Do Political Differences Inhibit Market Transactions? An Investigation in the Context of Online Lending

References

• Abadie A, Diamond A, Hainmueller J (2015) Comparative politics and the synthetic control method. Amer. J. Political Sci. (59):495–510.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Alesina A, Miano A, Stantcheva S (2020) The polarization of reality. AEA Paper Proc. 110:324–328.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bakos Y (1991) A strategic analysis of electronic marketplaces. Manage. Inform. Systems Quart. 15(3):295–310.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barbera P, Jost J, Nagler J, Tucker J, Bonneau R (2015) Tweeting from left to right: Is online political communication more than an echo chamber? Psych. Sci. 26(10):1531–1542.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berry W, Ringquist E, Fording R, Hanson R (1998) Measuring citizen and government ideology in the American states, 1960–93. Amer. J. Political Sci. 42(1):327–348.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berry W, Fording R, Ringquist E, Hanson R, Klarner C (2010) Measuring citizen and government ideology in the U.S. states: A re-appraisal. State Political Policy Quart. 10(2):117–135.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boutyline A, Willer B (2017) The social structure of political echo chambers: Variation in ideological homophily in online networks. Political Psych. 38(3):551–569.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brandt M, Crawford J (2020) Worldview conflict and prejudice. Gawronski B, ed. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 61 (Elsevier, New York), 1–66.Google Scholar
• Burtch G, Ghose A, Wattal S (2014) Cultural differences and geography as determinants of online social lending. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 38(3):773–794.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cameron C, Trivedi P (2005) Microeconometrics: Methods and Applications (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Caughey D, Warshaw C (2016) The dynamics of state policy liberalism, 1936–2014. Amer. J. Political Sci. 60(4):899–913.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chambers J, Schlenker B, Collisson B (2013) Ideology and prejudice: The role of value conflicts. Psych. Sci. 24(2):140–149.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chan J, Wang J (2018) Hiring preference in online labor markets: Evidence of a female hiring bias. Management Sci. 64(7):2973–2994.Link, Google Scholar
• Chen K, Rohla R (2016) The effect of partisanship and political advertising on close family ties. Science 360(6392):1020–1024.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Crawford J, Brandt M, Inbar Y, Chambers J, Motyl M (2017) Social and economic ideologies differentially predict prejudice across the political spectrum, but social issues are most divisive. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 112(3):383–412.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cui R, Li J, Zhang D (2020) Reducing discrimination with reviews in the sharing economy: Evidence from field experiments on Airbnb. Management Sci. 66(3):1071–1094.Link, Google Scholar
• Dajud U (2013) Political proximity and international trade. Econom. Politics 25(3):283–312.Google Scholar
• Decker J, Lim J (2009) Democracy and trade: An empirical study. Econom. Government 10(2):165–186.Google Scholar
• Duarte J, Siegel S, Young L (2012) Trust and credit: The role of appearance in peer-to-peer lending. Rev. Financial Stud. 25(8):2455–2484.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edelman B, Luca M, Svirsky D (2017) Racial discrimination in the sharing economy: Evidence from a field experiment. Amer. Econom. J. Appl. Econom. 9(2):1–22.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Einav L, Farronato C, Levin J (2016) Peer-to-peer markets. Annu. Rev. Econom. 8:615–635.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elfenbein D, Fisman R, McManus B (2022) The impact of socioeconomic and cultural differences on online trade. Working paper, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO.Google Scholar
• Feldman S, Johnson C (2014) Understanding the determinants of political ideology: Implications of structural complexity. Political Psych. 35(3):337–358.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ganju K, Atasoy H, McCullough J, Greenwood B (2020) The role of decision support systems in attenuating racial biases in healthcare delivery. Management Sci. 66(11):5171–5181.Link, Google Scholar
• Ganzach Y, Schul Y (2021) Partisan ideological attitudes: Liberals are tolerant; the intelligent are intolerant. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 120(6):1551–1566.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gao Q, Lin M, Sias R (2022) Words matter: The role of readability, tone, and deception cues in online credit markets. J. Financial Quant. Anal. Forthcoming.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greenberg J, Mollick E (2017) Activist choice homophily and the crowdfunding of female founders. Admin. Sci. Quart. 62(2):341–374.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harkness S (2016) Discrimination in lending markets: Status and the intersections of gender and race. Soc. Psych. Quart. 79(1):81–93.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hildebrand T, Puri M, Rocholl J (2017) Adverse incentives in crowdfunding. Management Sci. 63(3):587–608.Link, Google Scholar
