Gender Equity in Financial Perceptions Among Mexican Youth
Exploring the Nexus: Gender Equitable Attitudes & Financial Perceptions of Mexican Adolescents
Rhea Kartha¹, Amita Vyas¹, Nitasha Nagaraj¹
- Department of Prevention and Community Health, Milken Institute School of Public Health, George Washington University, Washington, DC 20052, USA
OPEN ACCESS
PUBLISHED: 31 March 2025
CITATION: Kartha, R., Vyas, A., et al., 2025. Exploring the Nexus: Gender Equitable Attitudes & Financial Perceptions of Mexican Adolescents. Medical Research Archives, [online] 13(3).
https://doi.org/10.18103/mra.v13i3.6312
COPYRIGHT:© 2025 European Society of Medicine. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
DOI https://doi.org/10.18103/mra.v13i3.6312
ISSN 2375-1924
Abstract
Background: The aim of the study is to assess the relationship between gender equitable attitudes and norms, and gender based financial perceptions among adolescent boys and girls in Mexico. This evaluation is part of a larger Girl Rising Financial Education Initiative conducted amongst adolescents in Mexico.
Methods: A quantitative study was conducted including 979 adolescents (boys n=385, girls n=589) at baseline. Gender equitable attitudes were measured using a scale consisting of 3 subdomains (roles/privileges/restrictions, gender attributes and gender violence) and gender based financial perceptions were measured using a vignette.
Results: Multivariate Linear regression analyses revealed that positive gender based financial perceptions were associated with significantly higher gender equitable attitudes after adjusting for sociodemographic differences. Girls reported significantly higher gender equitable attitudes when compared to boys (Model 1: β = 0.240, 95% CI [0.218, 0.347], p <0.001).
Conclusion: Introducing financial education initiatives at an early age can shape the way young people interact with money. It not only improves overall literacy but also reinforces the idea that financial literacy and decision-making are not limited by gender.
Keywords
Adolescents, Financial perceptions, Gender norms, Gender
Introduction
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) defines financial literacy as both the knowledge, and behavior required to make sound financial decisions. This encompasses not only being informed about financial matters but also having the skills, attitude, and motivation to effectively manage one’s finances for long-term wellbeing. Lusardi and Mitchell refer to financial literacy as a form of “investment in human capital”, by which they mean that investing in financial knowledge can improve one’s ability to navigate complex financial concepts and achieve success. Due to the wide array of modern financial products and services in the market, financial literacy is now more crucial than ever. These products, such as student loans, mortgages, credit cards, pension accounts, and annuities, are challenging for financially inexperienced individuals to comprehend and manage effectively. Without a solid understanding of financial concepts and practices, individuals may struggle to make informed decisions regarding borrowing, saving, investing, and managing assets.
Considering the significant impact of financial literacy on economic behaviors, it is critical to understand the extent of financial literacy among diverse populations, especially to identify disparities in financial skills among different demographic groups such as women, adolescents, and those with lower socioeconomic status. The 2014 S&P Global FinLit Survey revealed that globally, only 1 in 3 people are financially literate. The rate of financial literacy varies significantly worldwide, even among member nations of G7 and G20 blocks, which report low levels of literacy despite higher national income.
GENDER EQUITABLE ATTITUDES & FINANCIAL PERCEPTIONS
Gender attitudes are defined as an individual’s perceptions, beliefs, or support of gender norms. Gender norms refer to traditional, social principles that dictate human behavior based on gender identity and what is deemed acceptable. These norms often uphold a hierarchical system that favors behaviors and roles associated with masculinity over those associated with femininity. This structure further perpetuates systemic inequality by reinforcing existing power imbalances between men and women. Consequently, women are steered towards early marriage, unpaid care work, and jobs that are deemed less important and lower paying, thus putting them at risk of financial instability and dependence. In most households, women are rarely involved in financial decision-making, a role traditionally assumed by men. Disaggregated data from financial literacy studies highlight heightened gaps in literacy by gender, age, and socioeconomic status. Women not only score significantly less than men in financial knowledge, but they also have a higher tendency to indicate that they feel less confident, and “don’t know” the correct answer to financial questions. Therefore, empowering women with financial education at an early age can play a critical role in narrowing this gender gap. The significance of financial and livelihood education for youth is further underscored in the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG 4.3, 4.4, 4.6), emphasizing the role of financial literacy in achieving broader societal and economic objectives.
