







































 
 

 

51 
© 2025 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 
 

Economy 
Vol. 12, No. 2, 51-59, 2025 

ISSN(E) 2313-8181: / ISSN(P) 2518-0118: 
DOI: 10.20448/economy.v12i2.6780 

© 2025 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 
 

 
 
 
Bridging Finance and Marketing: The role of psychological traits and social factors 
in investment decisions and positive word-of-mouth 

 
Poltak Sinaga1  

Deddy Marciano2  

Amelia Amelia3  

  
( Corresponding Author)  

1,3Pelita Harapan University, Indonesia. 
Email: poltak.sinaga@uph.edu  
2,3Universitas Surabaya, Indonesia. 
Email: marciano@staff.ubaya.ac.id 
Email: ameliafbe@staff.ubaya.ac.id 

 
 

 
Abstract 

This study investigates the various factors that influence investment decision-making, specifically 
focusing on five key variables: Family Influence, Innovation, Need for Achievement, Risk-Taking, 
and the relationship between Investment Decisions and Positive Word of Mouth. A quantitative 
research approach was employed, and data were analyzed using SPSS version 22.0. The study 
surveyed 250 respondents, consisting mostly of e-commerce users in Indonesia. The purpose was 
to examine how psychological and social variables impact individuals’ investment behaviors and 
how these behaviors contribute to subsequent outcomes such as word-of-mouth promotion. Five 
hypotheses were formulated and tested to determine the significance of each factor. The findings 
revealed that four out of the five hypotheses were supported. Family Influence, Innovation, and 
Need for Achievement were found to have a significant and positive effect on investment decision-
making. In contrast, Risk-Taking showed no significant effect. Furthermore, Investment 
Decisions were shown to have a meaningful and positive relationship with Positive Word of 
Mouth, suggesting that confident and well-informed investment behavior can lead to increased 
consumer advocacy. The results underscore the importance for marketers and business strategists 
to understand and enhance the key drivers of investment behavior. By addressing these factors 
effectively, companies can encourage more favorable consumer decisions and foster stronger 
brand loyalty through word-of-mouth communication. 

 
Keywords: Family influence, Innovation, Investment decision-making, Need for achievement, Positive word of mouth, Risk-taking. 

 
Citation | Sinaga, P., Marciano, D., & Amelia, A. (2025). Bridging 
finance and marketing: The role of psychological traits and social 
factors in investment decisions and positive word-of-mouth. 
Economy, 12(2), 51-59. 10.20448/economy.v12i2.6780 
History:  
Received: 14 May 2025 
Revised: 11 June 2025 
Accepted: 13 June 2025 
Published: 16 June 2025 
Licensed: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons 

Attribution 4.0 License  
Publisher:  Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 
 

Funding:   This research is supported by “Universitas Pelita Harapan, 
Indonesia”. 
Institutional Review Board Statement: The Ethical Committee of the 
Universitas Pelita Harapan, Indonesia   has granted approval for this study  
Transparency: The   authors   confirm   that   the   manuscript   is   an   
honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study; that no vital features of 
the study have been omitted; and that any discrepancies from the study as 
planned have been explained. This study followed all ethical practices during 
writing. 
Data Availability Statement: The  corresponding  author  may  provide  
study data upon reasonable request 
Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing 
interests. 
Authors’ Contributions: All authors contributed equally to the conception 
and design of the study. All authors have read and agreed to the published 
version of the manuscript. 
Acknowledgements: The authors would like to thank UPH and Universitas 
Surabaya also the anonymous referees for their valuable comments and 
suggestions. 

 

Contents 
1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 52 
2. Literature Review ............................................................................................................................................................................ 53 
3. Research Issue and Methodology ................................................................................................................................................. 55 
4. Finding and Discussion ................................................................................................................................................................... 55 

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
https://www.doi.org/10.20448/economy.v12i2.6780
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3927-8320
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6216-5319
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3579-1995


Economy, 2025, 12(2): 51-59 

52 
© 2025 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

5. Discussion .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 57 
6. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 57 
7. Research Limitation ........................................................................................................................................................................ 58 
References .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 58 
 

Contribution of this paper to the literature 
This study uniquely integrates psychological, social, and technological factors specifically family 
influence, need for achievement, risk-taking behavior, and innovation to examine their combined impact 
on investment decisions and positive word of mouth, offering a holistic perspective rarely addressed in 
previous investment behavior research. 

 
1. Introduction 

The process of investment decision-making has undergone significant transformation over time. Initially, 
investment activities were primarily conducted through traditional methods, where investors relied on direct 
interactions with financial advisors and institutions. This conventional approach often involved personalized advice 
and portfolio management services provided by Registered Investment Advisors (RIAs), who operated 
independently from banks and other financial entities (Bodie, Kane, & Marcus, 2014). However, as financial markets 
evolved, both individual and institutional investors sought to enhance efficiency and accessibility through 
technological advancements and financial innovations (Markowitz, 1991). 