• Hirshleifer D (2015) Behavioral finance. Annu. Rev. Financial Econom. 7:133–159.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hochberg Y, Rauh D (2013) Local overweighting and underperformance: Evidence from limited partner private equity investments. Rev. Financial Stud. 26(2):403–451.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hong Y, Hu Y, Burtch G (2018) Embeddedness, prosociality, and social influence: Evidence from online crowdfunding. Management Inform. Systems Quart. 42(4):1211–1224.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Iacus S, King G, Porro G (2012) Causal inference without balance checking: Coarsened exact matching. Political Anal. 20(1):1–24.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Iyer R, Khwaja A, Luttmer E, Shue K (2016) Screening peers softly: Inferring the quality of small borrowers. Management Sci. 62(6):1554–1577.Link, Google Scholar
• Jones P (2020) Partisanship, political awareness, and retrospective evaluations, 1956–2016. Political Behav. 42(4):1295–1317.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jost J (2006) The end of the end of ideology. Amer. Psych. 61(7):651–670.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jost J (2017) Ideological asymmetries and the essence of political psychology. Political Psych. 38(2):167–208.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee J, Lee K, Nagarajan N (2014) Birds of a feather: Value implications of political alignment between top management and directors. J. Financial Econom. 112(2):232–250.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lewis G, Gossett C (2008) Change public opinion on same-sex marriage: The case of California. Political Policy 36(1):4–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liang C, Hong Y, Gu B (2021) Can monitoring help flatten the world? An empirical examination of online hiring. Working paper, University of Connecticut, Mansfield, CT.Google Scholar
• Lin M, Viswanathan S (2016) Home bias in online investments: An empirical study of an online crowdfunding market. Management Sci. 62(5):1393–1414.Link, Google Scholar
• Lin M, Prahala N, Viswanathan S (2013) Judging borrowers by the company they keep: Friendship networks and information asymmetry in online peer-to-peer lending. Management Sci. 59(1):17–35.Link, Google Scholar
• Linden S, Panagopoulos C (2019) The O’Reilly factor: An ideological bias in judgments about sexual harassment. Personality Individual Differences 139:198–201.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McConnell C, Margalit Y, Malhotra N, Levendusky M (2018) The economic consequences of partisanship in a polarized era. Amer. J. Political Sci. 62(1):5–18.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mejia J, Parker C (2021) When transparency fails: Bias and financial incentives in ridesharing platforms. Management Sci. 67(1):166–184.Link, Google Scholar
• Morrow J, Siverson R, Tabares T (1998) The political determinants of international trade: The major powers, 1907–1990. Amer. Political Sci. Rev. 92(3):649–661.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nunley J, Owens M, Howard R (2011) The effects of information and competition on racial discrimination: Evidence from a field experiment. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 80(3):670–679.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Phelps E (1972) The statistical theory of racism and sexism. Amer. Econom. Rev. 62(4):659–661.Google Scholar
• Pope D, Sydnor J (2011) What’s in a picture? Evidence of discrimination from Prosper.com. J. Human Resources 46(1):53–92.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sabzehzar A, Burtch G, Hong Y, Raghu T (2020) The role of religion in online prosocial lending: An interactional view. Working paper, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ.Google Scholar
• Santos Silva J, Tenreyro S (2006) The log of gravity. Rev. Econom. Statist. 88(4):641–658.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schoenmueller V, Netzer O, Stahl F (2022) Polarized America: From political partisanship to preference partisanship. Marketing Sci. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
• Senney G (2019) The geography of bidder behavior in peer-to-peer lending markets. J. Industrial Econom. 67(1):1–36.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Siegel J, Licht A, Schwartz S (2013) Egalitarianism, cultural distance, and foreign direct investment: A new approach. Organ. Sci. 24(4):1174–1194.Link, Google Scholar
• Wang H, Overby E (2022) How does online lending influence bankruptcy filings? Management Sci. 68(5):3309–3329.Link, Google Scholar
• Wei Z, Lin M (2017) Market mechanisms in online peer-to-peer lending. Management Sci. 63(12):4236–4257.Link, Google Scholar
• Wintoki M, Xi Y (2020) Partisan bias in fund portfolios. J. Financial Quant. Anal. 55(5):1717–1754.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wooldridge J (2002) Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach, 2nd ed. (South-Western Cengage Learning, Mason, OH).Google Scholar
• Younkin P, Kuppuswamy V (2018) The colorblind crowd? Founder race and performance in crowdfunding. Management Sci. 64(7):3269–3287.Link, Google Scholar
• Zhang J, Liu P (2012) Rational herding in microloan markets. Management Sci. 58(5):892–912.Link, Google Scholar