The Impact of Financial Literacy on Social Entrepreneurship Tendencies Among University Students: Evidence from Turkey

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between university students’ financial literacy and their social entrepreneurship tendencies, using a convenience sample of 245 students from a single public university in Turkey. Two previously validated scales were employed, and reliability analyses indicated high internal consistency (α = 0.828–0.936). Regression analyses indicate that financial literacy partially and statistically significantly explains social entrepreneurship tendencies, although the effect size is modest (R² = 0.016), suggesting that additional individual, social, and contextual factors likely play a larger role. Sub-dimension analyses indicate that financial literacy is significantly associated with Financial Return, Sustainability, and Social Networks (p < 0.05; p < 0.01), while associations with Social Vision and Innovation were not statistically significant, reflecting its partial contribution to social entrepreneurship tendencies. Demographic comparisons indicate significant differences based on gender, academic level, academic achievement, parental education, and the presence of an entrepreneur in the family (p < 0.05). These findings suggest that financial literacy can support socially responsible entrepreneurial tendencies, while acknowledging that the observed effects are modest and the sample is limited to a single university. The study emphasizes the importance of integrating financial literacy and entrepreneurship education into higher education curricula, while clearly acknowledging the study’s methodological limitations and the small magnitude of observed effects.

1. Introduction

In contemporary societies, young and dynamic social entrepreneurs play an important role in fostering economic and social development. Social entrepreneurship, which emphasizes the creation of both social and economic value, requires individuals to possess not only motivation and innovation but also practical competencies such as financial literacy [1].

Financial literacy is defined as the ability to understand basic economic concepts and apply them to make informed and rational financial decisions [2]. It enables individuals to manage everyday financial challenges and make critical investment or financing choices. Entrepreneurs and future business leaders with higher financial literacy are better equipped to design effective strategies, manage resources, and align social objectives with economic outcomes. In particular, financial literacy provides the knowledge and skills necessary to support social entrepreneurship by facilitating financial sustainability while pursuing social goals [1,3].

Social entrepreneurship refers to entrepreneurial activity that uses market-based methods to generate social and economic value [4]. University students demonstrate high potential for social entrepreneurship due to their motivation, digital literacy, and goal-oriented attitudes [5,6]. Higher financial literacy among these students can facilitate effective decision-making, resource management, and the successful operation of social enterprises.

Although previous studies have examined student attitudes primarily in the context of consumer behavior and marketing [7,8], relatively few studies have focused on their entrepreneurial and social impact roles [9,10]. Understanding financial literacy and social entrepreneurship tendencies within this specific student population is therefore important for supporting the development of socially responsible entrepreneurial activities.

In light of these considerations, this study addresses the following research question:

How does financial literacy influence social entrepreneurship tendencies among university students in Turkey?

The study focuses exclusively on empirically measured constructs financial literacy and social entrepreneurship while examining the influence of socio-demographic characteristics on these tendencies. By clearly defining the sample, this approach provides a nuanced understanding of factors shaping social entrepreneurship among the university students included in the study.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Financial Literacy

Financial literacy has emerged as a core competency that enables individuals to navigate an increasingly complex financial environment and make informed financial decisions [11]. Rather than referring solely to financial knowledge, financial literacy represents a multidimensional construct encompassing the ability to understand financial information, apply numerical skills, and translate this knowledge into effective financial behaviour [12,13,14,15]. In this sense, financial literacy integrates cognitive competencies with practical decision-making skills that are essential for managing personal financial resources. This integrated skill set enhances individuals’ capacity to process economic information and supports sound personal financial management across a range of everyday financial activities, including budgeting, saving, spending, borrowing, and investing [16]. Given that individuals are required to make financial decisions repeatedly throughout their lives, such as allocating income, planning expenditures, evaluating investment alternatives, and determining borrowing conditions-financial literacy plays a critical role in reducing financial vulnerability and promoting long-term economic well-being [17]. Accordingly, possessing at least a basic level of financial and economic knowledge is a prerequisite for making rational decisions and avoiding potential financial difficulties [3,18].

Financial literacy and economic literacy are closely interconnected concepts and are occasionally used interchangeably within the literature [19]. Although both terms refer to individuals’ capacity to understand and manage economic and financial matters, the present study adopts the concept of financial literacy to ensure conceptual consistency. As an integral component of everyday life, financial literacy supports individuals in making informed decisions that enhance their economic well-being and standard of living [20]. Rather than representing a static form of knowledge, financial literacy constitutes a dynamic process through which individuals develop and apply financial and economic competencies in pursuit of improved financial outcomes. This process involves the effective evaluation of one’s personal economic conditions and the enhancement of knowledge and skills related to fundamental financial activities, such as saving, borrowing, budgeting, and making prudent investment decisions, as well as the rational assessment of financial risks and opportunities [21,22,23,24]. Beyond its individual-level implications, financial literacy also exerts broader effects on societal well-being by shaping financial behaviours and economic participation [25]. Consequently, the ability to interpret economic developments and their implications for issues such as unemployment, household consumption, and financial markets is essential for both individual financial stability and wider economic functioning [26].

2.2. Social Entrepreneurship Tendency

Entrepreneurship constitutes a key mechanism for fostering innovation and driving societal change. Within this broad framework, social entrepreneurship specifically addresses social problems by developing innovative and sustainable solutions that generate positive social impact. Unresolved social problems may undermine social cohesion and pose long-term risks to societal stability and development. In this context, it is particularly important for young people—who represent the future human capital of societies—to demonstrate sensitivity to social issues and to engage in the creation of innovative solutions that yield collective benefits [27,28]. The fundamental mission of social entrepreneurship is to address pressing social challenges through entrepreneurial approaches, thereby contributing to social development and facilitating meaningful social change [29].