One of the most notable developments has been the emergence of digital investment platforms, which have 
significantly expanded access to financial markets. These platforms democratize investing by providing cost-
effective, user-friendly solutions that cater to a broader demographic, including individuals with limited financial 
knowledge or resources (Tapia & Yermo, 2021). The rise of digital trading platforms, robo-advisors, and 
algorithmic investment tools has transformed traditional investment strategies, making financial markets more 
accessible and fostering increased participation (D’Hondt, De Winne, & Van Achter, 2015). 

Beyond technological advancements, investment decisions are also deeply influenced by psychological and 
social factors, particularly family dynamics. Family plays a crucial role in shaping financial literacy, risk tolerance, 
and long-term financial behavior. Individuals who grow up in financially literate households are more likely to 
develop prudent investment habits, whereas those from risk-averse families may demonstrate conservative 
investment behaviors (Lusardi & Mitchell, 2014). Furthermore, family influence extends to investment attitudes, 
shaping perceptions of market opportunities and risk assessment (Guiso, Sapienza, & Zingales, 2008). 

In addition to family influence, the need for achievement serves as a critical driver of investment behavior. 
Investors with a strong need for achievement are motivated by financial success and personal growth, which 
influences their willingness to take calculated risks and explore innovative investment strategies (McClelland, 
1987). These individuals are more likely to seek high-reward opportunities, engage in active portfolio management, 
and adapt to emerging market trends (Barber & Odean, 2001). Their ambition often fuels the adoption of novel 
investment tools and strategies, thereby contributing to the expansion of digital investment platforms (D’Hondt et 
al., 2015). 

Risk-taking behavior is another essential factor shaping investment decisions. Investors with a higher risk 
tolerance tend to embrace diversified portfolios, explore emerging markets, and experiment with unconventional 
financial instruments. Their propensity to take risks is influenced not only by personal financial goals but also by 
external encouragement, including advice from family members or positive experiences shared by peers (Kahneman 
& Tversky, 1979). Risk-tolerant investors are more receptive to adopting financial innovations, further reinforcing 
the role of digital platforms in modern investment strategies (Charness, Gneezy, & Imas, 2013). 

Furthermore, positive word of mouth (WOM) has emerged as a powerful force in shaping investor behavior. 
Successful investment experiences often lead investors to share insights with their social circles, fostering trust and 
encouraging broader market participation (Brown & Reingen, 1987). Social networks, both offline and online, serve 
as key channels for investment-related discussions, with peer recommendations often carrying more weight than 
traditional financial marketing efforts (Bikhchandani, Hirshleifer, & Welch, 1992). The widespread use of digital 
platforms, including social media and investment forums, has amplified the influence of WOM, enabling investors 
to exchange knowledge and strategies more efficiently. 

As financial markets continue to evolve, investors face new challenges and opportunities. Economic 
fluctuations, technological disruptions, and changing market dynamics necessitate a strategic approach to 
investment decision-making. A combination of financial literacy, adaptability to innovation, and risk assessment 
plays a crucial role in navigating modern investment landscapes (Lusardi & Mitchell, 2011). Additionally, empathy-
driven investment strategies—those that account for investors’ subjective financial goals and experiences—can 
enhance decision-making processes and support long-term financial growth (Shefrin & Statman, 2000). 

This research contributes significantly to the understanding of investment behavior by integrating 
psychological, social, and technological perspectives. By examining the interconnected influences of family, 
innovation, need for achievement, and risk-taking on investment decisions and positive word of mouth, this study 
provides valuable insights for financial institutions, policymakers, and investors. The findings highlight the 
importance of financial education, the promotion of technological innovation in investment services, and leveraging 
social networks to enhance investor confidence and market participation. 

In conclusion, the interplay between family influence, innovation, need for achievement, and risk-taking 
behavior plays a pivotal role in shaping investment decisions and fostering positive word of mouth. As financial 
markets undergo continuous transformation, investors and financial service providers must adapt to these evolving 
dynamics, embracing innovative strategies that enhance investment experiences and outcomes. 

 
 
 



Economy, 2025, 12(2): 51-59 

53 
© 2025 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

2. Literature Review 
2.1. Family Influence 

According to Mandell and Klein (2009) family plays a fundamental role in shaping an individual's financial 
literacy, which significantly impacts investment decision-making. Financial literacy, acquired through parental 
guidance and early financial experiences, influences how individuals perceive risks and opportunities in investment 
activities. Families that engage in discussions about financial management tend to foster greater confidence and a 
proactive investment mindset among their members. 

Lusardi and Mitchell (2014) also found that family influence extends beyond financial education to shaping risk 
tolerance. Individuals raised in families with a strong investment culture are more likely to take calculated 
investment risks, whereas those from risk-averse families tend to prefer conservative financial strategies. This 
aligns with the findings of Shim, Barber, Card, Xiao, and Serido (2010) who emphasized that parental financial 
behaviors serve as role models, reinforcing long-term financial habits and decision-making patterns in adulthood. 