Mexico has made significant progress in empowering women in the recent years. However, existing traditional gender roles and stereotypes perpetuate inequities in varying fields: education, economics, health, and politics. Women perform over 75% of unpaid care work, leaving very little time for paid work. Additionally, only 44.5% of working age Mexican women are employed, compared to 78.5% of employed men. Gender gaps in employment and earnings tend to widen during childbearing years, thereby disproportionately affecting women’s ability to participate in the workforce, their earnings, and their opportunities for career advancement.
FINANCE IN THE CONTEXT OF MEXICO
Mexico ranks 12th among G20 member nations for financial education, with a score of 57.62%. Low financial literacy among its population is one of the contributing factors to Mexico’s delayed financial and economic development. Several studies have reported low financial literacy among high school students in Mexico, with less than 1 in 5 students demonstrating an understanding of basic financial concepts. Despite the adoption of financial inclusion in 2012, access to financial services is yet limited, and a substantial proportion of the population continues to rely on cash and informal credit systems. In 2022, only 46.2% of individuals aged 15 and older in Mexico reported having an account at a financial institution, with a notable gender disparity—39.1% of women had an account compared to 54.1% of men—highlighting persistent barriers to financial inclusion for women. The 2021 National Survey of Financial Inclusion revealed that among individuals with a savings account, 14.9% were men, while only 2.4% were women. Notably, married individuals reported worse financial inclusion as compared to unmarried individuals.
GIRL RISING
Girl Rising is a global campaign that uses powerful storytelling and partnerships to inspire social action and challenge long-held views about girls and women. Girl Rising delivers its educational programming and teacher training in 12 countries and has recently expanded into Mexico. The Girl Rising Financial Education Initiative is a comprehensive 24-session curriculum built around the critically acclaimed Girl Rising feature film, including additional multimedia tools with the objective of supporting adolescents in identifying, articulating, and sharing their gender-related experiences through activities and stories.
GIRL RISING PARTNERS
In Mexico, Girl Rising partnered with Credit Suisse’s Financial Empowerment Initiative (financial partner) and Aflatoun International (financial education curriculum partner) to fund and direct the expansion of the program. Through this partnership, Girl Rising built on their existing gender-focused curriculum to address financial barriers that often limit girls’ potential and economic involvement through financial education and empowerment curricula. To implement the educational program, Girl Rising partnered with Glasswing International and CIAM Cancún. Glasswing aims to improve education through after school programs and school revitalization, health through promoting trauma-informed care and nutrition, community empowerment through volunteer opportunities, and employment entrepreneurship through work training and economic reactivation. CIAM Cancún aims to promote peace and gender equality through promoting justice, equality, and human rights. Their educational initiatives focus on teaching nonviolent communication, conflict resolution, community collaboration, and gender equity.
Methods
This study is part of a larger Girl Rising financial education program that assessed Gender Equitable Attitudes, Gender Responsiveness, Gender Equitable Environment, Agency, Voice, Gender-based Financial Perceptions, Financial Literacy and Skills, and Attitudes Towards Finances, among adolescents and educators before and after program implementation. However, the present study will focus only on Gender Equitable Attitudes and Gender-based Financial Perceptions among adolescent boys and girls in Mexico.
STUDY DESIGN
A quasi-experimental design utilizing a one-group pre-and post-test method was employed. The evaluation study included two “independent samples” at baseline and follow-up. It was assumed that individuals in the baseline and follow-up samples are composed of the same participants. The baseline assessment was conducted prior to the start of the Girl Rising Financial Education Initiative program, and a follow-up assessment was conducted immediately after the completion of the program.
