本研究探討台灣投資人在面臨槓桿投資壓力時，是否受到心理帳戶、股息謬誤與損失規避等行為偏誤影響，並檢驗金融從業背景是否具有「專業免疫」效果。本研究採情境式問卷調查，模擬受測者面對新台幣 1,000 萬元房貸與 300 萬元個人信用貸款時之還款與投資標的選擇，共取得 129 份有效樣本，並以交叉分析、皮爾森卡方檢定與 Cramér’s V 進行分析。
實證結果顯示，借貸經驗、財務緊迫、金融從業背景與市場情緒，對主要槓桿決策行為皆未達統計顯著水準，顯示大額負債情境下之行為偏誤可能具有跨群體普遍性。其中，金融從業背景未能顯著區分受測者之決策差異，惟本研究並未直接衡量受測者之金融素養或商品理解能力，因此此結果不宜解讀為金融專業能力完全無效，而應理解為：在本研究樣本與衡量方式下，單純以金融從業背景作為代理變數，尚不足以有效區分槓桿情境下之決策差異。
雖然核心假說未獲顯著支持，描述性統計仍顯示，受測者普遍傾向降低眼前現金流壓力，偏好寬限期、高配息或保本配息商品。探索性分析進一步發現，曾使用信用貸款者較傾向採取「以配息養貸」策略；非獲利狀態者與市場情緒較不樂觀者，則較偏好保本配息商品。惟相關效果量偏弱至低中度，宜作為補充性觀察。
本研究建議，投資人應以整體資產負債表觀點評估槓桿投資，並進行寬限期結束後之本息壓力測試；金融機構亦應將負債比率、現金流壓力與行為風險納入 KYC 與公平待客評估。

This study examines whether Taiwanese investors’ leveraged investment decisions are affected by behavioral finance biases, including mental accounting, dividend fallacy, and loss aversion. It also explores whether financial occupational background can distinguish decision-making patterns under leveraged investment pressure. A scenario-based questionnaire was used to simulate repayment and investment choices under a NT$10 million mortgage and a NT$3 million personal credit loan. A total of 129 valid responses were analyzed using cross-tabulation, Pearson’s chi-square tests, and Cramér’s V.
The empirical results show that borrowing experience, financial distress, financial occupational background, and market sentiment did not significantly explain the major leveraged investment decisions. This suggests that behavioral biases under substantial debt pressure may be widespread across groups rather than limited to specific backgrounds. In particular, financial occupational background did not significantly distinguish respondents’ choices. Since this study did not directly measure financial literacy or product comprehension, this variable should be interpreted as a proxy rather than a direct measure of professional competence.
Although the core hypotheses were not statistically supported, descriptive statistics show that respondents generally tended to reduce immediate cash-flow pressure and preferred grace periods, high-dividend products, or principal-protected income products. Exploratory analysis further found that respondents with prior personal credit loan experience were more inclined to adopt a cash-flow-oriented strategy of using investment income to service debt. Respondents in non-profitable positions and those with less optimistic market sentiment were more likely to prefer principal-protected income products. However, these exploratory findings showed weak to low-to-moderate effect sizes and should be interpreted cautiously.
This study suggests that investors should evaluate leveraged investments from a consolidated balance sheet perspective and conduct repayment stress tests after grace periods. Financial institutions should also incorporate debt ratios, cash-flow pressure, and behavioral risks into KYC and fair-customer-treatment assessments.

一、 中文文獻
中華民國證券投資信託暨顧問商業同業公會（2026）。境內基金各項資料統計。取自投信投顧公會官方網站。
王韻怡、池祥萱、周冠男（2016）。行為財務學文獻回顧與展望：台灣市場之研究。管理評論，35(2)，41-65。
台灣證券交易所（2026）。台股加權股價指數歷史資料。取自台灣證券交易所官方網站。
傅玉婷（2023）。過度自信與私房錢效果之關係：以台灣市場為例［未出版之碩士論文］。國立政治大學。
廖紹寧（2020）。台灣基金經理人背景對過度自信行為與處分效果行為的影響［未出版之碩士論文］。國立政治大學。
謝晴雯（2024）。台灣高股息 ETF 與市值型 ETF 之績效分析［未出版之碩士論文］。國立政治大學。
二、 英文文獻
Baker, M., & Wurgler, J. (2004). A catering theory of dividends. The Journal of Finance, 59(3), 1125-1165.
Barber, B. M., & Odean, T. (2001). Boys will be boys: Gender, overconfidence, and common stock investment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(1), 261-292.
Barberis, N., Greenwood, R., Jin, L., & Shleifer, A. (2015). X-CAPM: An extrapolative capital asset pricing model. Journal of Financial Economics, 115(1), 1-24.
Barberis, N., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1998). A model of investor sentiment. Journal of Financial Economics, 49(3), 307-343.
Benartzi, S., & Thaler, R. H. (1995). Myopic loss aversion and the equity premium puzzle. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(1), 73-92.
Buehler, R., Griffin, D., & Ross, M. (1994). Exploring the "planning fallacy": Why people underestimate their task completion times. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(3), 366-381.
Crowne, D. P., & Marlowe, D. (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24(4), 349.
Fama, E. F. (1970). Efficient capital markets: A review of theory and empirical work. The Journal of Finance, 25(2), 383-417.
Harris, L. E., Hartzmark, S. M., & Solomon, D. H. (2015). Juicing the dividend yield: Mutual funds and the demand for dividends. Journal of Financial Economics, 116(3), 433-451.
Hartzmark, S. M., & Solomon, D. H. (2019). The dividend disconnect. The Journal of Finance, 74(5), 2153-2199.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263-291.
Landsberger, H. A. (1958). Hawthorne revisited. Cornell University.
Miller, M. H., & Modigliani, F. (1961). Dividend policy, growth, and the valuation of shares. The Journal of Business, 34(4), 411-433.
Modigliani, F., & Brumberg, R. (1954). Utility analysis and the consumption function: An interpretation of cross-section data. In K. K. Kurihara (Ed.), Post-Keynesian Economics (pp. 388-436). Rutgers University Press.
Prelec, D., & Loewenstein, G. (1998). The red and the black: Mental accounting of savings and debt. Marketing Science, 17(1), 4-28.
Shefrin, H., & Statman, M. (1984). Explaining investor preference for cash dividends. Journal of Financial Economics, 13(2), 253-282.
Shefrin, H., & Statman, M. (1985). The disposition to sell winners too early and ride losers too long: Theory and evidence. The Journal of Finance, 40(3), 777-790.
Thaler, R. H. (1985). Mental accounting and consumer choice. Marketing Science, 4(3), 199-214.
Thaler, R. H. (1999). Mental accounting matters. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12(3), 183-206.
Thaler, R. H., & Johnson, E. J. (1990). Gambling with the house money and trying to break even: The effects of prior outcomes on risky choice. Management Science, 36(6), 643-660.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cognitive Psychology, 5(2), 207-232.
Von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1944). Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton University Press.