Moreover, Jorgensen and Savla (2010) noted that parental influence on financial attitudes significantly affects 
the ability to assess investment opportunities. Parents who actively engage in wealth-building activities and 
discuss financial strategies with their children contribute to higher financial confidence and a greater likelihood of 
investment participation. 

In addition, Gudmunson and Danes (2011) highlighted that intergenerational financial transmission plays a 
crucial role in shaping investment behavior. Children from families with a history of asset accumulation and stock 
market participation are more inclined to make informed investment decisions, relying on parental guidance as a 
reference point for their own financial choices. 

H1: Family influence has a significant effect on investment decision-making. 
 

2.2. Innovation 
According to Schindler (2017) financial innovation has significantly transformed investment decision-making 

by increasing accessibility, efficiency, and the availability of data-driven insights. Technological advancements such 
as robo-advisors, algorithmic trading, and blockchain-based investment platforms have reshaped traditional 
investment strategies, allowing investors to make more informed and automated decisions. 

Cheng and Quiring (2019) emphasized that the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning 
in financial markets has improved the ability to analyze complex market trends, predict asset price movements, and 
optimize portfolio allocations. These innovations reduce human biases and improve decision-making by processing 
vast amounts of data with greater accuracy. 

Furthermore, Philippon (2016) argued that financial innovation has led to a democratization of investing, 
enabling retail investors to participate in markets that were once dominated by institutional players. The rise of 
low-cost investment platforms, fractional shares, and exchange-traded funds (ETFs) has lowered the barriers to 
entry, making investment opportunities more inclusive. 

Lerner and Tufano (2011) highlighted that innovations in fintech have revolutionized risk assessment and 
investment strategies, providing investors with real-time risk analytics and automated financial planning tools. 
These developments help investors optimize asset allocation while considering risk tolerance and financial goals. 

Moreover, Chishti and Barberis (2016) found that fintech innovations have increased investor engagement by 
offering customized investment solutions based on behavioral finance principles. Personalized recommendations, 
automated rebalancing, and AI-driven financial coaching have made investing more accessible, even for individuals 
with limited financial literacy. 

H2: Innovation has a significant effect on investment decision-making. 
 

2.3. Need for Achievement 
According to McClelland (1961) individuals with a high need for achievement are more likely to set ambitious 

financial goals and seek investment opportunities that align with their aspirations for success. This psychological 
drive encourages investors to engage in strategic decision-making, focusing on maximizing returns and optimizing 
portfolio performance. 

Rauch and Frese (2007) found that individuals with strong achievement motivation demonstrate higher 
financial risk tolerance and proactive investment behavior. Their desire for accomplishment leads them to explore 
innovative investment strategies, such as venture capital, high-growth stocks, and alternative assets. 

Furthermore, Barba-Sánchez and Atienza-Sahuquillo (2012) argued that need for achievement correlates with 
entrepreneurial investment behavior, where individuals are more inclined to invest in businesses or startups with 
high-growth potential. These investors often exhibit long-term commitment and strategic patience, allowing them 
to withstand short-term market fluctuations. 

Zhao, Seibert, and Hills (2005) also found that achievement-oriented investors tend to leverage financial 
knowledge and analytical skills to make informed decisions, reducing the impact of emotional biases. Their 
structured approach to investing contributes to more sustainable financial growth and portfolio diversification. 

H3: Need for Achievement has a significant effect on Investment Decision-Making. 
 

2.4. Risk Taking 
Investment decisions inherently involve risk, and individuals with a higher risk tolerance tend to engage in 

more diversified and aggressive investment strategies (Kahneman & Tversky, 1979). The Prospect Theory 
suggests that risk-taking behavior is influenced by how investors perceive potential gains and losses, with risk-
seeking individuals more likely to invest in volatile assets such as stocks, cryptocurrencies, and derivatives. 

Blais and Weber (2006) emphasized that risk-taking behavior is shaped by both cognitive and emotional 
factors, including past investment experiences, financial literacy, and market confidence. Investors with a high-risk 
appetite are more willing to explore emerging markets, new asset classes, and innovative financial instruments. 

Furthermore, Grinblatt and Keloharju (2009) found that personality traits, such as overconfidence and 
optimism, significantly influence risk-taking behavior in financial decisions. Investors who perceive themselves as 



Economy, 2025, 12(2): 51-59 

54 
© 2025 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

financially competent are more likely to take risks, believing they can outperform the market through informed 
decision-making. 

Additionally, Panno (2019) found that risk-taking is positively correlated with investment success when paired 
with financial knowledge and analytical decision-making skills. Well-informed risk-takers benefit from higher 
returns and portfolio growth over time. 

H4: Risk-Taking has a significant effect on Investment Decision-Making. 
 