STUDY SAMPLE
The Girl Rising Financial Education Initiative program was implemented in 14 schools in Mexico. However, the final evaluation samples consisted of baseline data of adolescents from only three schools: one CIAM school in Cancún, Quintana Roo, and two Glasswing schools in Tijuana, Baja California, and Leòn, Guanajuato. The total sample included 979 participants of ages 11-19 years. The present study describes the results of gender equitable attitudes, and gender-based financial perceptions.
INSTRUMENTS AND MEASURES
The evaluation instruments were developed by faculty and students at The George Washington University, with input from Girl Rising, and then finalized after the pilot phase with students and teachers in January 2023. Youth assent for participating in the quantitative survey was obtained by reading the information and instructions provided on the first page of the survey. The survey did not collect any identifying information from adolescents or educators and participation was anonymous. Survey data was collected using iSurvey, an online questionnaire dissemination tool. The instruments were developed in English, translated to Spanish, and back-translated into English. During the pilot phase, both the English and Spanish language instruments underwent thorough assessment for comprehension, vocabulary, and technical terminology with input from adolescents, educators, and leaders from partner organizations.
Sociodemographic information collected through the survey included age, grade, school, gender, sibling information and household composition.
Gender Equitable Attitudes and Norms
Gender equitable attitudes were captured via two vignettes and a gender equity scale. The current study assessed gender equitable attitudes and norms using only the gender equity scale. The scale included 13 statements adapted from the Gender Equitable Measurement scale created for the Gender Equity Movement in Schools program in Mumbai, India; the UNICEF Evaluation of Empowering Young Girls and Women in Maharashtra, India; and the Gender Equitable Mean scale from the Compendium of Gender Scales. The statements consisted of three subdomains – gender roles/privileges/restrictions (8 statements), gender attributes (3 statements), and gender violence (2 statements). The response options ranged from strongly disagree to strongly agree, for example, “Girls and boys should share household tasks equally”. Negatively worded statements were reverse coded, for example, “Boys should get health services more than girls,” and the statements were summated to create a gender equitable attitudes scale. The internal reliability of the overall scale was ɑ = 0.863. The three subdomains also showed high internal consistency: roles/privileges/restrictions scale ɑ = 0.789, gender attributes scale ɑ = 0.8, and gender violence scale ɑ = 0.58.
Gender-Based Financial Perceptions
Gender-based financial perceptions were measured via the gender-based financial perceptions scale and one vignette. A vignette is a short story of a hypothetical scenario that is often used in research to glean information about the responder’s attitudes, perceptions or opinions. Vignettes are widely used in social sciences and are often considered useful for studying sensitive or subjective topics. By offering a non-personal way to respond to a specific situation, vignettes can help reduce social desirability bias in research. The vignette described a husband and wife who both work at a bank and make the same amount of money, however, the husband is in charge of finances and does not allow his wife to be involved in the family’s finances. Five questions followed this vignette to evaluate participants’ gender based financial perceptions (three 5-point Likert-scale questions, 1 yes/no answer choice, and 1 multiple choice question).
DATA ANALYSIS
All survey data analyses were conducted in IBM SPSS Statistics Version 28. Bivariate tests (Independent T-tests and Chi-square tests) were conducted to analyze the sociodemographic characteristics, gender equitable attitudes and norms, and financial perceptions between boys and girls. A multivariate linear regression analysis was done to assess the influence of gender based financial perceptions on gender equitable attitudes, after adjusting for gender, age, school, grade, presence of younger brother and male parent/guardian.
