Hey ChatGPT—Is a Louis Vuitton Bag an Investment? Evaluating LLM Readiness for Use in Financial Literacy and Education

Stacey Taylor et al.

Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting2025https://doi.org/10.2308/jeta-2023-066article
AJG 1ABDC B
Weight
0.37

Abstract

The prevalence of large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT has wowed the world with its ability to generate text in a human-like manner. While educators evaluate how AI will impact the future of learning, we identify mistakes ChatGPT has made. We further extend this concern to nonfinancially sophisticated users seeking to improve their financial literacy who may not possess the financial acumen to determine when the AI is hallucinating. Using a longitudinal study, our analysis frames the prompts and subsequent findings within the four stages of the Dunning-Kruger effect to explore how users of varying expertise receive output from the LLMs. We find that ChatGPT cannot always fully distinguish between three different user groups. Our findings have important implications for accountants, educators, and students using LLMs as a tool in work and education and for the general population looking to bypass financial experts for their personal finance needs. Data Availability: Data will be made available upon request. JEL Classifications: M41.

1 citation

Open via your library →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2308/jeta-2023-066

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{stacey2025,
  title        = {{Hey ChatGPT—Is a Louis Vuitton Bag an Investment? Evaluating LLM Readiness for Use in Financial Literacy and Education}},
  author       = {Stacey Taylor et al.},
  journal      = {Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2308/jeta-2023-066},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Hey ChatGPT—Is a Louis Vuitton Bag an Investment? Evaluating LLM Readiness for Use in Financial Literacy and Education

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.37

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.16 × 0.4 = 0.06
M · momentum0.53 × 0.15 = 0.08
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.