2.5. Investment Decision  
According to Arndt (1967) positive word of mouth (WOM) is one of the most influential factors in financial 

decision-making. Investors who have positive experiences with financial products or services are more likely to 
share their insights with peers, influencing the investment behavior of others. 

Bughin, Doogan, and Vetvik (2010) found that peer recommendations and social influence play a crucial role in 
investment decisions, particularly in financial markets where uncertainty is high. Positive WOM creates trust and 
credibility, encouraging more individuals to participate in investment activities. 

Furthermore, East, Hammond, and Lomax (2008) argued that investors who achieve significant financial gains 
are more inclined to share their success stories, leading to greater adoption of investment platforms, financial 
products, and trading strategies. This social validation effect reinforces market participation and investor 
confidence. 

Berger and Milkman (2012) emphasized that investments with high perceived value generate more WOM, as 
investors are eager to discuss profitable ventures and strategies. Additionally, investment firms and financial 
service providers benefit from customer advocacy, where satisfied investors actively promote their services. 

H5: Investment Decisions have a significant effect on Positive Word of Mouth. 
 

2.6. Positive Word of Mouth 
Positive Word of Mouth (WOM) plays a significant role in shaping investment decisions by influencing 

investor perceptions, trust, and market participation. One relevant theory is the Diffusion of Innovation Theory 
Rogers (1962) which explains how new financial products or investment strategies spread through social networks. 
Investors who successfully adopt innovative investment tools, such as robo-advisors or exchange-traded funds 
(ETFs), tend to share their positive experiences, encouraging wider adoption.  

Additionally, the Social Influence Theory Kelman (1958) suggests that investors rely on social validation from 
peers or financial experts when making investment decisions. Positive recommendations from trusted individuals 
or communities enhance credibility and persuade others to invest in similar assets. The Signaling Theory Shefrin 
and Statman (2000) also plays a crucial role in investment-related WOM, as successful investors act as signals of 
financial credibility. When individuals share their positive investment experiences, they unintentionally provide 
signals to others about the reliability and profitability of certain financial instruments. Furthermore, the 
Expectation Confirmation Theory (Oliver, 1980) states that investors who experience returns exceeding their 
expectations are more likely to share favorable reviews, reinforcing confidence in particular investment products or 
platforms.  

Lastly, the Prospect Theory Kahneman and Tversky (1979) suggests that individuals evaluate investment 
gains and losses asymmetrically. Investors who experience higher-than-expected gains are more likely to spread 
positive WOM, creating a ripple effect that attracts new investors to the market. These theories collectively 
highlight the powerful impact of positive WOM in shaping investment behaviors and fostering greater financial 
market participation. 

 



Economy, 2025, 12(2): 51-59 

55 
© 2025 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

 

Figure 1. Research model. 

3. Research Issue and Methodology 
This study utilizes the conceptual framework shown in Figure 1 to examine the intricate relationships 

among family influence, innovation, need for achievement, and risk-taking behavior in shaping investment 
decisions and encouraging positive word-of-mouth. Gender and investment experience are included as control 
variables to account for demographic and experiential differences. 

Data were collected from 250 respondents across Indonesia, all of whom had prior investment experience 
and had shared positive word-of-mouth related to their investment activities. Of the participants, 39.23% were male 
and 60.77% were female. 

A purposive sampling method was used to target individuals with relevant investment backgrounds. The 
survey was distributed over a three-day period, and participants were given one week to complete and return the 
questionnaire. The self-administered questionnaire was designed to measure investment behavior and decision-
making in relation to the study’s key constructs. Strict methodological standards were followed throughout the 
data collection process to ensure reliability and validity. Participation was entirely voluntary, ensuring that the 
responses were authentic and free from coercion. 

 

4. Finding and Discussion  
4.1. Characteristics of Respondents 

In every research study, understanding the characteristics of the respondents is crucial. One important aspect 
that influences differences in individual views, behavior, and preferences is gender and age. 
 
Table 1. Characteristics of respondents based on gender. 

No Description Qty Percentage 

1 Male 138 39.23% 

2 Female 112 60.77% 
Total Qty 250 250 

Source: Questionnaire respondents, 2025. 

 
Based on Table 1, out of 250 respondents, 138 (55.2%) are women and 112 (44.8%) are men, indicating that 

female investors make up the majority in this study. Psychological research highlights that men and women often 
exhibit different investment behaviors: men typically demonstrate higher risk tolerance and prefer aggressive 
strategies, while women are generally more risk-averse and inclined toward stable, long-term investments (Barber 
& Odean, 2001). The greater representation of female investors in this study may reflect a broader shift, with more 
women gaining financial independence and actively engaging in investment decisions. This trend is consistent with 
research showing increased female participation in financial decision-making, driven by rising financial literacy and 
improved access to digital investment platforms (Lusardi & Mitchell, 2014). 
 
 
 
 



Economy, 2025, 12(2): 51-59 

56 
© 2025 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

Table 2. Characteristics of respondents based on age. 