Results
| Overall % (N) or Mean (SD) | Boys % (N) | Girls % (N) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| N = 979 | N = 385 | N = 580 | |
| Grade*** | 1st grade of secondary school 18.5% (180) | 22.3% (86) | 16.1% (93) |
| 2nd grade of secondary school 15.1% (147) | 19.7% (76) | 12.1% (70) | |
| 3rd grade of secondary school 13.6% (133) | 23.6% (91) | 7.3% (42) | |
| 1-2 semesters of high school 30.1% (293) | 19.7% (76) | 36.4% (210) | |
| 3-4 semesters of high school 22.8% (222) | 14.5% (56) | 28.1% (162) | |
| Age*** | Range: 11 – 19 years 14.62 (± 1.54) | 14.26 (± 1.53) | 14.85 (± 1.51) |
| School*** | Octavio Paz (Tijuana) 21.8% (212) | 28.2% (108) | 17.6% (102) |
| Telesecundaria General (León) 25.4% (247) | 37.3% (143) | 18.0% (104) | |
| Conalep (Cancún) 52.9% (515) | 34.5% (132) | 64.4% (372) | |
| Sibling type (participants selected all options that applied) | Older brothers 39.4% (386) | 143 (37.1%) | 237 (40.9%) |
| Younger brothers* 33.0% (323) | 146 (37.9%) | 174 (30.0%) | |
| Older sisters 33.4% (327) | 126 (32.7%) | 193 (33.3%) | |
| Younger sisters 32.1% (314) | 128 (33.2%) | 184 (31.7%) | |
| Do not have any brothers or sisters 7.2% (70) | 29 (7.5%) | 41 (7.1%) | |
| Household composition (participants selected all options that applied) | Male parent/guardian* 66.2% (648) | 276 (71.7%) | 365 (62.9%) |
| Female parent/guardian 87.9% (861) | 332 (86.2%) | 517 (89.1%) | |
| Brothers/Sisters 63.7% (624) | 231 (60.0%) | 383 (66.0%) | |
| Grandparents 13.1% (128) | 50 (13.0%) | 77 (13.3%) | |
| Aunts/Uncles 6.0% (59) | 22 (5.7%) | 36 (6.2%) | |
| Cousins 3.8% (37) | 13 (3.4%) | 23 (4.0%) | |
| Others 1.8% (18) | 7 (1.8%) | 10 (1.7%) |
Statistical Significance: *p <0.05; **p <0.01; ***p <0.001.
| Gender Equitable Attitudes, by Gender | Overall Mean (SD) | Boys Mean (SD) | Girls Mean (SD) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender equitable attitudes scale α = 0.863, Mean = 4.24 (± 0.589) | N = 963 | N = 383 | N = 580 |
| Sub-domain: Roles/privileges/restrictions*** | Boys should be fed before girls during meals.† 4.30 (± 0.927) | 4.17 (± 1.064) | 4.39 (± 0.814) |
| Boys should get health services more than girls.† 4.36 (± 0.882) | 4.17 (± 1.010) | 4.48 (± 0.761) | |
| Boys should go to school more than girls.† 4.39 (± 0.868) | 4.22 (± 0.977) | 4.50 (± 0.770) | |
| When a man/husband/father and woman/wife/mother disagree about the number of children to have, the husband’s opinion matters more.† 4.39 (± 0.870) | 4.09 (± 0.975) | 4.58 (± 0.734) | |
| A man/husband/father should have final say in all family matters.† 4.21 (± 1.041) | 3.86 (± 1.187) | 4.45 (± 0.858) | |
| Girls need their parents’ protection more than boys.† 3.26 (± 1.193) | 3.00 (± 1.264) | 3.42 (± 1.114) | |
| Girls and boys should share household tasks equally. 4.43 (± 1.002) | 4.13 (± 1.220) | 4.63 (± 0.767) | |
| Girls can be as good at being a leader as boys. 4.31 (± 1.053) | 3.91 (± 1.242) | 4.57 (± 0.805) | |
| Subdomain α = 0.789, Mean = 4.21 (± 0.622) | |||
| Sub-domain: Attributes*** | Boys are better at math and science than girls.† 4.08 (± 1.028) | 3.78 (± 1.056) | 4.28 (± 0.958) |
| Boys are naturally better at sports than girls.† 3.72 (± 1.223) | 3.18 (± 1.313) | 4.07 (± 1.014) | |
| Boys are naturally smarter than girls.† 4.19 (± 0.959) | 3.83 (± 1.052) | 4.42 (± 0.812) | |
| Subdomain α = 0.8, Mean = 3.99 (± 0.904) | |||
| Sub-domain: Violence*** | There are times when a husband or boy needs to hit his wife or girlfriend.† 4.77 (± 0.566) | 4.67 (± 0.671) | 4.83 (± 0.474) |
| Girls like to be teased by boys.† 4.45 (± 0.873) | 4.3 (± 0.926) | 4.55 (± 0.820) | |
| Subdomain α = 0.58, Mean = 4.61 (± 0.612) |
Statistical Significance: *p <0.05; **p <0.01; ***p <0.001.
