Does FinTech reduce human biases? Evidence from advisory vs. automated FinTechs in lending

IF 4 2区 经济学 Q1 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Journal of Banking & Finance Pub Date : 2025-12-01 Epub Date: 2025-10-11 DOI:10.1016/j.jbankfin.2025.107557
Yanting Chen , Yingwei Dong , Jiayin Hu , Yiping Huang
{"title":"Does FinTech reduce human biases? Evidence from advisory vs. automated FinTechs in lending","authors":"Yanting Chen ,&nbsp;Yingwei Dong ,&nbsp;Jiayin Hu ,&nbsp;Yiping Huang","doi":"10.1016/j.jbankfin.2025.107557","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>We investigate whether FinTech can mitigate human biases in lending decisions using proprietary loan-level data from a Chinese auto equity lender. The lender first integrated big data credit scoring as an advisory tool to enhance its traditional lending model, subsequently transitioning to algorithmic decision-making with optional human override. Our findings reveal that cognitive biases decrease significantly when loan officers use algorithmic lending decisions, substantially reducing disparities in loan-to-value ratios between local and nonlocal borrowers without exacerbating default differentials. Notably, the discretionary adjustments made by loan officers remain modest. In contrast, advisory credit scores alone exhibit no discernible bias-reducing effects. Our study is among the first to demonstrate that automation and choice architecture – specifically, nudging via algorithmic defaults – is more effective than mere information provision in combating discrimination and promoting financial inclusion.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48460,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Banking & Finance","volume":"181 ","pages":"Article 107557"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Banking & Finance","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378426625001773","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/10/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We investigate whether FinTech can mitigate human biases in lending decisions using proprietary loan-level data from a Chinese auto equity lender. The lender first integrated big data credit scoring as an advisory tool to enhance its traditional lending model, subsequently transitioning to algorithmic decision-making with optional human override. Our findings reveal that cognitive biases decrease significantly when loan officers use algorithmic lending decisions, substantially reducing disparities in loan-to-value ratios between local and nonlocal borrowers without exacerbating default differentials. Notably, the discretionary adjustments made by loan officers remain modest. In contrast, advisory credit scores alone exhibit no discernible bias-reducing effects. Our study is among the first to demonstrate that automation and choice architecture – specifically, nudging via algorithmic defaults – is more effective than mere information provision in combating discrimination and promoting financial inclusion.
金融科技能减少人类的偏见吗?咨询与自动化金融科技在贷款中的对比证据
我们使用一家中国汽车股权贷款机构的专有贷款水平数据,研究金融科技是否可以减轻人类在贷款决策中的偏见。该银行首先将大数据信用评分作为一种咨询工具,以增强其传统的贷款模式,随后过渡到算法决策,并可选择人工控制。我们的研究结果表明,当信贷员使用算法贷款决策时,认知偏差显著减少,大大减少了本地和非本地借款人之间贷款与价值比率的差异,而不会加剧违约差异。值得注意的是,信贷员的酌情调整幅度仍然不大。相比之下,咨询信用评分本身并没有显示出明显的减少偏见的效果。我们的研究是第一批证明自动化和选择架构——特别是通过算法默认推动——在打击歧视和促进金融包容性方面比仅仅提供信息更有效的研究之一。
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
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
5.40%
发文量
262
期刊介绍: The Journal of Banking and Finance (JBF) publishes theoretical and empirical research papers spanning all the major research fields in finance and banking. The aim of the Journal of Banking and Finance is to provide an outlet for the increasing flow of scholarly research concerning financial institutions and the money and capital markets within which they function. The Journal''s emphasis is on theoretical developments and their implementation, empirical, applied, and policy-oriented research in banking and other domestic and international financial institutions and markets. The Journal''s purpose is to improve communications between, and within, the academic and other research communities and policymakers and operational decision makers at financial institutions - private and public, national and international, and their regulators. The Journal is one of the largest Finance journals, with approximately 1500 new submissions per year, mainly in the following areas: Asset Management; Asset Pricing; Banking (Efficiency, Regulation, Risk Management, Solvency); Behavioural Finance; Capital Structure; Corporate Finance; Corporate Governance; Derivative Pricing and Hedging; Distribution Forecasting with Financial Applications; Entrepreneurial Finance; Empirical Finance; Financial Economics; Financial Markets (Alternative, Bonds, Currency, Commodity, Derivatives, Equity, Energy, Real Estate); FinTech; Fund Management; General Equilibrium Models; High-Frequency Trading; Intermediation; International Finance; Hedge Funds; Investments; Liquidity; Market Efficiency; Market Microstructure; Mergers and Acquisitions; Networks; Performance Analysis; Political Risk; Portfolio Optimization; Regulation of Financial Markets and Institutions; Risk Management and Analysis; Systemic Risk; Term Structure Models; Venture Capital.
×
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
小红书