of income I will need throughout my retirement | 20.545a,b | 14 | 0.114 |
| I am confident that I will be financially secure throughout my retirement | 36.241a | 14 | 0.001* |
| I would be prepared to pay for financial advice to assist with my retirement planning | 26.506a | 14 | 0.022* |
| I would trust the advice of a professional financial adviser in regards to my retirement planning | 19.558a,b | 14 | 0.145 |
Statistical significance p<0.05
a. The test statistic is adjusted for ties.
b. Multiple comparisons are not performed because the overall test does not show significant differences across samples.
These reflect that there is a statistical significance (p<0.05) based on income on seven of these questions. Those with a higher pension fund value were more likely to currently have an adviser in place and intend to speak with a financial adviser regarding retirement plans. This is consistent with the study by Dick et al. (2020) which identified that those with pensions valued over £500,000 were almost five times more likely to seek financial advice. Based on the study by Brancati et al. (2017), the fact that respondents currently had financial advisers or had received advice in the past could also be the reason that they have higher pension funds.
Those with a higher current pension fund value were more likely to answer positively to the Likert scale questions on; understanding pensions, understanding the various options for taking pension benefits, understanding how pension benefits would be taxed, confidence in being financially secure, and prepared to pay for financial advice.
In addition, when testing whether having previously used a financial adviser had an impact on the intention to use a financial adviser for their retirement, the Kruskal Wallis test showed a statistically significant difference (p<0.05). Those who had previously received financial advice were more likely to seek financial advice in planning their retirement. However, this did not hold true if the previous advice was in relation to arranging a mortgage only.
This is consistent with Himawan (2020) who found that taking financial advice results in increased confidence and in consumers being better prepared. Normative isomorphism in Institutional change theory is based on changes through professionalism (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983). Professional financial advisers through previous contact can encourage consumers to seek financial advice at retirement.
This is also supported by cognitive dissonance in Behavioural financial theory, as consumers who have previously made their own decisions may not seek financial advice at retirement due to the risk that their previous decisions would be challenged by a third party (Chang et al., 2016).
| Question | Kruskal-Wallis H | Degree Of Freedom | Asymptotic Sig.(2-sided test) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Have you ever received financial advice from a professional financial adviser? | 26.656a | 2 | 0.000* |
* Statistical significance p<0.05
a. The test statistic is adjusted for ties.
Further groups were also tested against questions 11-16 and 18-25 using Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U. Those assessed were gender, age, time to retirement, industry the respondent works in, the highest level of education the respondents have, and the type of pensions they hold. These results reflect minimal statistical significance in the results across these groups.
4. Findings
This study has shown that more than half of the respondents had previously received financial advice (52.38%), and more than half planned to take financial advice to support them with their retirement planning (53.57%). This is higher than demonstrated on larger surveys and, if replicated across newer studies, would be considered a positive development.
Other studies highlighted that cost, trust, financial education, age, perception of advice, lower income, and preference for automated services, impacted the decision to receive financial advice.
This study was unable to identify a relationship between age and gender and the propensity to seek financial advice.
In addition, financial education was not demonstrated to play a role with respondents confident in their understanding of their pensions and their options, the tax position of their pensions in payment, and advised had a good understanding of the income they would need in retirement. This study therefore adds to those that did not find a link between improved financial behaviours and financial education like Alsemgeest (2015) and those that found only a minor improvement (Fernandes et al., 2014).
The research did identify that cost remains a factor in the decision to seek advice in that consumers remain unwilling to pay for advice. Research by the ABI (2020) highlighted consumers were not prepared to pay as did the study by Moss (2015).
Mis-selling scandals over the years have impacted the levels of trust the general public has in the financial advice industry (Bennett & Gabriel, 2001) but this does not appear to have impacted the respondents trust levels for financial advisers. This could indicate an improvement in public perception of professional advisers.
Prior contact with a financial adviser also has a positive impact on the likelihood of seeking financial advice in retirement. This is consistent with the effects of loyalty and improvement in trust levels as identified by McKechnie (1992). Pension providers and financial advisers should therefore seek to engage with consumers earlier in their life cycle, even where their incomes are lower.
The findings from this study also identified that those with higher income and higher pension values were more likely to understand their pensions, understand their pensions options and more likely to seek financial advice. This supports prior studies undertaken by Collins (2010), Brancati et al. (2017) and Dick et al. (2020). Those with higher incomes are likely to have more complex financial needs in general and therefore appreciate the business of professional advice. They are also more likely to experience losses on investments and the cognitive dissonance aspect of behavioural finance theory finds that consumers prefer to be able to assign blame to a third party in such situations (Chang et al., 2016).