| Gender Based Financial Perceptions [Elizabeth Vignette], by Gender | Overall Mean (SD) or % (N) | Boys Mean (SD) or % (N) | Girls Mean (SD) or % (N) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5-point Likert scale items (Strongly Disagree – Strongly Agree)*** | N = 961 | N = 375 | N = 574 |
| Elizabeth should not have access to her own money because it is not a woman’s place to be involved in family finances.† 4.42 (± 0.945) | 4.24 (± 1.053) | 4.53 (± 0.855) | |
| Elizabeth should not have access to her own money because she does not have the same abilities to work with money like David does.† 4.43 (± 0.911) | 4.26 (± 1.004) | 4.53 (± 0.835) | |
| Elizabeth should have access to her own money because she earned it. 4.53 (± 0.791) | 4.41 (± 0.878) | 4.61 (± 0.725) | |
| Do you agree that David should take care of all the family finances? Choose Yes or No** | Yes 10.5% (101) | 14.5% (54) | 8.2% (47) |
| No 89.3% (846) | 85.5% (319) | 91.8% (527) | |
| In a relationship, whose job is it to manage the finances? Please select ONLY ONE option*** | It is the man’s job to manage the finances 5.3% (51) | 8.9% (33) | 3.2% (18) |
| It is the woman’s job to manage the finances 3.0% (29) | 4.0% (15) | 2.5% (14) | |
| It is the man and woman’s job together to manage the finances 89.3% (862) | 87.1% (323) | 94.4% (539) |
Statistical Significance: *p <0.05; **p <0.01; ***p <0.001.
| Multivariate linear regression model of overall gender equitable attitudes, gender roles/privileges/restrictions, attributes and violence. | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gender Equitable Attitudes (overall) | Adjusted Beta | 95% CI | Adjusted Beta | 95% CI |
| Elizabeth should not have access to her own money because it is not a woman’s place to be involved in family finances. + | 0.183*** | (0.068, 0.163) | 0.182*** | (0.069, 0.168) |
| Elizabeth should not have access to her own money because she does not have the same abilities to work with money like David does+ | 0.177*** | (0.066, 0.165) | 0.165*** | (0.060, 0.161) |
| Elizabeth should have access to her own money because she earned it. | 0.093** | (0.026, 0.117) | 0.102*** | (0.035, 0.126) |
| Do you agree that David should take care of all the family finances? | No (Ref) | (Ref) | (Ref) | (Ref) |
| Yes – | 0.117*** | (–0.349, –0.118) | –0.099*** | (–0.319, –0.085) |
| In a relationship, whose job is it to manage the finances? | Man’s job (Ref) | (Ref) | (Ref) | (Ref) |
| Woman’s job | 0.081* | (0.053, 0.481) | 0.123*** | (0.194, 0.632) |
| Man and woman’s job together | 0.087* | (0.035, 0.326) | 0.103** | (0.069, 0.373) |
| Age | –0.023 | (–0.054, 0.037) | –0.078 | (–0.078, 0.017) |
| Gender | Boys (Ref) | (Ref) | (Ref) | (Ref) |
| Girls | 0.240*** | (0.218, 0.347) | 0.188*** | (0.164, 0.299) |
| Grade | 1st grade – secondary school (Ref) | (Ref) | (Ref) | (Ref) |
| 2nd grade – secondary school | 0.102** | (0.043, 0.281) | 0.115** | (0.067, 0.316) |
| 3rd grade – secondary school | 0.064 | (–0.037, 0.252) | 0.070 | (–0.027, 0.275) |
| 1-2 semesters – high school | –0.061 | (–0.588, 0.434) | 0.066 | (–0.456, 0.628) |
| 3-4 semesters – high school | –0.045 | (–0.581, 0.460) | 0.072 | (–0.450, 0.654) |
| School | Octavio Paz (Ref) | (Ref) | (Ref) | (Ref) |
| Telesecundaria General | –0.035 | (–0.143, 0.050) | –0.063 | (–0.188, 0.013) |
| Conalep | 0.324 | (–0.132, 0.882) | 0.266 | (–0.217, 0.859) |
| Younger Brother | No (Ref) | (Ref) | (Ref) | (Ref) |
| Yes | –0.017 | (–0.083, 0.042) | –0.014 | (–0.083, 0.048) |
| Male Parent/ Guardian | No (Ref) | (Ref) | (Ref) | (Ref) |
| Yes | 0.042 | (–0.013, 0.117) | 0.032 | (–0.027, 0.109) |
Statistical Significance: *p <0.05; **p <0.01; ***p <0.001.
