ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2025
Leveraging artificial intelligence to explore gendered patterns in financial literacy among teachers in academia.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Financial literacy is essential for long-term economic stability, yet persistent gender disparities in financial knowledge continue to be observed across professions, including academia. This study explores how Artificial Intelligence (AI) can be applied to identify and analyze gender-based patterns in financial literacy among higher education faculty. Methods: A mixed-methods design was employed, combining traditional survey instruments with AI-driven analytics. Survey data were collected from 300 academic professionals across diverse institutions, capturing financial knowledge, attitudes, behaviors, and socioeconomic characteristics such as marital status, number of dependents, and family income. Natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning (ML) techniques were used to detect linguistic and behavioral differences between male and female participants. Results: Findings revealed statistically significant gender gaps in financial literacy. Male participants scored higher in investing knowledge (Δ=1.9 points, p<0.001) and expressed greater confidence (+0.42 sentiment vs. -0.15 for women). Intersectional analysis showed that women in STEM disciplines demonstrated narrower gaps (Δ=0.7) compared to women in the humanities (Δ=1.2), with disparities shaped by wage differentials and caregiving responsibilities. Socioeconomic factors-including marital status, family size, and income-were also associated with variations in financial literacy and investment confidence. While the findings are correlational, AI-powered sentiment and cluster analyses provided deeper insights into behavioral segments, illustrating the compounded influence of gender, discipline, and socioeconomic context. Discussion: By integrating AI techniques with traditional survey methods, this research advances the study of gender and financial literacy in academia. The combined approach enhances interpretability and highlights the value of context-sensitive interventions. Recommended strategies include gender-responsive financial training, AI-enabled coaching tools, and institutional and policy-level reforms supported by universities, government agencies, and funding bodies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.