No Description Qty Percentage 

1 21 – 30  133 53% 
2 31 – 40  90 36% 

3 41 – 50  18 7% 
4 51- 56  9 4% 

Total qty 250 100% 
Source: Questionnaire respondents, 2025. 

 
Based on Table 2, all respondents fall within the productive age group in Indonesian society. The majority of 

respondents are aged 21-30 years, comprising 53% of the sample. This is followed by respondents aged 31-40 
years, who account for 36%, while those aged 41-50 years represent 7%. Lastly, respondents aged 51-56 years 
constitute 4% of the total sample. 

 

4.2. Validity, Reliability and Multicollinearity Test  
The data obtained from the questionnaire were analyzed using SPSS software. The outputs from this analysis 

include the corrected item-total correlation and Cronbach’s alpha, which assess the validity and reliability of each 
questionnaire item based on the indicators of each variable. To meet the validity criteria, the corrected item-total 
correlation must exceed the R Table value (0.196). For the reliability test, Cronbach’s alpha must be greater than 
0.7 (Ghozali, 2017). Additionally, to pass the multicollinearity test, the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) must be less 
than 10, and the tolerance value must be greater than 0.1. 

 
Table 3. Validity, reliability, and multicollinearity test. 

Variable Indicator Validity test Reliability test Tolerance VIF 

Family influence (FI) 
FI1 0.724 

0.874 0.525 1.904 FI2 0.787 
FI3 0.758 

Innovation (IN) 
IN1 0.819 

0.916 0.458 2.185 IN2 0.853 
IN3 0.819 

Need for achievement (NA) 
NA1 0.771 

0.894 0.387 2.583 NA2 0.813 
NA3 0.791 

Risk taking (RT) 
RT1 0.739 

0.878 0.427 2.340 RT2 0.814 
RT3 0.739 

Investment decision (ID) 
ID1 0.773 

0.876 - - ID2 0.796 
ID3 0.710 

Positive word of mouth (PWOM) 
PWOM1 0.778 

0.911 - - PWOM2 0.874 
PWOM3 0.814 

 
Based on the tests for data validity, reliability, and multicollinearity from Table 3, it is confirmed that all 

indicators used to estimate each variable are valid and reliable, and they also pass the multicollinearity test. 
 

4.3. Normality Test 
The normality test is conducted to assess whether the residuals in the regression model follow a normal 

distribution (Ghozali, 2017). In this context, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test is typically employed. If the Asymp. 
Sig. value exceeds 0.05, it indicates that there is no significant deviation from normality, and thus the residuals are 
considered to follow a normal distribution. 
 
Table 4. Normality test. 

No. Equation Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) Critical number Description 

1.  FI, IN, NA, RT→ ID 0.200 0.05 Normal 

2.  ID → PWOM 0.052 0.05 Normal 

 
According to Table 4, the Asymp. Sig. value exceeds 0.05, indicating that there is no significant deviation from 

normality in the data. Therefore, it can be concluded that the data collected in this study are approximately 
normally distributed. 

 
Table 5. Multiple regression and T-test. 

Variable Standardized Coef. Sig Description 

FI*ID 0.255 0.000 Hypothesis accepted 
IN*ID 0.139 0.006 Hypothesis accepted 
NA*ID 0.520 0.000 Hypothesis accepted 
RT*ID 0.045 0.387 Hypothesis rejected 
ID*PWOM 0.781 0.000 Hypothesis accepted 

Note: * = The influence of the independent variables on the dependent variable. 

 
 
 



Economy, 2025, 12(2): 51-59 

57 
© 2025 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

4.4. Multiple Regression and T-Test 
The results of the t-test significance from Table 5 indicate that five hypotheses were tested. The results show 

that hypotheses H1, H2, H3, and H5 are supported, as the t-test values for these variables are below 0.05. 
Therefore, it can be concluded that H1 (Family Influence), H2 (Innovation), H3 (Need for Achievement), and H5 
(Investment Decision * Positive Word of Mouth) are supported. 

However, hypothesis H4 (Risk Taking * Investment Decision) is rejected, as the t-test value is above 0.05 
(0.387). 

Additionally, from Table 5, it can be concluded that the Need for Achievement (NA) has the largest positive 
direct influence on Investment Decision (ID), with a regression coefficient of 0.520. The factors with the greatest 
positive influence on Investment Decision are Family Influence (FI) with a coefficient of 0.255, followed by 
Innovation (IN) with a coefficient of 0.139, and lastly, Risk Taking (RT) with a coefficient of 0.045. 

 
Table 6. F-test. 

Variable Sig Standard Hypothesis 

FI, IN, NA, RT→ ID 0.000 0.05 Hypothesis Accepted 

ID → PWOM 0.000 0.05 Hypothesis Accepted 

 

4.5. F-Test 
Based on Table 6, it can be stated that there is a significant influence of Family Influence (FI), Innovation (IN), 

Need for Achievement (NA), and Risk Taking (RT) on Investment Decision (ID), as well as an influence of 
Investment Decision (ID) on Positive Word of Mouth (PWOM), with all hypotheses being accepted. 

