Multiple discriminant analyses of consumer owners of thrift deposits in commercial banks and savings and loan associations show that measures obtained by a standard pencil-and-paper psychological test prove to be more effective than standard socioeconomic variables and asset balances in discriminating among consumer groups.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlhadeffDavid, and AlhadeffCharlotte P., “The Struggle for Commercial Bank Savings,”The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. LXXII, No. 1 (February 1958), 1–22.
2.
CooleyWilliam W., and LohnesPaul R., Multivariate Procedures for the Behavioral Sciences, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1962, 117–18.
3.
CrepsClifton H.Jr., and LapkinDavid T., “Public Regulation and Operating Conventions Affecting Sources of Funds of Commercial Banks and Thrift Institutions,”Journal of Finance, Vol. XVII, No. 2 (May 1962), 289.
4.
EdwardsAlan, Edwards Personal Preference Schedule Manual, Revised 1959. New YorkPsychological Corporation.
5.
FerberRobert, Collecting Financial Data by Consumer Panel Techniques, Bureau of Economic and Business Research, University of Illinois, 1959.
6.
FisherR. A., Contributions to Mathematical Statistics, New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1950, 184–90.
7.
Flows Through Financial Intermediaries”, Federal Reserve Bulletin, Vol. 50, No. 5 (May 1964), 549–557.
8.
FrankRonald E., and MassyWilliam F., “Innovation and Brand Choice” (Paper presented at the American Marketing Association Winter Conference, Boston, Massachusetts, 1963).
9.
FrankRonald E., MassyWilliam F., and MorrisonDonald G., “Validation Techniques for Multiple Discriminant Analysis,” forthcoming in Journal of Marketing Research.
10.
RozenMarvin, “Competition Among Financial Institutions for Demand and Thrift Deposits,”Journal of Finance, Vol. XVII, No. 2 (May 1962), 318.
