在领域之间做出决定:借款人如何权衡市场和人际选择

IF 2.1 2区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Rourke L O'Brien, Adam S. Hayes, Barbara Kiviat
{"title":"在领域之间做出决定:借款人如何权衡市场和人际选择","authors":"Rourke L O'Brien, Adam S. Hayes, Barbara Kiviat","doi":"10.1177/01902725221108964","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Individuals routinely satisfy borrowing needs by transacting in the market or by relying on social relations. In the market domain, price logic leads borrowers to choose the cheaper option; in the interpersonal domain, role-matching logic leads borrowers to choose the relation best matched to the act. But how do individuals choose when faced with options from each domain? Drawing on theories in economic sociology that assert the economic and the social are mutually constitutive, we posit that when market and interpersonal options appear in the same choice set, the characteristics of one option inflect how people assess the other. Through two survey experiments, we show that price sensitivity toward the market option is less when the interpersonal option is role mismatched and that concerns about interpersonal borrowing changing or damaging the relationship attenuate when the market option is expensive. We discuss the implications for studies of stratification and financial decision-making.","PeriodicalId":48201,"journal":{"name":"Social Psychology Quarterly","volume":"85 1","pages":"327 - 350"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deciding between Domains: How Borrowers Weigh Market and Interpersonal Options\",\"authors\":\"Rourke L O'Brien, Adam S. Hayes, Barbara Kiviat\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01902725221108964\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Individuals routinely satisfy borrowing needs by transacting in the market or by relying on social relations. In the market domain, price logic leads borrowers to choose the cheaper option; in the interpersonal domain, role-matching logic leads borrowers to choose the relation best matched to the act. But how do individuals choose when faced with options from each domain? Drawing on theories in economic sociology that assert the economic and the social are mutually constitutive, we posit that when market and interpersonal options appear in the same choice set, the characteristics of one option inflect how people assess the other. Through two survey experiments, we show that price sensitivity toward the market option is less when the interpersonal option is role mismatched and that concerns about interpersonal borrowing changing or damaging the relationship attenuate when the market option is expensive. We discuss the implications for studies of stratification and financial decision-making.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48201,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Psychology Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"85 1\",\"pages\":\"327 - 350\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Psychology Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01902725221108964\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Psychology Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01902725221108964","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

个人通常通过市场交易或依靠社会关系来满足借款需求。在市场领域,价格逻辑引导借款人选择更便宜的选项;在人际关系领域,角色匹配逻辑引导借款人选择与行为最匹配的关系。但是,当面对每个领域的选择时,个人如何选择呢?根据断言经济和社会是相互构成的经济社会学理论,我们假设,当市场和人际选择出现在同一选择集中时,一个选择的特征会影响人们对另一个选择的评估。通过两个调查实验,我们发现当人际选择是角色错配时,对市场选择的价格敏感性较低;当市场选择是昂贵的时,对人际借贷改变或破坏关系的担忧减弱。我们讨论了对分层和财务决策研究的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Deciding between Domains: How Borrowers Weigh Market and Interpersonal Options
Individuals routinely satisfy borrowing needs by transacting in the market or by relying on social relations. In the market domain, price logic leads borrowers to choose the cheaper option; in the interpersonal domain, role-matching logic leads borrowers to choose the relation best matched to the act. But how do individuals choose when faced with options from each domain? Drawing on theories in economic sociology that assert the economic and the social are mutually constitutive, we posit that when market and interpersonal options appear in the same choice set, the characteristics of one option inflect how people assess the other. Through two survey experiments, we show that price sensitivity toward the market option is less when the interpersonal option is role mismatched and that concerns about interpersonal borrowing changing or damaging the relationship attenuate when the market option is expensive. We discuss the implications for studies of stratification and financial decision-making.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Social Psychology Quarterly
Social Psychology Quarterly PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
3.70%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: SPPS is a unique short reports journal in social and personality psychology. Its aim is to publish cutting-edge, short reports of single studies, or very succinct reports of multiple studies, and will be geared toward a speedy review and publication process to allow groundbreaking research to be quickly available to the field. Preferences will be given to articles that •have theoretical and practical significance •represent an advance to social psychological or personality science •will be of broad interest both within and outside of social and personality psychology •are written to be intelligible to a wide range of readers including science writers for the popular press
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信