随着我国经济的发展以及家庭结构的变化，中学生的直接消费能力以及对家庭消费决策的影响力增强。消费者社会化是个体社会化的重要内容，而中学阶段是个体社会化的重要阶段，因此有必要对中学生的消费情况进行研究。本研究从消费者社会化理论出发，探讨中学生消费决策风格、消费价值观的特点及其与家庭理财教育方式之间的关系，揭示中学生消费现状及其影响因素，为中学生消费教育提供理论依据，以促进中学生在消费领域的社会化。研究工具包括修订的消费者决策风格问卷（Consumer Styles Inventory， CSI，Sproles & Kendall，1986）、中学生消费价值观问卷（孙琦等，2007）、家庭理财教育方式问卷（石庆新，2008）以及自编中学生消费状况调查表。参与正式施测的被试为北京市两所普通中学初一、初二、高一、高二4个年级（每个年级3个班）的学生，共377人。研究发现：1.CSI具有跨文化适应性，修订后的问卷保留了原问卷中的8个维度，包括：品牌认知导向、习惯导向、决策困扰导向、冲动导向、流行认知导向、娱乐认知导向、价格认知导向、质量认知导向等。CSI信效度达到心理测量学指标。2.中学生消费决策风格年级差异不显著，性别差异显著。男生在品牌导向上的得分显著高于女生；而女生在流行导向和娱乐导向上得分显著高于男生。中学生消费决策风格可划分为决策随意型、决策紊乱型、决策理智型和决策实惠型。四种类型比例依次为：26.94%，22.50%，28.61%，21.94%。3.中学生注重节俭消费，最不重视攀比消费。低年级中学生比高年级学生更注重节俭消费，而高年级学生更注重品牌消费和时尚消费；男生比女生更注重时尚消费和攀比消费。4.注重时尚消费与攀比消费的中学生易形成冲动、困扰等不良的决策风格；注重节俭消费的中学生易形成价格导向和质量导向的决策风格。5.积极引导型、溺爱放纵型、忽视型和消极控制型等四种不同理财教育方式对中学生消费决策风格有显著影响。其中，教育引导能在一定程度上避免中学生形成冲动、困扰等不良决策风格，而消极控制则相反。6.父母教育方式为积极引导型的中学生更易形成节俭消费的价值观，更难形成时尚消费和攀比消费的价值观；而溺爱放纵则相反。7.消费价值观在家庭理财教育方式与习惯导向之间起完全中介作用，在理财教育方式与消费决策风格其余维度之间起部分中介作用。

The direct consumption ability of adolescents and their influences on family consumption decision-making are developing with the development of economy and the change of family structures. Consumer socialization takes important part in the individual socialization,what’s more adolescent is one of the most important stages of individual socialization. So it is necessary to study the consumption of adolescents. This research discussed the characteristics of students’ consumer decision-making styles and consumption values,and their correlation with family financial education， from the view of consumer socialization theory,in order to discover the characteristics of adolescents’ consumption and the influence factors and serve for the financial education and consumer socialization of adolescents.The instruments included Consumer Styles Inventory (Sproles & Kendall， 1986)，Adolescent Consumption Value(Sun，et al，2007)， Family Financial Education Questionnaire(Feng，2008) .There were 377 participants from four grades of two ordinary middle schools in Beijing.The results of this study show that:(1)The revised CSI includes 8 dimensions,namely brand conscious，habit conscious， confused by overchoice conscious, impulsive,fashion conscious,recreational conscious,price conscious and quality conscious. The reliability and validity of CSI reaches the standards of psychometrics.(2)Significant gender difference has been found. Boys have higher scores in brand conscious and lower scores in fashion conscious and recreational conscious than girls.There are four clusters of decision-making, including indifference, turbulence, rational and utilitarian. The proportions of the four types are 26.94%, 22.50%, 28.61%, 21.94%.(3) The adolescents are inclined to frugality most and contrast least on the consumer value. The junior are inclined to frugality more, but the senior regard fad and contrast more on the consumer value. And boys are more inclined to fad and contrast than girls.(4)The adolescents who have higher scores on fad and contrast are more confused and impulsive in consumer decision-making. The adolescents who have higher scores on frugality take price and quality into account in consumer decision-making.(5) The adolescents accept inductive, spoiled, neglected or negative controlled educations are significantly different on consumer decision-making styles. The inductive educations can avoide the adolesecents’ confusion and impulsion in consumer decision-making, the negative controlled educations reversed. (6) The adolescents accept inductive, spoiled, neglected or negative controlled educations are significantly different on consumer values. The adolescents accept inductive educations are inclined to frugality more.(7) The consumer values partly mediated between consumer decision-making styles and family financial education.