 

5. Discussion 
This model was developed to examine the impact of various psychological and social factors on investment 

decision-making (IDM), including Family Influence (FI), Innovation (IN), Need for Achievement (NA), and Risk-
Taking (RT), with Positive Word of Mouth (PWOM) serving as a moderating variable. The research established 
that Family Influence, Innovation, and Need for Achievement significantly affect investment decision-making, 
while Risk-Taking did not. Based on the data analysis, the study confirms that factors such as familial support, 
openness to innovation, and personal achievement goals drive the investment decisions of individuals. 

Additionally, the findings suggest that gender and age play a role in shaping investment behaviors. The 
majority of respondents in the study were women aged 21-30, which highlights the importance of understanding 
this demographic in investment decision-making processes. These results indicate that financial platforms and 
investment firms should consider targeting younger, tech-savvy women, who are more likely to make investment 
decisions and influence others within their social circles. 

The positive regression coefficient for Family Influence indicates a unidirectional relationship, meaning that as 
family influence increases, so does the likelihood of making investment decisions. This supports Hypothesis 1 (H1), 
confirming that familial support plays a crucial role in the decision-making process. The findings align with 
previous research that highlights the significant role of family in shaping financial choices, especially in areas 
requiring long-term planning like investment. Similarly, Hypothesis 2 (H2), which proposed that Innovation 
influences investment decisions, was also supported. Although the effect was moderate, the data shows that 
individuals open to innovation are more likely to make investment decisions, emphasizing the relevance of new 
financial products and services that appeal to more innovative investors. 

Hypothesis 3 (H3), concerning the Need for Achievement, was strongly supported as well. Individuals with a 
high need for achievement were found to make investment decisions at higher rates. This finding highlights the 
influence of personal ambition and goals for financial success on investment behavior. Investors who are driven by 
achievement may be more willing to take calculated risks and seek opportunities for growth, which is critical in 
investment decision-making. 

On the other hand, Hypothesis 4 (H4), which suggested that Risk-Taking significantly impacts investment 
decisions, was rejected. The study found that risk-taking behavior did not significantly influence investment 
decision-making, which contradicts traditional views that assume investors are inherently risk-tolerant. This could 
be due to the moderating effect of other factors such as family influence and personal achievement, which may 
outweigh the direct influence of risk-taking on investment decisions. 

Finally, the significant positive relationship found between Investment Decisions and Positive Word of Mouth 
(Hypothesis 5, H5) underscores the importance of social influence in financial decision-making. Individuals who 
make investment decisions are more likely to share their experiences with others, thereby spreading information 
about investments through word-of-mouth. This finding aligns with the theory that social networks play a 
significant role in financial behaviors, with recommendations from trusted peers serving as important drivers of 
investment decisions. 

In conclusion, the study provides a comprehensive understanding of the psychological, social, and demographic 
factors that influence investment decision-making. Family influence, innovation, and need for achievement were 
found to have a significant impact on investment decisions, while risk-taking was not as influential as expected. 
The positive effect of investment decisions on Positive Word of Mouth further emphasizes the role of social 
influence in shaping investment behaviors. These insights can inform marketing strategies for investment 
platforms and financial advisors, helping them target specific demographics and build trust through social 
validation. 

 

6. Conclusion 
Based on the results of the analysis, this research has successfully contributed to the understanding of the 

psychological and social factors influencing investment decision-making (IDM). Specifically, four hypotheses were 
supported in this study, confirming the significant impact of Family Influence (FI), Innovation (IN), and Need for 



Economy, 2025, 12(2): 51-59 

58 
© 2025 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

Achievement (NA) on investment decisions. However, the hypothesis related to Risk-Taking (RT) was rejected. 
The study highlights that family support, innovation, and personal ambition play key roles in shaping individuals’ 
investment choices, while risk-taking does not have as significant an effect as initially expected. The research also 
emphasizes the important role of Positive Word of Mouth (PWOM) in influencing investment decisions, with a 
strong positive relationship found between investment decisions and PWOM. 

The findings suggest that the most significant variable in making investment decisions is the influence of 
family. Therefore, investment platforms should target customers by acknowledging and incorporating family 
influences into their marketing strategies. For instance, providing tools or advice that encourage family 
involvement in financial planning could enhance customers' decision-making processes. Additionally, innovation is 
another vital factor, with individuals who are open to new ideas and technologies being more likely to make 
investment decisions. Financial institutions should aim to offer innovative and technology-driven products to 
attract this demographic, especially by promoting investment tools that incorporate cutting-edge technologies. 