Of those that were not taking financial advice 21.88% confirmed that they did not consider that their pension assets were sufficient to support obtaining financial advice. Finke et al. (2011) found that there is a perception that higher assets are required for financial advice. While 9.38% wanted to know more information on the costs which indicates they are likely not being targeted for marketing, an issue highlighted as a barrier to receiving advice by Allam et al. (2016).
In terms of resources that consumers would use to assist them in their retirement planning, there is a clear preference for free support provided either online, in booklets or by call centres rather than face-to-face workshops or paid-for services. Indicating this is the route that government and industry should focus on as well as looking into ways the costs can be better explained.
5. COnclusions
This research indicates that consumers would trust advice provided by financial advisers but there are barriers to them seeking this in the form of cost, understanding and the perception of value.
Consumers prefer free advice service, support from the government in the form of workshops and booklets and call centres. The government and industry, including both pension providers and financial advisers, should work on providing online free workshops for consumers to access. These could focus on improving understanding of pensions and retirement options.
Work to help de-mystify the costs of advice and highlight the benefits, financial and non-financial, of the service being provided as this is linked to the cost would also add value and help support the benefits of this to those with lower incomes and pension assets, who are less likely to seek advice.
The research also indicates that those with prior contact with financial advisers increase the likelihood of utilising advisers for pension planning. It is therefore recommended that pension providers and financial advisers seek to engage with consumers earlier in their life cycle, even where their incomes are lower.
This research adds to and expands on existing work in the area of financial advice and financial literacy by other researchers by focusing on this rural and coastal region. The study contributes to practice by developing an understanding of the barriers to consumers seeking advice and specifically what will motivate them to seek advice. This information can be applied by the government, pension providers and financial advisers to mitigate the barriers and help them develop new guidance and practices to specifically address the concerns raised.
More analysis is necessary to test or challenge consumers understanding of pension and retirement options rather than relying primarily on the respondents rating of their abilities in this area. In addition, more detailed discussions could take place to understand what prevents consumers from using financial advisers and what action both the government and the industry could take that would encourage their use.
Some limitations to this study should be highlighted regarding the range of respondents. Of the 84 respondents that are included in the analysis over 70% are female and approximately half of the respondents are from the same age group 61-65. In addition, 50 of the respondents held pension benefits that provide guaranteed income in retirement in the form of Defined Benefits and Local Government career average schemes. There is therefore not an equitable representation across these groups. Further analysis to increase the representation across gender and age would be appropriate.
References
ABI. (2020). ABI News Articles 18 November 2020. Association of British Insurers.
https://www.abi.org.uk/news/news-articles/2020/11/abi-calls-for-financial-advice-and-guidance-overhaul-as-polling-reveals-72-of-people-will-not-pay-for-advice/
Allam, S., Echalier, M., James, H., & Luheshi, S. (2016). Consumer Financial Advice and Guidance for High Risk DC Savers. Pensions Policy Institute. http://www.pensionspolicyinstitute.org.uk/publications/reports/consumer-financialadvice-and-guidance-for-high-risk-dc-savers
Alsemgeest, L. (2015). Arguments for and against financial literacy education: where to go from here? International Journal of Consumer Studies, 39(2), 155-161. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.12163
Alyousif, M., & Kalenkoski, C. M. (2017). Who seeks financial advice? Available at SSRN 2943159.
Bailey, P. E., Ebner, N. C., Moustafa, A. A., Phillips, J. R., Leon, T., & Weidemann, G. (2021). The weight of advice in older age. Decision, 8(2), 123.
Barber, B. M., & Odean, T. (1999). The Courage of Misguided Convictions. Financial Analysts Journal, 55(6), 41-55.
Bennett, R., & Gabriel, H. (2001). Corporate reputation, trait covariation and the averaging principle‐The case of the UK pensions mis‐selling scandal. European Journal of Marketing.
Brancati, C., Franklin, B., & Beach, B. (2017). The value of financial advice.
Brenner, L., & Meyll, T. (2020). Robo-advisors: A substitute for human financial advice? Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 25, 100275.
Calcagno, R., & Monticone, C. (2015, 2015/01/01/). Financial literacy and the demand for financial advice. Journal of Banking & Finance, 50, 363-380.
Chang, T. Y., Solomon, D. H., & Westerfield, M. M. (2016). Looking for Someone to Blame: Delegation, Cognitive Dissonance, and the Disposition Effect. The Journal of Finance, 71(1), 267.
