Psychological Aspects of Consumer Economic Choice in Conditions of Uncertainty and Market Fluctuations

Abstract

Background: In environments characterised by economic instability and market fluctuations, irrational psychological factors increasingly dictate financial decision-making. This shift underscores a critical need to understand cognitive biases more deeply to enhance the effectiveness of consumer protection frameworks and financial education policies.

Objective: To identify the impact of key cognitive distortions on consumer economic behaviour under conditions of socio-economic instability.

Methodology: The study surveyed 265 people who were asked 30 questions grouped into five cognitive effects. Responses were classified into three types of behaviour: economically rational, emotionally impulsive, and unique/cautious. The c²criterion was used to identify the relationship between behavioural responses, age, and income level.

Results:

The results of the study indicate the presence of a pronounced effect of information presentation in the financial behavior of respondents. Under conditions of positively formulated economic information, the emotional-impulsive decision-making model dominated in 187 people, which is 70.6% of the sample, and reflects a tendency to make quick decisions without in-depth analytical evaluation. At the same time, in situations where alternatives were presented in a neutral or rationally structured form, economically rational behavior was demonstrated by 209 respondents (78.9%) and 199 respondents (75.1%), respectively, which indicates the activation of cognitive mechanisms for comparing benefits and risks. A cautious or unique choice strategy was generally recorded the least often, reaching a maximum value in 65 responses, which is 24.5% of the total number of observations. Generalizing the results obtained allows us to state that the way economic information is formulated significantly affects the nature of financial decisions, and this influence is more pronounced among younger respondents and people with lower incomes.

Conclusion: The study revealed the dominance of cognitive and behavioural distortions in Ukrainians' consumer economic strategies, driven by a combination of low financial literacy, institutional distrust, and information overload, and calls for targeted interventions to improve the rationality of economic decisions.

Unique Contribution: This study advances the field of behavioural economics by formulating a multi-dimensional intervention framework. Key contributions include the proposal of immersive financial literacy simulations, the development of state-led transparent pricing platforms, and the implementation of digital "nudges" designed to mitigate spontaneous economic choices. Furthermore, the study advocates income-differentiated consumer policies and tools to critically deconstruct marketing messages and safeguard vulnerable populations in volatile markets.

Key Recommendation: Prospects for further research lie in deepening the empirical analysis of the interaction between cognitive biases and social variables, particularly considering regional characteristics, educational level, trust in financial institutions, and length of participation in market relations.