Abstract
This study aimed at measuring the level of inequality income distribution and its development in Indonesia. It employed the quantitative method by selecting data from the statistic center of Indonesia purposively. The data have been analyzed using path analysis. The results yield the following conclusions: First, the inequality of income distribution between islands in Indonesia is classified as medium and high inequality. The highest inequality in income distribution is in Java, while the lowest income distribution inequality is in Kalimantan; Second, provinces with lower levels of inequality in income distribution in Indonesia are the provinces of Riau, Jambi, Bengkulu, Lampung, West Java, Banten, Central Sulawesi, Gorontalo, and West Papua. Provinces with increasing inequality in income distribution are South Sumatra Province, DKI Jakarta, East Kalimantan, North Kalimantan, North Sulawesi, and North Maluku; Third, Sulawesi is the island with the highest level of income distribution inequality in rural and urban areas, while in Java, it has the highest level of distribution inequality in urban areas. Maluku and Papua are the islands with the highest level of distribution inequality in rural areas but they have a low level of inequality in urban areas. Besides, the island of Kalimantan also has a level of inequality of low-income distribution in rural areas. There is a significant difference in the Gini index between urban and rural areas in Indonesia, where urban areas have a high level of distribution inequality compared to rural areas; Fourth, there are significant Gini index differences before regional autonomy and after regional autonomy in Indonesia, where high-income disparities occurred after regional autonomy compared to the era before regional autonomy.
Highlights
Humans make mistakes because they are forced, by their psyche, to consider many options while making decisions
Microsoft Excel is used for data cleansing and removal of outliers and SPSS is used for demographics Javed et al (2014)
Descriptive statistics are shown in table 01 below. 21.2% (n=88) of our respondents lie within the range of 18 to years, 28.8% (n=120) are within the range of to years, 38.5% (n=160) are in to 45 years of age and 11.5% (n=48) are above 45 years of age. 59.6% (n=248) male and 40.4% (n=168) are female respondents
Summary
Humans make mistakes because they are forced, by their psyche, to consider many options while making decisions. Choosing an option can lead to benefit or loss, satisfaction or regret, whether that option is considered perfect at the time or not. Sometimes people make financial decisions such as spending in profit making stocks or spending money very consciously where it’s needed but sometimes those decisions lead to loss. But not all the time, bad financial decisions whether in saving or investing. Due to online available contents, a smartphone which has the ability to restrict someone from financial mistakes, the risk of impulsive decision-making behavior can be controlled (Farooq, 2018; Kumar, 2018; Meyer, 2018; Varadarajan, 2018). Marshmallow Theory suggests that better selfcontrol leads to better well-being and bright future (Angeles and Uni, 1972)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