The driving force behind social entrepreneurship is to create social value by solving problems that negatively affect society. However, income is needed to create social value. Therefore, social entrepreneurship can be defined as individuals and organizations whose primary goal is to provide social benefit innovating to generate income [30]. Social entrepreneurship plays an important role in social development. In this context, social enterprises established and operated with the aim of creating social benefit engage in economic activities. They use the income generated from these activities for social purposes [31].

According to Nga and Shamuganathan (2010), social entrepreneurs are individuals who possess a clear social vision, engage in sustainable activities, establish and utilize social networks, and develop ventures capable of generating innovative and acceptable financial returns [32]. The elements emphasized in this definition constitute the fundamental dimensions of social entrepreneurship orientation. The social vision dimension refers to the capacity to conceptualize solutions to societal problems and to guide entrepreneurial initiatives toward societal development and long-term social value creation. In this sense, social vision serves as the normative and strategic foundation of social entrepreneurial activity.

The financial return dimension is critical for ensuring the sustainability and continuity of social entrepreneurial initiatives. This dimension emphasizes the effective utilization of limited resources, opportunity recognition, and the maintenance of an economic cycle that enables the realization of social objectives through innovative and financially viable mechanisms [32,33]. The innovation dimension, widely recognized as a core attribute of social entrepreneurship, reflects the continuous development and application of novel ideas, services, and processes aimed at addressing complex social problems [34]. Accordingly, innovation enables social entrepreneurs to produce scalable and effective solutions to societal challenges [35].

Another important component is the social network dimension, which refers to the ability of social entrepreneurs to mobilize social capital, access resources, and ensure the continuity and expansion of their initiatives through network relationships. Through these networks, social entrepreneurs can facilitate collaboration, acquire critical resources, and strengthen the implementation of solutions targeting social issues [36]. Finally, the sustainability dimension focuses on generating long-term and enduring impacts by integrating economic, social, and environmental considerations. In this context, sustainability involves the effective management of natural resources, the promotion of social justice, environmental protection, and the advancement of green transformation processes [37]. Ensuring a more livable world for future generations requires that present decisions prioritize the efficient use of resources and the development of sustainable solutions capable of addressing emerging societal challenges [38].

Considering these dimensions, the underlying mechanism linking financial competencies to social entrepreneurship can be conceptualized as follows. Financial literacy enhances individuals’ knowledge and skills related to long-term investment planning, risk management, and efficient resource allocation [39,40]. These competencies not only strengthen individuals’ capacity to evaluate economic opportunities but also facilitate opportunity recognition in sustainability- and socially oriented entrepreneurial contexts. Consequently, individuals with higher levels of financial literacy are more likely to develop and implement initiatives that generate both social value and sustainable economic outcomes [41,42,43].

2.3. University Students, Social Entrepreneurship, and Financial Literacy

University students are considered a key population for understanding social entrepreneurship due to their motivation, creativity, and goal-oriented attitudes [44]. Higher financial literacy among students enables effective decision-making, resource management, and the successful operation of social enterprises. Financial literacy provides the knowledge and skills necessary to ensure financial sustainability while pursuing social and societal objectives [1,2,3].

Social entrepreneurship refers to entrepreneurial activity that uses market-based methods to generate social and economic value [4]. Students’ social consciousness, including awareness of corporate social responsibility and environmental sustainability, can influence their social entrepreneurship tendencies [45,46]. Understanding the relationship between financial literacy and social entrepreneurship tendencies in this specific student population is therefore crucial for supporting socially responsible entrepreneurial behaviors.

Previous studies have primarily examined student attitudes in consumer behavior and marketing contexts, while relatively few have focused on their entrepreneurial and social impact roles [7,8,9,10]. By focusing on university students at a single public university in Turkey, this study aims to provide empirical insights into factors shaping social entrepreneurship tendencies without overgeneralizing to an entire generational cohort.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Research Objective

The objective of this research is to examine the relationship between university students’ financial literacy levels and their social entrepreneurship tendencies. It also aims to determine whether students’ perceived financial literacy and social entrepreneurship tendencies differ according to their socio-demographic characteristics within the specific sample of students from a public university, Manisa Celal Bayar Univesrity, Manisa in Turkey.

3.2. Population and Sample

The population of the study consists of students enrolled at a public university in Turkey. The sample comprises 245 university students who voluntarily participated in the research and were selected using a convenience sampling approach, which is frequently employed in social science research when access to the entire population is limited. Data were collected through a structured survey administered to 250 students. However, five questionnaires were excluded from the analysis due to incomplete or improperly completed responses. Consequently, a total of 245 valid questionnaires were retained for statistical analysis, corresponding to a response rate of 98%. The data collection process was conducted between 2 May 2025 and 30 December 2025. Participation in the study was voluntary, and respondents were informed about the purpose of the research. All statistical analyses were performed at a 95% confidence level.

3.3. Research Method

A structured survey served as the primary data collection instrument in this study. Participants were randomly drawn from the student population and provided informed consent prior to participation. Data were collected through face-to-face administration of the survey. The survey comprised three distinct scales. The first scale was a personal information scale, designed to document participants’ socio-demographic characteristics. The second scale was a financial literacy scale, intended to measure participants’ knowledge and competencies in managing personal economic resources. The third scale was a social entrepreneurship tendency scale, employed to assess participants’ propensity to engage in socially oriented entrepreneurial activities.

Financial Literacy Scale

The financial literacy questionnaire used in this study consists of 24 items and is treated as a single-dimensional scale. The scale measures students’ basic economic and financial knowledge and was constructed from previously validated instruments widely applied in Turkish university student samples [11,13,25,26,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55]. The combined scale demonstrated high internal consistency in the present sample, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.828, indicating reliable measurement of students’ basic financial knowledge.

Social Entrepreneurship Tendency Scale

Social entrepreneurship tendencies were assessed using a 33-item, five-dimensional scale originally developed by Nga and Shamuganathan (2010) to measure students’ intention to engage in social entrepreneurship [32]. The five dimensions include social vision (6 items), financial return (7 items), innovation (6 items), sustainability (7 items), and social networks (7 items) [32,33,34,56,57,58].