Collins, J. M. (2010). A review of financial advice models and the take-up of financial advice. Center for Financial Security WP, 10(5).
Dick, J., Harvey, J., Sharma, S., & University of Northumbria at, N. (2020). The relationship between pension literacy, retirement planning and the propensity to seek financial advice in the light of the 2015 Pension Freedoms Northumbria University]. WorldCat.org. [Great Britain].
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American sociological review, 147-160.
Espadinha, M. (2018). Most over-50s underestimate life expectancy FT Adviser. FT. https://www.ftadviser.com/pensions/2017/11/28/most-over-50s-underestimate-life-expectancy/
FCA. (2018). Retirement Outcomes Review Final Report MS16/1.3 https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/market-studies/ms16-1-3.pdf
FCA. (2019). Retirement Outcomes Review: feedback on CP19/5 and our final rules and guidance PS19/211. https://www.fca.org.uk/publication/policy/ps19-21.pdf
Fernandes, D., Lynch Jr, J. G., & Netemeyer, R. G. (2014). Financial literacy, financial education, and downstream financial behaviors. Management Science, 60(8), 1861-1883.
Finke, M. S., Huston, S. J., & Winchester, D. D. (2011). Financial advice: Who pays. Journal of financial counseling and planning, 22(1), 18.
Gerrans, P., & Hershey, D. A. (2017). Financial Adviser Anxiety, Financial Literacy, and Financial Advice Seeking. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 51(1), 54-90. https://doi.org/10.1111/joca.12120
GOV.UK (2022). The new State Pension https://www.gov.uk/new-state-pension
Himawan, A. (2020). Understanding the non-financial benefits of financial advice. International Longevity Centre UK.
Lachance, M.-E., & Tang, N. (2012). Financial advice and trust. Financial Services Review, 21(3).
Levesque, R. (2007). SPSS programming and data management. A guide for SPSS and SAS Users.
Lusardi, A., & Mitchell, O. S. (2011). Financial literacy and planning: Implications for retirement wellbeing.
Lusardi, A., & Mitchell, O. S. (2014). The Economic Importance of Financial Literacy: Theory and Evidence. Journal of Economic Literature, 52(1), 5-44. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.52.1.5
LV (2021). LV= Wealth and Wellbeing Monitor https://www.lv.com/life-insurance/wealth-and-wellbeing-july-2021
McKechnie, S. (1992). Consumer Buying Behaviour in Financial Services: An Overview. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 10(5).
McKnight, P. E., & Najab, J. (2010). Kruskal‐wallis test. The corsini encyclopedia of psychology, 1-1.
Montmarquette, C., & Viennot-Briot, N. (2015). The value of financial advice. Annals of Economics and Finance, 16(1), 69-94.
Montmarquette, C., & Viennot-Briot, N. (2019). The gamma factors and the value of financial advice. Annals of Economics and Finance, 20(1), 387-411.
Moss, J. G. R. (2015). Personal financial planning advice : barriers to access University of Birmingham]. WorldCat.org. [Great Britain].
http://etheses.bham.ac.uk/6016/
Peterson, M. (2017). An introduction to decision theory. Cambridge University Press.
Newbold, P., Carlson, W. L., & Thorne, B. (2003). Statistics for business and economics (5th ed. ed.). Prentice Hall.
ONS. (2021a). Overview of the UK Population: January 2021. Office of National Statistics. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/articles/overviewoftheukpopulation/january2021
ONS. (2021b). Regional gross disposable household income, UK: 1997 to 2019. Office of National Statistics. https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/regionalaccounts/grossdisposablehouseholdincome/bulletins/regionalgrossdisposablehouseholdincomegdhi/1997to2019
Peterson, M. (2017). An introduction to decision theory. Cambridge University Press.
Salcedo, J., & McCormick, K. (2020). SPSS statistics for dummies (Fourth edition. ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://www.overdrive.com/search?q=62B256CF-204D-4457-88CA-77771C9F4A42
SBC. (2020). Scottish Borders Picture of Poverty. https://scottishborders.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s49952/Item%20No.%209%20-%20Appendix%202%20-%20Picture%20of%20Poverty%20in%20the%20Scottish%20Borders%202021.pdf
Scotland, N. R. o. (2021). Mid-2020 Population Estimates by Council Area in Scotland. National Records of Scotland. https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/files/statistics/council-area-data-sheets/scottish-borders-council-profile.html
Tang, N., & Lachance, M.-E. (2012). Financial advice: What about low-income consumers? Journal of Personal Finance, 11(2), 121.