Angry Borrowers: Ex Post Effects of Social Shaming on Debt Repayment

References

• Acquisti A, Taylor C, Wagman L (2016) The economics of privacy. J. Econom. Lit. 54(2):442–492.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agarwal S, Green R, Rosenblatt E, Yao V (2015) Collateral pledge, sunk-cost fallacy and mortgage default. J. Financial Intermed. 24(4):636–652.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ai C, Norton EC (2003) Interaction terms in logit and Probit models. Econom. Lett. 80(1):123–129.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Akerlof G (1982) Labor contracts as partial gift exchange. Quart. J. Econom. 97(4):543–569.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Athey S, Catalini C, Tucker C (2017) The digital privacy paradox: Small money, small costs, small talk. NBER Working paper, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Benabou R, Tirole J (2006) Incentives and prosocial behavior. Amer. Econom. Rev. 96(5):1652–1678.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berg T, Burg V, Gombović A, Puri M (2020) On the rise of FinTechs: Credit scoring using digital footprints. Rev. Financial Stud. 33(7):2845–2897.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berg T, Fuster A, Puri M (2022) FinTech lending. Annual Rev. Financial Econom. 14(1):187–207.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boudreau K, Jeppesen L, Reichstein T, Rullani F (2018) Entrepreneurial crowdfunding without private claims. Working Paper No. 16-038, Harvard Business School, Boston.Google Scholar
• Brusa F, Luo X, Fang Z (2019) The power of non-monetary incentive: Experimental evidence from P2P lending in China. Working paper, Temple University, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
• Burnham T (2007) High-testosterone men reject low ultimatum game offers. Proc. Royal Soc. B Biol. Sci. 274(1623):2327–2330.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bursztyn L, Jensen R (2017) Social image and economic behavior in the field: Identifying, understanding and shaping social pressure. Annual Rev. Econom. 9(1):131–153.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carlin B, Olafsson A, Pagel M (2020) FinTech and consumer well-being in the information age. Working paper, UCLA, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
• Cheng I, Severino F, Townsend R (2021) How do consumers fare when dealing with debt collectors? Evidence from out-of-court settlements. Rev. Financial Stud. 34(4):1617–1660.Crossref, Google Scholar
• D’Acunto F, Prabhala N, Rossi A (2019) The promises and pitfalls of robo-advising. Rev. Financial Stud. 32(5):1982–2020.Google Scholar
• D’Acunto F, Rossi A, Weber M (2024) Crowdsourcing peer information to change spending behavior. J. Financial Econom. 157:103858.Google Scholar
• Dai L, Han J, Shi J, Zhang B (2020) Digital footprints as collateral for debt collection. Working paper, CUHK, Shenzhen, China.Google Scholar
• DeFusco A, Tang H, Yannelis C (2022) Measuring the welfare cost of asymmetric information in consumer credit markets. J. Financial Econom. 146(3):821–840.Google Scholar
• Diep-Nguyen H, Dang H (2020) Social collateral. Working paper, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.Google Scholar
• Dobbie W, Song J (2015) Debt relief and debtor outcomes: Measuring the effects of consumer bankruptcy protection. Amer. Econom. Rev. 105(3):1272–1311.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dobbie W, Liberman A, Paravisini D, Pathania V (2021) Measuring bias in consumer lending. Rev. Econom. Stud. 88(6):2799–2832.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Drozd L, Serrano-Padial R (2017) Modeling the revolving revolution: The debt collection channel. Amer. Econom. Rev. 107(3):897–930.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Du N, Li L, Lu T, Lu X (2020) Pro-social compliance in P2P lending: A natural field experiment. Management Sci. 66(1):315–333.Link, 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
• Eckel C, Grossman P (2001) Chivalry and solidarity in ultimatum games. Econom. Inquiry 39(2):171–188.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Falk A, Hermle J (2018) Relationship of gender differences in preferences to economic development and gender equality. Science 362(6412):eaas9899.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fan J, Tang L, Zhu W, Zou B (2018) The Alibaba effect: Spatial consumption inequality and the welfare gains from E-commerce. J. Internat. Econom. 114(1):203–220.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fehr E, Gächter S (2000) Fairness and retaliation: The economics of reciprocity. J. Econom. Perspect. 14(3):159–181.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fonseca J, Strair K, Zafar B (2017) Access to credit and financial health: Evaluating the impact of debt collection. Staff Reports No. 814, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, New York.Google Scholar
• Fuster A, Goldsmith-Pinkham P, Ramadorai T, Walther A (2022) Predictably unequal? The effects of machine learning on credit markets. J. Finance 77(1):5–47.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gine X, Goldberg J, Yang D (2012) Credit market consequences of improved personal identification: Field experimental evidence from Malawi. Amer. Econom. Rev. 102(6):2923–2954.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goldfarb A, Tucker C (2012) Shifts in privacy concerns. Amer. Econom. Rev. Papers Proc. 102(3):349–353.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guiso L, Sapienza P, Zingales L (2013) The determinants of attitudes toward strategic default on mortgages. J. Finance 68(4):1473–1515.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Güth W, Schmittberger R, Schwarze B (1982) An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 3(4):367–388.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hart O, Moore J (2008) Contracts as reference points. Quart. J. Econom. 123(1):1–48.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hirshleifer D, Rasmusen E (1989) Cooperation in a repeated prisoners’ dilemma with ostracism. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 12(1):87–106.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
• Knez M, Camerer C (1995) Outside options and social comparison in three-player ultimatum game experiments. Games Econom. Behav. 10(1):65–94.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kuhnen CM, Melzer BT (2018) Noncognitive abilities and financial delinquency: The role of self‐efficacy in avoiding financial distress. J. Finance 73(6):2837–2869.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kummer M, Schulte P (2019) When private information settles the bill: Money and privacy in Google’s market for smartphone applications. Management Sci. 65(8):3470–3494.Link, Google Scholar
• Laudenbach C, Pirschel J, Siegel S (2021) Personal communication in a Fintech world: Evidence from loan payments. Working paper, CESifo, Munich, Germany.Google Scholar
• Liao L, Martin X, Wang N, Wang Z, Yang J (2023) What if borrowers were informed about credit reporting? Two natural field experiments. Accounting Rev. 98(3):397–425.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liao L, Wang Z, Xiang J, Yan H, Yang J (2021) User interface and firsthand experience in retail investing. Rev. Financial Stud. 34(9):4486–4523.Google Scholar
• Prince J, Wallsten S (2022) How much is privacy worth around the world and across platforms? J. Econom. Management Strategy 31(4):841–861.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Savage S, Waldman D (2013) The value of online privacy. Working paper, University of Colorado, Boulder.Google Scholar
• Srivastava J, Espinoza E, Fedorikhin A (2009) Coupling and decoupling of unfairness and anger in ultimatum bargaining. J. Behav. Decision Making 22(5):475–489.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tang H (2020) The value of privacy: Evidence from online borrowers. Working paper, LSE, London.Google Scholar