From the Editor

This issue contains Volume 29 - Issue 3 of Financial Services Review (FSR). I would

like to thank the board and members of the Academy of Financial Services for their contin-

ued support. I continue to work in broadening the scope of articles, while still focusing on

individual financial management and personal financial planning. I encourage authors to

reach out when discussing implications of their findings in a more comprehensive way. As

such, all articles in the Journal more appropriately relate to financial planning issues.

The lead article “The relationship between objective financial knowledge, financial man-

agement, and financial self-efficacy among African American students” is coauthored by

Kenneth White at University of Georgia, Narang Park at Texas State University, Kimberly

Watkins at University of Alabama, Megan McCoy at Kansas State University, and Joycelyn

Morris at Florida International University. The authors examine the factors contributing to

African American college students’ financial literacy. Using the National Student Financial

Wellness Study and structural equation modeling, their findings suggest that for African

American students, objective financial knowledge is not directly or indirectly associated

with financial self-efficacy. They find that only financial management is significantly associ-

ated with increased financial self-efficacy. Their findings posit that experiential learning

may be effective for improving African American students’’ financial literacy.

The second article “Income more Important than Financial Literacy for Improving

Wellbeing” is coauthored by Tracey West at Griffith University, Michelle Cull at Western

Sydney University and Dianne Johnson at Griffith University. The authors study the impact

of financial literacy on financial behaviors. They do not find that university students with

higher levels of financial literacy have reduced money management stress and positive finan-

cial behavior, leading to higher levels of financial wellbeing. They do find that being older

and having higher levels of income contributed most significantly and consistently to

explaining better financial wellbeing.

The third article, “The Effect of Risk Literacy and Visual Aids on Portfolio Choices

among Professional Financial Planners” is coauthored by Meghaan R. Lurtz at University of

Maryland University College, Michael G. Kothakota at WolfBridge Wealth Management,

Stuart J. Heckman at Kansas State University, and Kristy Archuleta at University of

Georgia. In this article the authors explore the impact of risk literacy on the ability to under-

stand and interpret probabilistic trade-offs. The authors use an experimental design to test fi-

nancial planners’ risk literacy and their ability to select the most resilient portfolio based on

whether they were given probabilistic information and a visual representation or only

1057-0810/21/$ – see front matter © 2021 Academy of Financial Services. All rights reserved.

Financial Services Review 29 (2021) v–vi



probabilistic information. Their results indicate that visual representation does help financial

planners determine the appropriate choice, but risk literacy does not.

The final article, “Enumerating the Value of Financial Advice in a Competitive Market:

A Dual Structure Approach & Analysis” is coauthored by Steve P. Fraser at Florida Gulf

Coast University, Brian C. Payne at University of Nebraska at Omaha, and Scott Schatzle at

Mutual Trust Advisory Group. In this article, the authors introduce and examine a compos-

ite, dual fee structure (CDFS) for financial planners that helps quantify the value of financial

advice. They specifically separate financial planning (advice) fees based on total net worth

(NW) from Investment Management (IM) fees based on assets under management (AUM),

which are readily observable and pervasive in the marketplace. The authors state that with

this knowledge, the financial value of the non-IM component of financial planning services

can reduce perceived conflicts of interest by permitting financial planners to generate com-

pensation for non-IM planning activities in a transparent manner, whether or not the client

moves investable funds to the planner.

Thank you to those who make the journal possible, especially the referees and contribut-

ing authors. Over the past year, the following reviewers provided excellent reviews of the

articles you enjoyed within the pages of Financial Services Review. I would like to send a

special thank you to the many reviewers that have significantly contributed to the quality of

our journal by providing timely and thorough reviews of the submissions to our journal.

Please consider submission to the Financial Services Review and rely on the style infor-

mation provided to ease readability and streamline the review process. The Journal wel-

comes articles over the range of areas that comprise personal financial planning. While FSR

articles are certainly diverse in terms of topic, data, and method, they are focused in terms of

motivation. FSR exists to produce research that addresses issues that matter to individuals. I

remain committed to the goal of making Financial Services Review the best academic jour-

nal in individual financial management and personal financial planning.

Best regards,

Stuart Michelson

Editor Financial Services Review

S. Michelson / Financial Services Review 29 (2021) v–vi vi