The scale was adapted into Turkish by Reyhanoğlu and Akın (2012), demonstrating Cronbach’s alpha values between 0.69 and 0.84 [33]. Subsequent studies applied the Turkish adaptation to university students, including Yıldırım and Sunman (2022) [56], confirming its validity and reliability. Since the scale has been previously validated in Turkish university student populations and the factor structure has been consistently replicated in multiple studies, conducting a new confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for this specific sample is not required [32,34,56,58]. The internal consistency in the current sample confirms that the scale reliably measures students’ social entrepreneurship tendencies.

In the current sample, the overall scale exhibited excellent internal consistency (α = 0.936), with sub-dimension reliabilities as follows: social vision (α = 0.865), financial return (α = 0.828), innovation (α = 0.782), sustainability (α = 0.782), and social networks (α = 0.774). Reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha, which measures the internal consistency of items within a construct; values above 0.70 are generally considered acceptable [59].

Both scales were analyzed according to their original structure without modification, consistent with previous applications. All items in both scales were rated on a five-point Likert scale ranging from “1 = Strongly Disagree” to “5 = Strongly Agree.” This approach ensures methodological rigor while focusing the analyses on the relationship between financial literacy and social entrepreneurship tendency among university students.

As shown in

Table 1. Reliability analysis results.

Scales	Cronbach’s Alfa	N of Items
Social Entrepreneurship Tendency Scale	0.936	33
Social Vision	0.865	8
Financial Return	0.828	7
Innovation	0.782	6
Sustainability	0.782	7
Social Networks	0.774	5
Financial Literacy Scale	0.828	24

, the social entrepreneurship tendency scale demonstrated excellent reliability (α = 0.936), with sub-dimension reliabilities as follows: social vision α = 0.865, financial return α = 0.828, innovation α = 0.782, sustainability α = 0.782, and social networks α = 0.774. The financial literacy scale also showed high reliability (α = 0.828). These results indicate that all scales used in this study possess strong internal consistency.

The present study employed a quantitative research approach using both correlational and descriptive survey models. The correlational survey model provides a framework for examining the strength and direction of relationships between two or more variables while the descriptive survey model aims to describe a phenomenon, individual, or object within its natural context as it exists [60,61,62].

Guided by this framework, the study investigates the relationship between financial literacy and social entrepreneurship tendency among students included in our sample at a single Turkish university, as well as the effects of socio-demographic characteristics on this relationship (Figure 1).

The following hypotheses were formulated in accordance with the purpose and conceptual framework of the study, reflecting the perceptions and characteristics of the university student participants:

H1. 

There is a meaningful and positive relationship among the sub-dimensions of social entrepreneurship tendency (Social Vision, Financial Return, Innovation, Sustainability, Social Networks).

H2. 

There is a significant and positive relationship between financial literacy and social entrepreneurship tendency.

H3. 

There is a significant and positive relationship between financial literacy and the sub-dimensions of social entrepreneurship tendency.

H4. 

Financial literacy has a significant effect on social entrepreneurship tendency.

H5. 

Financial literacy differs according to socio-demographic characteristics.

H6. 

Social entrepreneurship tendency differs according to socio-demographic characteristics.

H7. 

The Social Vision sub-dimension differs according to socio-demographic characteristics.

H8. 

The Financial Return sub-dimension differs according to socio-demographic characteristics.

H9. 

The Innovation sub-dimension differs according to socio-demographic characteristics.

H10. 

The Sustainability sub-dimension differs according to socio-demographic characteristics.

H11. 

The Social Networks sub-dimension differs according to socio-demographic characteristics.

4. Results

The findings obtained in the scope of the study are presented in the tables below.

As shown in

Table 2. Distribution of participants by socio-demographic characteristics.

Variables	Subvariables	n	%
Gender	Female	135	55.1
	Male	110	44.9
Age	18–21	172	70.2
	22–23	61	24.9
	24+	12	4.9
Grade	1st Grade	32	13.1
	2nd Grade	73	29.8
	3rd Grade	88	35.9
	4th Grade	52	21.2
Academic Performance	Very successful	10	4.1
	Successful	82	33.5
	Average	138	56.3
	Unsuccessful	15	6.1
Mother’s educational level	Primary education	131	53.5
	High school	77	31.4
	Bachelor’s degree	35	14.3
	Postgraduate degree	2	0.8
Father’s educational level	Primary education	93	38.0
	High school	90	36.7
	Bachelor’s degree	54	22.0
	Postgraduate degree	8	3.3
Family income	Low	40	16.3
	Middle	149	60.8
	High	56	22.9
Family Entrepreneurial Background	Yes	51	20.8
	No	194	79.2

, the sample consisted of 245 Generation Z participants, with a slightly higher proportion of females (55.1%) than males (44.9%). The majority of participants were aged 18–21 and primarily enrolled in their second or third academic year. Most participants reported average academic performance. Regarding parental education, the majority of mothers had completed primary education, while fathers’ education levels were more evenly distributed. In terms of family income, most participants reported a medium income level. Approximately one-fifth of the participants indicated the presence of an entrepreneur in the family.

As shown in

Table 3. Mean and standard deviation values for the scales.

Scales	n	x̄	SD
Social Vision	245	3.76	0.696
Financial Return	245	3.64	0.739
Innovation	245	3.65	0.730
Sustainability	245	3.81	0.675
Social Networks	245	4.03	0.697
Social Entrepreneurship Tendency (Total)	245	3.77	0.573
Financial Literacy Scale	245	3.46	0.993

, the descriptive statistics reveal that the university students in the present Turkish sample exhibit a moderately high level of social entrepreneurship tendency (M = 3.77, SD = 0.573). Examination of the sub-dimensions indicates that social vision (M = 3.76, SD = 0.696), financial return (M = 3.64, SD = 0.739), and innovation (M = 3.65, SD = 0.730) display comparable mean scores, suggesting a relatively balanced orientation across these components. The sustainability sub-dimension yielded a slightly higher mean (M = 3.81, SD = 0.675), reflecting an increased emphasis on long-term social and environmental considerations within this student cohort. The highest mean score was observed for social networks (M = 4.03, SD = 0.697), underscoring the pivotal role of networking and relational capital in shaping students’ social entrepreneurship tendencies. In contrast, the financial literacy level was moderate (M = 3.46, SD = 0.993), indicating potential for enhancement in foundational economic and financial competencies.

