Do Consumers Choose the Right Credit Contracts?

Sumit Agarwal, S. Chomsisengphet, Chunlin Liu, Nicholas S. Souleles
{"title":"Do Consumers Choose the Right Credit Contracts?","authors":"Sumit Agarwal, S. Chomsisengphet, Chunlin Liu, Nicholas S. Souleles","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.843826","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A number of studies have pointed to various mistakes that consumers might make in their consumption-saving and financial decisions. We utilize a unique market experiment conducted by a large U.S. bank to assess how systematic and costly such mistakes are in practice. The bank offered consumers a choice between two credit card contracts, one with an annual fee but a lower interest rate and one with no annual fee but a higher interest rate. To minimize their total interest costs net of the fee, consumers expecting to borrow a sufficiently large amount should choose the contract with the fee, and vice-versa. We find that on average consumers chose the contract that ex post minimized their net costs. A substantial fraction of consumers (about 40%) still chose the ex post sub-optimal contract, with some incurring hundreds of dollars of avoidable interest costs. Nonetheless, the probability of choosing the sub-optimal contract declines with the dollar magnitude of the potential error, and consumers with larger errors were more likely to subsequently switch to the optimal contract. Thus most of the errors appear not to have been very costly, with the exception that a small minority of consumers persists in holding substantially sub-optimal contracts without switching.","PeriodicalId":269732,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Issues in Debtor-Creditor Relations (Topic)","volume":"27 22","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"176","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Issues in Debtor-Creditor Relations (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.843826","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 176

Abstract

A number of studies have pointed to various mistakes that consumers might make in their consumption-saving and financial decisions. We utilize a unique market experiment conducted by a large U.S. bank to assess how systematic and costly such mistakes are in practice. The bank offered consumers a choice between two credit card contracts, one with an annual fee but a lower interest rate and one with no annual fee but a higher interest rate. To minimize their total interest costs net of the fee, consumers expecting to borrow a sufficiently large amount should choose the contract with the fee, and vice-versa. We find that on average consumers chose the contract that ex post minimized their net costs. A substantial fraction of consumers (about 40%) still chose the ex post sub-optimal contract, with some incurring hundreds of dollars of avoidable interest costs. Nonetheless, the probability of choosing the sub-optimal contract declines with the dollar magnitude of the potential error, and consumers with larger errors were more likely to subsequently switch to the optimal contract. Thus most of the errors appear not to have been very costly, with the exception that a small minority of consumers persists in holding substantially sub-optimal contracts without switching.
消费者是否选择了正确的信用合同?
许多研究指出了消费者在消费储蓄和财务决策中可能犯的各种错误。我们利用一家美国大型银行进行的独特市场实验来评估此类错误在实践中的系统性和代价。该银行向消费者提供两种信用卡合同,一种有年费但利率较低,另一种没有年费但利率较高。为了使扣除费用后的总利息成本最小化,希望借到足够多钱的消费者应该选择有费用的合同,反之亦然。我们发现,平均而言,消费者选择事后净成本最小的合同。相当一部分消费者(约40%)仍然选择事后的次优合约,其中一些会产生数百美元的本可避免的利息成本。然而,选择次优合约的概率随着潜在错误的美元大小而下降,错误较大的消费者随后更有可能转向最优合约。因此,除了少数消费者坚持持有本质上低于最优的合约而不转换之外,大多数错误似乎代价并不高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信