Discussion
The evaluation of the Girl Rising Financial Education Initiative program aimed to assess the relationship between gender equitable attitudes, and gender based financial perceptions among adolescent boys and girls in Mexico. The study reveals a complex interplay between gender equitable attitudes and gender-based financial perceptions, highlighting the gendered nature of financial decision-making and autonomy. A key finding is the significant difference in how boys and girls perceive gender equity across various domains, including family roles, educational opportunities, and financial independence. Girls consistently demonstrated more favorable attitudes toward gender equity, both in terms of household dynamics and financial decision-making, compared to boys. This aligns with broader literature suggesting that increasing gender equity in financial decision-making and leadership positions leads to positive long-term economic and social outcomes.
Financial Socialization Theory posits that financial literacy is influenced by socializing agents such as family, peers, media, and school. While parents often play the primary source of financial knowledge, schools can represent a formal space where this knowledge can be introduced and reshaped. Research on financial education in schools has demonstrated that early exposure to financial literacy programs significantly influences long-term financial behaviors and attitudes. However, the effectiveness of such programs largely depends on how much they challenge existing societal norms. If financial education merely reinforces traditional financial hierarchies – where men are assumed to be the primary financial decision-makers – it risks perpetuating economic inequalities rather than mitigating them.
The strong positive relationship between gender equitable attitudes and financial perceptions is evident in the findings on the financial vignette involving Elizabeth and David. The overwhelmingly rejection of patriarchal financial norms by girls – 91.8% disagreed with the statement that David should control all family finances – demonstrates that adolescent girls are not only advocates for gender-equitable financial participation but are also actively challenging. Their strong affirmation of Elizabeth’s right to access and manage her own money reflects an evolving recognition of women’s financial independence, reinforcing the general trend of girls holding more progressive gender equitable attitudes. Boys, in contrast, were more likely to agree with traditional gender norms related to financial management, as indicated by their lower scores in gender-based financial perceptions. Their reluctance to support shared financial decision-making mirrors the findings across other domains of gender-equitable attitudes, where boys were less likely to support equal roles in household tasks or leadership positions for girls. The results suggest that boys, more than girls, may internalize traditional gender roles that prioritize male authority in financial matters. These patterns reveal a potential disconnect between boys’ gender equitable attitudes and their views on financial decision making, which could be influenced by cultural norms that privilege male dominance in family finances.
IMPLICATIONS ON FINANCIAL EDUCATION AND POLICY-MAKING
The findings from this study have critical implications for financial educational programs and policy development. Given that gender norms and attitudes play a significant role in shaping financial behaviors, financial education must explicitly address gender biases in financial decision-making. Schools should integrate gender-responsive curricula/programs that emphasize shared financial responsibility in households and relationships. Additionally, expanding initiatives such as Girl Rising into rural areas – where gender norms may be more rigid – could increase adolescents’ exposure to critical discussions on gender roles, economic empowerment, and financial decision making.
Furthermore, policymakers’ efforts should prioritize financial inclusion strategies targeting adolescent girls and women, ensuring that they have equal access to financial services, savings programs, and entrepreneurial opportunities. Future research should explore intersectional factors – such as socioeconomic status, family educational levels, and family financial structures – that further shape gendered financial perceptions and behaviors. By tackling both societal norms and structural barriers, financial education initiatives can become more effective in reducing gendered economic disparities and promoting financial empowerment for all.