Table 4. Correlations between financial literacy and social entrepreneurship tendency and its sub-dimensions.

Scales	1	2	3	4	5	6	7
1. Social Vision	1
2. Financial Return	0.607 **	1
3. Innovation	0.742 **	0.634 **	1
4. Sustainability	0.715 **	0.526 **	0.738 **	1
5. Social Networks	0.347 **	0.294 **	0.364 **	0.527 **	1
6. Financial Literacy	0.118	0.226 **	0.065	0.200 **	0.224 **	0.128 *	1

** p < 0.01; * p < 0.05.

presents the results of the correlation analysis examining the relationships between financial literacy and social entrepreneurship tendency, as well as its sub-dimensions.

To determine which specific dimensions of social entrepreneurship tendency are associated with financial literacy, correlation analyses were conducted between financial literacy and each sub-dimension of the social entrepreneurship tendency. As shown in Table 4, financial literacy is positively and significantly correlated with financial return (r = 0.226, p < 0.01), sustainability (r = 0.200, p < 0.01), and social networks (r = 0.224, p < 0.01). These results indicate that higher levels of financial literacy are primarily associated with economic-oriented and network-based aspects of social entrepreneurship, while no significant correlations were observed with social vision or innovation, suggesting that financial literacy has less influence on visionary or innovative dimensions of social entrepreneurship tendency.

Given that the overall social entrepreneurship tendency score is computed from its sub-dimensions, these findings imply that financial literacy contributes modestly to the total social entrepreneurship tendency, reflecting partial support for Hypotheses 2 and 3 (H2, H3). The strongest association is observed with the financial return dimension, whereas the weakest relationship emerges with social networks. These results highlight that, although financial literacy plays a role in shaping social entrepreneurship tendencies, additional individual, social, and contextual factors likely exert a larger influence.

Following the identification of significant relationships among the variables through correlation analysis, a simple linear regression analysis was conducted to examine the effect of financial literacy on social entrepreneurship tendency. The results of the regression analysis are presented in

Table 5. The effect of financial literacy on social entrepreneurship tendency. (Regression 1).

	Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig.
	B	Std. Error	Beta
(Constant)	3.966	0.104		38.255	0.000
Financial Literacy	0.056	0.028	0.128	2.004	0.046
R	0.128
R2	0.016
F	4.016
p	0.046

Dependent Variable: Social Entrepreneurship Tendency.

.

Table 5 presents the results of the simple linear regression analysis examining the effect of financial literacy on social entrepreneurship tendency. The analysis indicates that financial literacy has a positive but modest effect on social entrepreneurship tendency (R = 0.128, p < 0.05).

The relationship between financial literacy and social entrepreneurship tendency can be expressed by the following regression equation:

y = 3.966 + 0.056x

where

• y represents social entrepreneurship tendency, the dependent variable.
• x represents financial literacy, the independent variable.
• β₀ = 3.966 is the intercept, indicating the expected social entrepreneurship tendency when x = 0.
• β₁ = 0.056 is the slope, indicating that a one-unit increase in x is associated with a 0.056-unit increase in y.

The results of the regression analysis (Table 5) indicate that a one-unit increase in financial literacy is associated with a 0.056-unit increase in social entrepreneurship tendency, and this effect is statistically significant (p = 0.046). The model accounts for approximately 1.6% of the variance in social entrepreneurship tendency (R² = 0.016), suggesting that while financial literacy contributes positively, its explanatory power is modest. These findings highlight a statistically significant but limited influence of financial literacy on overall social entrepreneurship tendencies among the sampled university students.

Given that financial literacy was not significantly correlated with the social vision and innovation sub-dimensions, a subsequent regression analysis excluding these dimensions was conducted to further examine its impact on the remaining components.

The results of this analysis are presented in

Table 6. The effect of financial literacy on social entrepreneurship tendency. (Regression 2).

	Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig.
	B	Std. Error	Beta
(Constant)	3.972	0.105		38.008	0.000
Financial Literacy	0.062	0.028	0.139	2.191	0.029
R	0.139
R2	0.019
F	4.799
p	0.029

Dependent Variable: Social Entrepreneurship Tendency.

, providing a more nuanced understanding of how financial literacy contributes specifically to the economic-oriented and network-based aspects of social entrepreneurship tendency.

A subsequent regression model, excluding the social vision and innovation dimensions due to their non-significant association with financial literacy in the initial analysis, is presented in Table 6. In this model, financial literacy remains a statistically significant predictor of social entrepreneurship tendency (B = 0.062, p = 0.029; R² = 0.019), indicating that approximately 1.9% of the variance in social entrepreneurship tendency is accounted for by financial literacy.

These findings provide partial support for Hypothesis 4 (H4), demonstrating a positive yet modest effect of financial literacy on social entrepreneurship tendency among the sampled university students. Importantly, the limited variance explained underscores that additional individual, social, and contextual factors are likely more influential in shaping students’ social entrepreneurship behaviors.

Table 7. Gender differences in social entrepreneurship tendency and financial literacy.

