In a survey of 640 people across the country, 12 per cent said they might use a "lower tier" adviser if they needed the appropriate type of simple product, while 7 per cent said they would if it was cheaper.
The majority would prefer to go to someone who was fully qualified to advise on all products or to use their own judgment.
Young people and those in the C2/DE social grades, likely to be the low earners that the government most wants to target to close the savings gap, endorsed these results.
The survey found that just 13 per cent of 15-24 year olds and 13 per cent of C2/DEs said they might use a lower tier adviser if they needed a relevant simple product.
However, price was not a determining factor, as only 8 per cent of those would choose a lower tiered adviser if it was cheaper.
Experience was the most important factor for 31 per cent of respondents, with 25 per cent saying they would rather go to someone fully qualified to advise on all areas of finance.
Liz Walkington, communications manager at RJ Temple, said: "This suggests that the proposals in CP121 for two-tier advice would not be widely effective and it also casts doubt on the recommendations in the Sandler Review for a suite of "stakeholder" products sold by unqualified people.
"We would welcome measures that encourage people to save more, but are concerned that advisers without qualifications and "one size fits all" products dilute the message of sound financial planning and could lead to mis-buying that would simply deter people from making provision in the future.
"The IFA's role is to empower people to make informed decisions on their financial needs. With the proposed stakeholder products, the government would effectively be making the decision on what is good for people, with no "know your customer", no suitability checks and no regulation. This flies in the face of all that has been built up since the Financial Services Act was passed in 1988."