LIMITATIONS
While the results of this quantitative study are promising, it is not without limitations. A major limitation is that only baseline data was analyzed for the purpose of this research. To accurately assess the impact of the Girl Rising Financial Education Initiative program, future research should explore the differences between baseline and follow-up data over time. Another limitation of this study is that it relied on self-reported data, which can be prone to social desirability bias where participants respond in a way they perceive as more socially acceptable rather than stating their own beliefs and attitudes.
Conclusion
In sum, the study highlights a significant gender divide in both general attitudes toward gender equity and specific financial perceptions among adolescents. Adolescence is a formative period and interventions during this age can shape the way young people interact with money. But particularly for girls, introducing financial education and encouraging them to engage in money management activities can help shape their attitudes towards financial autonomy. Girls’ more favorable views on gender equity across various domains, particularly, financial autonomy, suggest that they may be more receptive to social changes in promoting gender equality. Meanwhile, boys may require more targeted interventions that challenge traditional gender roles, particularly, in the realm of financial decision-making. These findings point to the importance of addressing gender norms holistically, integrating discussions on both gender equity and financial autonomy in efforts to promote more equitable attitudes among adolescents in Mexico.
References
2. Lusardi A, Mitchell OS. The economic importance of financial literacy: Theory and evidence. J Econ Lit. 2014;52(1):5-44. doi:10.1257/jel.52.1.5
3. Promoting Financial Inclusion through Financial Education. OECD. October 10, 2013. Accessed January 30, 2025. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/promoting-financial-inclusion-through-financial-education_5k3xz6m88smp-en.html
4. Lusardi A, Messy FA. The importance of financial literacy and its impact on financial wellbeing. J Financ Lit Wellbeing. 2023;1(1):1-11. doi:10.1017/flw.2023.8
5. Mitchell OS, Lusardi A. Financial literacy and economic outcomes: Evidence and policy implications. J Retire. 2015;3(1):107-114. doi:10.3905/jor.2015.3.1.107
6. Technical Note on Gender Norms. UNFPA. Accessed October 29, 2024. https://www.unfpa.org/resources/technical-note-gender-norms
7. Peters HE, Adelstein S, Abare R. Gender norms and women’s economic empowerment in low-income countries: What we learned by reviewing the evidence. Urban Institute. April 26, 2019. Accessed March 5, 2024. https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/gender-norms-and-womens-economic-empowerment-low-income-countries-what-we-learned-reviewing-evidence
8. Fonseca R, Mullen KJ, Zamarro G, Zissimopoulos J. What explains the gender gap in financial literacy? The role of household decision making. J Consum Aff. 2012;46(1):90. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6606.2011.01221.x
9. Boggio C, Coda Moscarola F, Gallice A. What is good for the goose is good for the gander?: How gender-specific conceptual frames affect financial participation and decision-making. Econ Educ Rev. 2020;75:101952. doi:10.1016/j.econedurev.2019.101952
10. Greimel-Fuhrmann B, Silgoner M. Analyzing the gender gap in financial literacy. Int J Infonomics. 2018;11(3):1779-1787. doi:10.20533/iji.1742.4712.2018.0180
11. Lusardi A. Financial literacy and the need for financial education: evidence and implications. Swiss J Econ Stat. 2019;155(1):1. doi:10.1186/s41937-019-0027-5
12. Klapper L, Lusardi A, van Oudheusden P. Financial Literacy Around the World: Insights From The Standard & Poor’s Rating Services Global Financial Literacy Survey.; 2015:28.