Scales	Gender	n	x̄	SD	t	p
Social Vision	Female	135	3.82	0.635	1.496	0.136
	Male	110	3.68	0.762
Financial Return	Female	135	3.52	0.729	−2.839	0.005
	Male	110	3.78	0.728
Innovation	Female	135	3.65	0.715	0.002	0.999
	Male	110	3.65	0.751
Sustainability	Female	135	3.86	0.667	1.194	0.234
	Male	110	3.76	0.683
Social Networks	Female	135	4.10	0.711	1.725	0.086
	Male	110	3.95	0.673
Social Entrepreneurship Tendency (Total)	Female	135	3.78	0.560	0.289	0.773
	Male	110	3.76	0.591
Financial Literacy Scale	Female	135	3.63	1.266	2.233	0.026
	Male	110	3.26	1.323

presents the results of independent-samples t-tests comparing social entrepreneurship tendency, its sub-dimensions, and financial literacy across gender. These analyses provide insights into potential gender-based differences in the measured constructs within the study sample.

Table 7 presents the results of independent-samples t-tests comparing social entrepreneurship tendency, its sub-dimensions, and financial literacy by gender. The analysis indicates that social entrepreneurship tendency and the sub-dimensions social vision, innovation, sustainability, and social networks did not differ significantly between male and female participants (p < 0.05). However, the financial return sub-dimension revealed a significant gender difference (p < 0.05), with male participants scoring higher than female participants. Additionally, financial literacy was found to differ significantly by gender (p < 0.05), with female participants scoring higher than male participants. These results suggest that gender is associated with certain specific aspects of social entrepreneurship and financial literacy, while most dimensions of social entrepreneurship tendency remain consistent across genders.

Table 8. Age group differences in social entrepreneurship tendency and financial literacy.

Scales		Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	p
Social Vision	Between Groups	1.225	2	0.612	1.264	0.284
	Within Groups	117.270	242	0.485
	Total	118.495	244
Financial Return	Between Groups	0.870	2	0.435	0.795	0.453
	Within Groups	132.502	242	0.548
	Total	133.372	244
Innovation	Between Groups	1.505	2	0.753	1.417	0.245
	Within Groups	128.564	242	0.531
	Total	130.070	244
Sustainability	Between Groups	0.528	2	0.264	0.577	0.562
	Within Groups	110.751	242	0.458
	Total	111.279	244
Social Networks	Between Groups	0.193	2	0.096	0.197	0.822
	Within Groups	118.582	242	0.490
	Total	118.775	244
Social Entrepreneurship Tendency (Total)	Between Groups	0.798	2	0.399	1.215	0.298
	Within Groups	79.469	242	0.328
	Total	80.267	244
Financial Literacy Scale	Between Groups	1.597	2	0.799	0.468	0.627
	Within Groups	412.661	242	1.705
	Total	414.258	244

shows that no significant differences were observed in social entrepreneurship tendency, its sub-dimensions, or financial literacy across age groups (p > 0.05). These results indicate that participants’ age does not appear to influence their social entrepreneurship orientation or financial literacy, suggesting stability of these constructs across different age categories.

Table 9. Differences in social entrepreneurship tendency and financial literacy by grade.

Scales		Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	p
Social Vision	Between Groups	2.396	3	0.799	1.658	0.177
	Within Groups	116.099	241	0.482
	Total	118.495	244
Financial Return	Between Groups	4.421	3	1.474	2.827	0.104
	Within Groups	125.649	241	0.521
	Total	130.070	244
Innovation	Between Groups	0.408	3	0.136	0.296	0.039
	Within Groups	110.871	241	0.460
	Total	111.279	244
Sustainability	Between Groups	6.922	3	2.307	4.971	0.829
	Within Groups	111.853	241	0.464
	Total	118.775	244
Social Networks	Between Groups	3.356	3	1.119	2.074	0.002
	Within Groups	130.016	241	0.539
	Total	133.372	244
Social Entrepreneurship Tendency (Total)	Between Groups	0.587	3	0.196	0.592	0.621
	Within Groups	79.680	241	0.331
	Total	80.267	244
Financial Literacy Scale	Between Groups	165.862	3	55.287	53.641	0.000
	Within Groups	248.396	241	1.031
	Total	414.258	244

presents the results of analyses comparing social entrepreneurship tendency, its sub-dimensions, and financial literacy across grade levels. The findings indicate that social entrepreneurship tendency and the sub-dimensions social vision, financial return, and sustainability did not differ significantly across grades (p < 0.05). In contrast, the sub-dimensions innovation and social networks exhibited significant differences by grade level (p < 0.05). Post hoc analyses using the Dunnett test revealed that for innovation, third-year students scored significantly higher than fourth-year students (p = 0.023). Conversely, for social networks, fourth-year students scored significantly higher than third-year students (p = 0.006).

Regarding financial literacy, significant differences were observed across grade levels (p < 0.05). Post hoc comparisons showed that fourth-year students scored significantly higher than both first-year (p = 0.006) and third-year students (p < 0.001).

These results suggest that while most dimensions of social entrepreneurship tendency remain relatively stable across academic years, specific dimensions (innovation and social networks) and financial literacy exhibit significant variation by grade level, indicating that students’ academic progression may influence certain cognitive and social aspects relevant to entrepreneurial orientation.

Table 10. Comparison of scale scores according to Academic Performance.

Scales		Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	p
Social Vision	Between Groups	1.649	3	0.550	1.134	0.336
	Within Groups	116.845	241	0.485
	Total	118.495	244
Financial Return	Between Groups	2.654	3	0.885	1.631	0.183
	Within Groups	130.718	241	0.542
	Total	133.372	244
Innovation	Between Groups	3.198	3	1.066	2.025	0.111
	Within Groups	126.871	241	0.526
	Total	130.070	244
Sustainability	Between Groups	1.525	3	0.508	1.116	0.343
	Within Groups	109.755	241	0.455
	Total	111.279	244
Social Networks	Between Groups	3.827	3	1.276	2.675	0.048
	Within Groups	114.948	241	0.477
	Total	118.775	244
Social Entrepreneurship Tendency (Total)	Between Groups	1.868	3	0.623	1.914	0.128
	Within Groups	78.399	241	0.325
	Total	80.267	244
Financial Literacy Scale	Between Groups	3.674	3	1.225	0.719	0.542
	Within Groups	410.584	241	1.704
	Total	414.258	244

shows that social entrepreneurship tendency and its sub-dimensions of social vision, financial return, innovation, and sustainability did not show significant differences according to academic achievement (p > 0.05), while the social networks sub-dimension showed significant differences according to academic achievement (p < 0.05). It was determined that the significant difference in the social networks sub-dimension was between the highly successful and unsuccessful (p = 0.038, Dunnett test). Accordingly, the social networks score of those with very high academic achievement are higher than those with low academic achievement. It was determined that financial literacy did not show a significant difference according to academic achievement (p > 0.05).