Furthermore, the study found that Need for Achievement (NA) plays a significant role in investment decision-
making. Individuals who are driven by a desire for success and personal achievement tend to be more engaged in 
making investment decisions. Investment firms should consider this aspect and offer personalized financial 
products that appeal to goal-oriented individuals. Tailoring services that help customers set and achieve their 
financial goals could foster a stronger connection with this target market. 

The hypothesis related to Risk-Taking (RT), however, was rejected, suggesting that risk-taking behaviors are 
not as strongly correlated with investment decisions as typically assumed. This finding could indicate that other 
factors, such as family influence or personal ambition, may outweigh the effect of risk tolerance in financial 
decision-making. It is crucial for financial institutions to focus more on offering stable and secure investment 
opportunities that appeal to conservative investors, rather than solely emphasizing high-risk, high-reward 
products. 

Lastly, the research underscores the importance of Positive Word of Mouth (PWOM) in reinforcing 
investment decisions. Individuals who make investment decisions are more likely to share their experiences and 
influence others in their social networks. Therefore, financial institutions and platforms should leverage the power 
of social influence in their marketing strategies. Encouraging satisfied investors to share their experiences and 
recommend investment products can further enhance customer acquisition and loyalty. 

In conclusion, this study highlights the significant psychological and social factors influencing investment 
decision-making. Family influence, innovation, and personal ambition emerged as key drivers in shaping 
investment behaviors, while risk-taking was not as influential as expected. The positive effect of investment 
decisions on Positive Word of Mouth further emphasizes the role of social influence in financial decision-making. 
Financial institutions and platforms should tailor their marketing strategies to focus on these factors, while also 
encouraging the social sharing of investment experiences to build trust and drive customer acquisition. 

 

7. Research Limitation 
This study is limited by its focus on e-commerce users in Indonesia, and future research should apply the same 

model or a modified version to different populations for more generalizable results. Expanding the respondent base 
and incorporating additional variables such as income, age, and gender could further enhance understanding of the 
factors influencing investment decisions and consumer behavior. Longitudinal studies could also provide insights 
into how investment behaviors evolve over time. Including control variables like financial literacy and market 
conditions would help refine the relationships found in this study, contributing to a broader understanding of the 
psychological, social, and economic factors that affect investment decision-making and Positive Word of Mouth. 

 

References 
Arndt, J. (1967). Role of product-related conversations in the diffusion of a new product. Journal of Marketing Research, 4(3), 291-295. 

https://doi.org/10.1177/002224376700400308 

Barba-Sánchez, V., & Atienza-Sahuquillo, C. (2012). Entrepreneurial behavior: Impact of motivation factors on decision to create a new 

venture. Investigaciones europeas de dirección y economía de la empresa, 18(2), 132-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1135-2523(12)70003-

5 

Barber, B. M., & Odean, T. (2001). Boys will be boys: Gender, overconfidence, and common stock investment. The quarterly journal of 

economics, 116(1), 261-292. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355301556400 

Berger, J., & Milkman, K. L. (2012). What makes online content viral? Journal of Marketing Research, 49(2), 192-205. 

https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.10.0353 

Bikhchandani, S., Hirshleifer, D., & Welch, I. (1992). A theory of fads, fashion, custom, and cultural change as informational cascades. Journal 

of Political Economy, 100(5), 992-1026. https://doi.org/10.1086/261849 

Blais, A.-R., & Weber, E. U. (2006). A domain-specific risk-taking (DOSPERT) scale for adultpopulations. Judgment and Decision Making, 

1(1), 33-47. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1930297500000334 

Bodie, Z., Kane, A., & Marcus, A. J. (2014). Investments (10th ed.). Chicago MLA: McGraw-Hill Education. 

Brown, J. J., & Reingen, P. H. (1987). Social ties and word-of-mouth referral behavior. Journal of Consumer Research, 14(3), 350-362. 

https://doi.org/10.1086/209118 

Bughin, J., Doogan, J., & Vetvik, O. J. (2010). A new way to measure word-of-mouth marketing. McKinsey Quarterly, 2(1), 113-116. 

https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429263965-7 

Charness, G., Gneezy, U., & Imas, A. (2013). Experimental methods: Eliciting risk preferences. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 

87, 43-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2012.12.023 

Cheng, J., & Quiring, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in finance: The impact on investment decision-making. Journal of Financial Technology, 

12(3), 125-141.  

Chishti, S., & Barberis, J. (2016). The FinTech book: The financial technology handbook for investors, entrepreneurs, and visionaries. West Sussex: 

Wiley. 

D’Hondt, C., De Winne, R., & Van Achter, M. (2015). Online trading behavior, attention, and limit order placement. Journal of Economic 

Behavior & Organization, 116, 113-129.  

https://doi.org/10.1177/002224376700400308
https://doi.org/10.1016/s1135-2523(12)70003-5
https://doi.org/10.1016/s1135-2523(12)70003-5
https://doi.org/10.1162/003355301556400
https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.10.0353
https://doi.org/10.1086/261849
https://doi.org/10.1017/s1930297500000334
https://doi.org/10.1086/209118
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429263965-7
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2012.12.023


Economy, 2025, 12(2): 51-59 

59 
© 2025 by the authors; licensee Asian Online Journal Publishing Group 

 

 

East, R., Hammond, K., & Lomax, W. (2008). Measuring the impact of positive and negative word of mouth on brand purchase probability. 