13. Women and Financial Education: Evidence, Policy Responses and Guidance. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development; 2013. Accessed October 29, 2024. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/finance-and-investment/women-and-financial-education_9789264202733-en
14. Billimoria J. Why young people are key to achieving the SDGs. World Economic Forum. September 26, 2016. Accessed March 5, 2024. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/09/why-young-people-are-key-to-achieving-the-sdgs/
15. Goal 4: Quality education. The Global Goals. Accessed March 5, 2024. https://globalgoals.org/goals/4-quality-education/
16. Hietanen AE, Pick S. Gender Stereotypes, Sexuality, and Culture in Mexico. In: Safdar S, Kosakowska-Berezecka N, eds. Psychology of Gender Through the Lens of Culture: Theories and Applications. Springer International Publishing; 2015:285-305. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-14005-6_14
17. The Pursuit of Gender Equality: An Uphill Battle. OECD Web Archive. Accessed May 9, 2024. https://web-archive.oecd.org/2018-07-18/451014-Gender2017-MEX-en.pdf
18. Mungaray A, Gonzalez N, Osorio G, Mungaray A, Gonzalez N, Osorio G. Financial education and its effect on income in Mexico. Probl Desarro. 2021;52(205):55-78. doi:10.22201/iiec.20078951e.2021.205.69709
19. Maravalle A, Pandiella AG. Expanding Access to Finance to Boost Growth and Reduce Inequalities in Mexico. OECD; 2022. doi:10.1787/2de3cd7d-en
20. Amezcua AV, Everardo JAH. Financial literacy and mathematics: A study among young Mexican high school students. Rev Mex Econ Finanz. 2016;12(2):1-22. Accessed March 6, 2024. https://www.redalyc.org/journal/4237/423750525001/html/
21. Arceo-Gómez EO, Villagómez FA. Financial literacy among Mexican high school teenagers. Int Rev Econ Educ. 2017;24:1-17. doi:10.1016/j.iree.2016.10.001
22. Álvarez ABV, González JRV. Financial literacy: Gaps found between Mexican public and private, middle, and high-school students. In: Research Anthology on Personal Finance and Improving Financial Literacy. IGI Global; 2021:518-543. doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-8049-3.ch028
23. Financial institution account (% age 15+). World Bank Gender Data Portal. Accessed February 2, 2025. https://genderdata.worldbank.org/en/indicator/fin1-t-a
24. Cabrera JAL. How Mexico is tackling financial inclusion. Baker Institute for Public Policy. June 21, 2023. Accessed March 6, 2024. https://www.bakerinstitute.org/research/how-mexico-tackling-financial-inclusion
25. Achyut P, Bhatla N, Khandekar S, Maitra S, Verma RK. Building Support for Gender Equality Young Adolescents in School: Findings from Mumbai, India. ICRW; 2011. Accessed October 29, 2024. https://www.icrw.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/GEMS-Building-Support-for-Gender-Equality-Adolescents.pdf
26. Evaluation of Empowering Young Girls and Women in Maharashtra, India. UNICEF. May 6, 2014. Accessed March 5, 2024. https://www.unicef.org/evaluation/reports
27. Nanda G. Compendium of Gender Scales. FHI 360/C-Change. Published online September 2011:40.
28. Gould D. Using vignettes to collect data for nursing research studies: how valid are the findings? J Clin Nurs. 1996;5(4):207-212. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2702.1996.tb00253.x
29. Silva AS, Campos-Silva WL, Gouvea MA, Farina MC. Vignettes: a data collection technique to handle the differential operation of items in surveys. BBR Braz Bus Rev. 2019;16(1):16-31. Accessed March 5, 2024. https://www.redalyc.org/journal/1230/123058781002/html/#:~:text=The%20use%20of%20vignettes%2C%20textualized,the%20situation%20than%20the%20characters.
30. Profeta P. Gender equality in decision-making positions: The efficiency gains. 2017;2017(1):34-37. Accessed May 9, 2024. https://www.intereconomics.eu/contents/year/2017/number/1/article/gender-equality-in-decision-making-positions-the-efficiency-gains.html
31. Obi-Anike HO, Daniel OC, Onodugo IJ, Attamah IJ, Imhanrenialena BO. The role of financial information literacy in strategic decision-making effectiveness and sustainable performance among Agribusiness entrepreneurs in Nigeria. Sustainability. 2023;15(13):10416. doi:10.3390/su151310416
32. Sundarasen S, Rajagopalan U, Kanapathy M, Kamaludin K. Women’s financial literacy: A bibliometric study on current research and future directions. Heliyon. 2023;9(12). doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21379