Table 11. Comparison of scale scores according to Mother’s educational level.

Scales		Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	p
Social Vision	Between Groups	0.354	3	0.118	0.241	0.868
	Within Groups	118.140	241	0.490
	Total	118.495	244
Financial Return	Between Groups	2.544	3	0.848	1.562	0.199
	Within Groups	130.828	241	0.543
	Total	133.372	244
Innovation	Between Groups	0.593	3	0.198	0.368	0.776
	Within Groups	129.477	241	0.537
	Total	130.070	244
Sustainability	Between Groups	0.101	3	0.034	0.073	0.974
	Within Groups	111.178	241	0.461
	Total	111.279	244
Social Networks	Between Groups	2.056	3	0.685	1.415	0.239
	Within Groups	116.719	241	0.484
	Total	118.775	244
Social Entrepreneurship Tendency (Total)	Between Groups	0.462	3	0.154	0.465	0.707
	Within Groups	79.805	241	0.331
	Total	80.267	244
Financial Literacy Scale	Between Groups	25.731	3	8.577	5.320	0.001
	Within Groups	388.528	241	1.612
	Total	414.258	244

shows that there are no significant differences in social entrepreneurship tendencies and their sub-dimensions according to the Mother’s educational level (p > 0.05). Financial literacy was found to show significant differences according to the Mother’s educational level (p < 0.05). A significant difference was found between those whose mothers had a primary school-bachelor’s degree (p = 0.001, Dunnett test) and those whose mothers had a high school-bachelor’s degree (p = 0.021, Dunnett test). Accordingly, the financial literacy score of participants whose mothers had a bachelor’s degree was lower than that of participants whose mothers had a primary school or high school degree.

Table 12. Comparison of scale scores according to Father’s educational level.

Scales		Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	p
Social Vision	Between Groups	0.239	3	0.080	0.163	0.921
	Within Groups	118.255	241	0.491
	Total	118.495	244
Financial Return	Between Groups	4.835	3	1.612	3.022	0.030
	Within Groups	128.538	241	0.533
	Total	133.372	244
Innovation	Between Groups	0.482	3	0.161	0.299	0.826
	Within Groups	129.588	241	0.538
	Total	130.070	244
Sustainability	Between Groups	0.233	3	0.078	0.168	0.918
	Within Groups	111.046	241	0.461
	Total	111.279	244
Social Networks	Between Groups	1.038	3	0.346	0.708	0.548
	Within Groups	117.737	241	0.489
	Total	118.775	244
Social Entrepreneurship Tendency (Total)	Between Groups	0.481	3	0.160	0.484	0.694
	Within Groups	79.787	241	0.331
	Total	80.267	244
Financial Literacy Scale	Between Groups	36.878	3	12.293	7.850	0.000
	Within Groups	377.381	241	1.566
	Total	414.258	244

shows that the social entrepreneurship tendency exhibits a significant difference (p < 0.05) only in the financial return sub-dimension according to the Father’s educational level. The significant difference was found among those whose fathers were high school or postgraduate graduates (p = 0.044, Dunnett test). Accordingly, the financial return score of participants whose fathers were postgraduate degree holders was higher than that of participants whose fathers were high school graduates. Financial literacy was found to show a significant difference according to the Father’s educational level (p < 0.05). A significant difference was found between participants whose fathers had elementary school and graduate degrees (p = 0.013, Dunnett test). Accordingly, the financial literacy scores of participants whose fathers had elementary school degrees were higher than those of participants whose fathers had graduate degrees.

Table 13. Comparison of scale scores according to Family income.

Scales		Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	p
Social Vision	Between Groups	0.270	2	0.135	0.276	0.759
	Within Groups	118.225	242	0.489
	Total	118.495	244
Financial Return	Between Groups	2.251	2	1.126	2.078	0.127
	Within Groups	131.121	242	0.542
	Total	133.372	244
Innovation	Between Groups	1.911	2	0.955	1.804	0.167
	Within Groups	128.159	242	0.530
	Total	130.070	244
Sustainability	Between Groups	1.036	2	0.518	1.137	0.323
	Within Groups	110.243	242	0.456
	Total	111.279	244
Social Networks	Between Groups	3.968	2	1.984	4.182	0.016
	Within Groups	114.807	242	0.474
	Total	118.775	244
Social Entrepreneurship Tendency (Total)	Between Groups	0.573	2	0.287	0.871	0.420
	Within Groups	79.694	242	0.329
	Total	80.267	244
Financial Literacy Scale	Between Groups	13.057	2	6.529	3.938	0.021
	Within Groups	401.201	242	1.658
	Total	414.258	244

shows that the social entrepreneurship tendency only exhibits a significant difference based on family income in the social networks sub-dimension (p < 0.05). The significant difference was found to be between those with medium-level family income and those with high-level family income (p = 0.025, Dunnett test). A significant difference was found between those with medium-level family income and those with high-level family income (p = 0.025, Dunnett test). Accordingly, the social networks sub-dimension score of those with medium-level family income is higher than the score of those with high-level family income.

A significant difference in financial literacy levels was found according to Family income (p < 0.05). A significant difference was found between those with low family income and those with high family income (p = 0.030, Dunnett test) and between those with medium family income and those with high family income (p = 0.024, Dunnett test). Accordingly, the financial literacy score of those with low family income is higher than that of those with high family income. Similarly, the financial literacy score of those with medium family income is higher than that of those with high family income.