International Journal of Research in Marketing, 25(3), 215-224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2008.04.001 

Ghozali, I. (2017). Multivariate analysis with SPSS. Indonesia: Diponegoro University Press. 

Grinblatt, M., & Keloharju, M. (2009). Sensation seeking, overconfidence, and trading activity. The Journal of Finance, 64(2), 549-578. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2008.04.001 

Gudmunson, C. G., & Danes, S. M. (2011). Family financial socialization: Theory and critical review. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 

32, 644-667. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-011-9275-y 

Guiso, L., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2008). Trusting the stock market. The Journal of Finance, 63(6), 2557-2600. 

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2008.01408.x 

Jorgensen, B. L., & Savla, J. (2010). Financial literacy of young adults: The importance of parental socialization. Family Relations, 59(4), 465-

478. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2010.00616.x 

Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263-291. 

https://doi.org/10.2307/1914185 

Kelman, H. C. (1958). Compliance, identification, and internalization three processes of attitude change. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2(1), 51-

60. https://doi.org/10.1177/002200275800200106 

Lerner, J., & Tufano, P. (2011). The consequences of financial innovation: a counterfactual research agenda. Annual Review of Financial 

Economics, 3(1), 41-85. https://doi.org/10.3386/w16780 

Lusardi, A., & Mitchell, O. S. (2011). Financial literacy and retirement planning in the United States. Journal of Pension Economics & Finance, 

10(4), 509-525. https://doi.org/10.1017/s147474721100045x 

Lusardi, A., & Mitchell, O. S. (2014). The economic importance of financial literacy: Theory and evidence. American Economic Journal: Journal 

of Economic Literature, 52(1), 5-44. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.52.1.5 

Mandell, L., & Klein, L. S. (2009). The impact of financial literacy education on subsequent financial behavior. Journal of Financial Counseling 

and Planning, 20(1), 15-25. https://doi.org/10.1891/1052-3073.30.1.132 

Markowitz, H. M. (1991). Foundations of portfolio theory. The Journal of Finance, 46(2), 469-477. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-

6261.1991.tb02669.x 

McClelland, D. C. (1961). The achieving society. Princeton: Van Nostrand. 

McClelland, D. C. (1987). Human motivation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 

Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences of satisfaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 17(4), 

460-469. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378001700405 

Panno, A. (2019). Decision-making under uncertainty: The role of risk-taking behavior and financial literacy. Journal of Behavioral Finance, 

20(2), 195-205.  

Philippon, T. (2016). The fintech opportunity. National Bureau of Economic Research. No. w22476. 

Rauch, A., & Frese, M. (2007). Let's put the person back into entrepreneurship research: A meta-analysis on the relationship between 

business owners' personality traits, business creation, and success. European Journal of work and organizational psychology, 16(4), 353-

385. https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320701595438 

Rogers, E. M. (1962). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press. 

Schindler, J. (2017). FinTech and financial innovation: Drivers and depth. Finance and Economics Discussion Series, Board of Governors of the 

Federal Reserve System. https://doi.org/10.17016/FEDS.2017.081 

Shefrin, H., & Statman, M. (2000). Behavioral portfolio theory. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 35(2), 127-151. 

https://doi.org/10.2307/2676187 

Shim, S., Barber, B. L., Card, N. A., Xiao, J. J., & Serido, J. (2010). Financial socialization of first-year college students: The roles of parents, 

work, and education. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 39, 1457-1470. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-009-9432-x 

Tapia, W., & Yermo, J. (2021). Implications of behavioral economics for mandatory individual account pension systems. OECD Working Papers on 

Insurance and Private Pensions, No. 11. 

Zhao, H., Seibert, S. E., & Hills, G. E. (2005). The mediating role of self-efficacy in the development of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of 

Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1265. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1265 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Asian Online Journal Publishing Group is not responsible or answerable for any loss, damage or liability, etc. caused in relation to/arising out of the use of the content. 
Any queries should be directed to the corresponding author of the article. 
 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2008.04.001
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2008.04.001
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10834-011-9275-y
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2008.01408.x
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2010.00616.x
https://doi.org/10.2307/1914185
https://doi.org/10.1177/002200275800200106
https://doi.org/10.3386/w16780
https://doi.org/10.1017/s147474721100045x
https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.52.1.5
https://doi.org/10.1891/1052-3073.30.1.132
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1991.tb02669.x
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1991.tb02669.x
https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378001700405
https://doi.org/10.1080/13594320701595438
https://doi.org/10.17016/FEDS.2017.081
https://doi.org/10.2307/2676187
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-009-9432-x
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1265