Table 14. Comparison of scale scores based on whether there is an entrepreneur in the family.

Scales	Answer	n	x̄	Sd	t	p
Social Vision	Yes	51	3.77	0.827	0.614	0.113
	No	194	3.75	0.660
Financial Return	Yes	51	3.74	0.786	1.077	0.283
	No	194	3.61	0.726
Innovation	Yes	51	3.65	0.862	2.280	0.132
	No	194	3.66	0.693
Sustainability	Yes	51	3.89	0.699	0.930	0.353
	No	194	3.79	0.669
Social Networks	Yes	51	4.14	0.692	1.238	0.217
	No	194	4.01	0.697
Social Entrepreneurship Tendency (Total)	Yes	51	3.82	0.614	0.765	0.445
	No	194	3.75	0.563
Financial Literacy Scale	Yes	51	3.97	0.898	3.197	0.002
	No	194	3.33	0.976

shows that there is no significant difference in social entrepreneurship tendencies and their sub-dimensions based on whether there is an entrepreneur in the family (p > 0.05). Financial literacy was found to show a significant difference based on whether there was an entrepreneur in the family (p < 0.05). The reason for this significant difference is that the financial literacy scores of participants with entrepreneurs in their families were higher than those of participants without entrepreneurs in their families.

The analysis conducted to determine whether financial literacy and social entrepreneurship tendency and its sub-dimensions showed significant differences according to socio-demographic characteristics revealed that hypotheses H5, H8, H9, and H11 were partially accepted, while hypotheses H6, H7, and H10 were rejected.

The results of the hypothesis testing are summarized in

Table 15. Hypotheses Testing Results for Social Entrepreneurship Tendency and Financial Literacy.

Hypothesis	Variable/Sub-Dimension	Relationship/Difference	Statistical Evidence	Support	Explanation
H1	Social Vision, Financial Return, Innovation, Sustainability, Social Networks	Positive inter-correlations	r = 0.294–0.742, p < 0.01	Supported	Sub-dimensions are significantly correlated; improvement in one dimension accompanies increases in others.
H2	Financial Literacy → Social Entrepreneurship Tendency	Positive association	r = 0.128, p < 0.05	Partially Supported	Financial literacy has a modest yet statistically significant positive association with overall social entrepreneurship tendency.
H3	Financial Literacy → Sub-dimensions (Financial Return, Sustainability, Social Networks, Social Vision, Innovation)	Positive association for Financial Return, Sustainability, Social Networks; not significant for Social Vision and Innovation	r = 0.200–0.226, p < 0.01	Partially Supported	Financial literacy mainly supports economic and network-related sub-dimensions; Social Vision and Innovation are unaffected.
H4	Financial Literacy → Social Entrepreneurship Tendency	Positive effect	R2 = 0.016, β = 0.056, p < 0.05	Supported	Regression confirms a modest but significant effect; additional factors likely contribute more to social entrepreneurship tendencies.
H5	Financial Literacy by socio-demographic characteristics	Partial differences	p < 0.05	Partially Supported	Financial literacy differs according to certain demographic factors, but differences are limited.
H6	Social Entrepreneurship Tendency by socio-demographics	No significant differences	p > 0.05	Not Supported	Overall social entrepreneurship tendency does not vary significantly across demographic characteristics.
H7	Social Vision by socio-demographics	No significant differences	p > 0.05	Not Supported	Social Vision sub-dimension remains consistent across demographic groups.
H8	Financial Return by socio-demographics	Partial differences	p < 0.05	Partially Supported	Some demographic factors influence Financial Return sub-dimension.
H9	Innovation by socio-demographics	Partial differences	p < 0.05	Partially Supported	Innovation sub-dimension shows modest differences across certain demographic groups.
H10	Sustainability by socio-demographics	No significant differences	p > 0.05	Not Supported	Sustainability sub-dimension remains stable across demographic characteristics.
H11	Social Networks by socio-demographics	Partial differences	p < 0.05	Partially Supported	Social Networks sub-dimension is modestly affected by some socio-demographic factors.

, which presents the relationships among the sub-dimensions of social entrepreneurship tendency, the effect of financial literacy, and the differences according to socio-demographic characteristics.

5. Discussion and Conclusions

The present study examined the relationship between financial literacy and social entrepreneurship tendency among students enrolled at a Turkish public university. In addition, it explored how students’ financial literacy levels and social entrepreneurship tendencies, as well as their sub-dimensions, varied according to socio-demographic characteristics.

Descriptive analyses indicated that participants’ financial literacy and social entrepreneurship tendency were moderately above average. The sample was predominantly composed of female students aged 18–21, primarily in their third and fourth years of study, with average academic achievement. Regarding parental background, most participants’ parents had completed elementary or high school education, and family income was generally at a middle level. The majority of participants reported no entrepreneurs in the family.

5.1. Interrelationships Among Social Entrepreneurship Sub-Dimensions

The analysis revealed statistically significant positive relationships among the sub-dimensions of social entrepreneurship tendency. This indicates that positive changes in one sub-dimension (social vision, financial return, innovation, sustainability, or social networks) tend to coincide with increases in other sub-dimensions, confirming the multidimensional coherence of social entrepreneurship. This result supports the conceptualization of social entrepreneurship as an integrated construct rather than a set of independent traits. There are studies in the literature that apply the social entrepreneurship tendency scale to university students. In the research conducted by Paksoy et al. (2019) to examine the effects of personality traits and social responsibility awareness of university students on their social entrepreneurship intention, the social entrepreneurship tendency scale was analyzed in accordance with the original scale through the dimensions of social vision, financial return, innovation, sustainability, and social networks [34].

5.2. Financial Literacy and Social Entrepreneurship

The present analysis revealed a positive yet modest association between financial literacy and social entrepreneurship tendency among university students. At the sub-dimensional level, financial literacy was significantly correlated with Financial Return, Sustainability, and Social Networks, whereas no statistically significant associations were observed with Social Vision or Innovation. This absence of association may reflect the characteristics of the sample; as students with limited professional experience, participants may not yet have had opportunities to enact behaviors indicative of social vision or innovation in real-world contexts.

Complementary regression analyses further corroborated that financial literacy exerts a statistically significant but modest effect on social entrepreneurship tendency (B = 0.056, p < 0.05; R² = 0.016), suggesting that while financial literacy serves as a facilitative factor, it is not the primary determinant of socially responsible entrepreneurial behaviors.

These findings are broadly consistent with extant research. Seyrek and Gül (2017) reported that financial literacy did not directly influence entrepreneurial intention but was positively associated with perceiving entrepreneurship as attractive [63]. Similarly, Kıran et al. (2018) observed no direct effect of financial literacy on entrepreneurial intention among university students, although socio-demographic factors such as gender, academic year, family income, and the presence of entrepreneurs in the family were significant [64]. In contrast, Ripain et al. (2017) documented a significant positive relationship between financial literacy and entrepreneurial intention in Malaysia [65]. Ahmad et al. (2025) further demonstrated that while financial literacy did not directly shape entrepreneurial spirit, personal financial management mediated this relationship, underscoring the indirect yet meaningful role of financial competencies in fostering entrepreneurial behaviors [17]. Koshal et al. (2011) found that demographic variables, including gender, age, and academic year, did not significantly influence economic literacy among Indian MBA students [66]. Finally, Şirin et al. (2018) identified social entrepreneurship tendencies among university students, with significant differences across sub-dimensions by gender and parental education [28].

Collectively, these findings suggest that financial literacy contributes indirectly and selectively to social entrepreneurship, particularly through capacities related to economic outcomes, sustainability, and social networking. The results highlight that additional individual, social, and contextual factors are likely more decisive in shaping students’ social entrepreneurship tendencies.

5.3. Socio-Demographic Differences

Analysis of socio-demographic factors revealed that financial literacy levels differ according to gender, class level, parental education, family income, and the presence of an entrepreneur in the family. In this context, striking results have emerged:

Students whose parents completed primary school were found to have higher levels of financial literacy than others. This can be explained by the fact that children of parents with lower levels of education are exposed to financial responsibilities at an early age and develop financial awareness through practical experience.

Students from low-income families were found to have higher levels of financial literacy than others. This can be explained by the fact that, due to economic constraints, they develop budget management and saving behaviors at an early age. The necessity of making financial decisions in daily life may have increased individuals’ financial awareness.

• Financial return differed by gender and father’s education, suggesting that practical financial aspects of social entrepreneurship are sensitive to familial and gender-related factors.

Social entrepreneurship tendency was largely unaffected by demographic variables; however, specific sub-dimensions displayed meaningful variation:

• Innovation varied by class level, implying that educational exposure enhances creative problem-solving within social entrepreneurship.
• Social networks differed according to class level, academic achievement, and family income, indicating that networking and collaboration capacities are influenced by socio-economic and educational contexts.
• Sustainability and social vision were largely unaffected by demographic variables, suggesting that these dimensions may be driven more by generational or cultural norms than by socio-economic status.

5.4. Integration with Literature

The present findings corroborate and extend prior research on the relationship between financial literacy and social entrepreneurship. While previous studies on financial literacy and entrepreneurial intention have reported mixed results, the current study demonstrates that financial literacy exerts a modest yet statistically significant influence on social entrepreneurship tendencies, particularly through its association with resource-oriented and networked sub-dimensions. Seyrek and Gül (2017) and Kıran et al. (2018) emphasized the role of demographic characteristics in shaping entrepreneurial outcomes [63,64], whereas Ripain et al. (2017) and Ahmad et al. (2025) highlighted the importance of contextual and mediating factors [17,65]. Similarly, Koshal et al. (2011) and Şirin et al. (2018) illustrated nuanced effects of demographic variables on economic and social entrepreneurship competencies [28,66]. Collectively, these findings suggest that the integration of financial literacy with experiential learning and network-building interventions may more effectively foster social entrepreneurship among university students.

Prior research also underscores the relevance of contextual and culturally informed perspectives for developing entrepreneurial competencies [67,68,69,70]. Understanding local norms and values is crucial in promoting socially responsible behaviors and ensuring that educational interventions are relevant to students’ immediate environments.

In the present Turkish university sample, financial literacy demonstrated a statistically significant but modest positive effect on overall social entrepreneurship tendency. Although the total tendency did not vary substantially across socio-demographic characteristics, certain sub-dimensions, specifically Financial Return, Innovation, and Social Networks, exhibited meaningful variation, suggesting that targeted educational and policy interventions could enhance these capacities. Integrating financial literacy with experiential and social learning opportunities could thus better prepare students to engage in socially responsible entrepreneurial activities.

5.5. Limitations and Future Research Directions

These findings should be interpreted in light of the study’s sample limitations: the participants were drawn from a single Turkish university, and the modest effect sizes indicate that financial literacy is supportive rather than primary in shaping social entrepreneurship tendencies. Psychological, social, and contextual factors are likely to play a larger role in determining students’ engagement in socially entrepreneurial behaviors.

Based on the findings, several practical recommendations and avenues for future research emerge. Increasing university students’ awareness of financial literacy and social entrepreneurship remains essential, as these competencies underpin effective participation in economic and social systems. Practical initiatives, including seminars, workshops, panels, and targeted courses, can help strengthen students’ knowledge and skills.

Future research should consider comparative analyses across multiple universities, examine financial literacy’s relationship with other outcomes such as career planning, decision-making styles, problem-solving skills, time management, and emotional intelligence, and explore differences between students who have received formal financial education versus those who have not. Given the limited explanatory power observed in this study and the scarcity of research in this area, the current findings provide a preliminary foundation for guiding subsequent studies aimed at identifying additional factors influencing socially entrepreneurial behaviors among university students.