Advertisement

Measuring Aversion to Debt: An Experiment Among Student Loan Candidates

  • Gregorio Caetano
  • Miguel Palacios
  • Harry A. Patrinos
Original Paper

Abstract

Debt aversion, an unwillingness to enter into a financial contract framed or labeled as debt, distorts household investment and financing decisions. We test through an experiment for the presence of debt aversion among a relevant population. The tests allow us to identify two sources of debt aversion: one due to framing (as debt or as an income-contingent contract) and another due to labeling (as a loan or as a human capital contract). Most of the debt aversion we identified was due to labeling. Labeling a contract as a loan decreased its probability of being chosen over a financially equivalent contract and increased its perceived cost.

Keywords

Debt aversion Human capital contracts Income contingent loans Income share agreements 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Juan David Herreño for valuable research assistance, Shizuka Kunimoto for help with the manuscript, the World Bank for providing funding for this project, and Lumni Inc. for conducting the surveys. We are grateful to seminar participants at the Australian National University, the University of Naples Federico II, the Darden School (University of Virginia), the University of Leicester and the World Bank for valuable suggestions and comments.

Funding

This study was funded by the World Bank.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

Caetano and Palacios received funding from The World Bank. Palacios is co-founder, shareholder, and board member in Lumni Inc.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

References

  1. Angrist, J. D., & Krueger, A. B. (1991). Does compulsory school attendance affect schooling and earnings? The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(4), 979–1014.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2937954.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ashenfelter, O., & Krueger, A. (1994). Estimates of the economic return to schooling from a new sample of twins. The American Economic Review, 84 (5), 1157–1173. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/2117766
  3. Barr, N. (2001). The welfare state as piggy bank: Information, risk, uncertainty, and the role of the state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.  https://doi.org/10.1093/0199246599.001.0001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Becker, G. S. (1964). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference to education. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  5. Beshears, J., Choi, J. J., Laibson, D., & Madrian, B. C. (2008). The importance of default options for retirement saving outcomes: Evidence from the usa. Lessons from Pension Reform in the Americas.  https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226801.001.0001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boatman, A., Evans, B. J., & Soliz, A. (2017). Understanding loan aversion in education: Evidence from high school seniors, community college students, and adults. AERA Open, 3(1), 2332858416683649.  https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858416683649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Card, D. (1999). The causal effect of education on earnings. Handbook of Labor Economics, 3, 1801–1863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Card, D. (2001). Estimating the returns to schooling: progress on some persistent econometric problems. Econometrica, 69(5), 1127–1160.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carneiro, P., & Heckman, J. J. (2002). The evidence on credit constraints in post-secondary schooling. The Economic Journal, 112(482), 705–734.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00075.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Choi, J. J., Laibson, D., & Madrian, B. C. (2011). 100 bills on the sidewalk: Suboptimal investment in 401 (k) plans. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 93(3), 748–763.  https://doi.org/10.1162/REST_a_00100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Constantinides, G. M., Donaldson, J. B., & Mehra, R. (2002). Junior can’t borrow: A new perspective on the equity premium puzzle. Quaterly Journal of Economics, 1, 269–296.  https://doi.org/10.1162/003355302753399508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Eckel, C. C., Johnson, C., Montmarquette, C., & Rojas, C. (2007). Debt aversion and the demand for loans for postsecondary education. Public Finance Review, 35(2), 233–262.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1091142106292774.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Field, E. (2009). Educational debt burden and career choice: Evidence from a financial aid experiment at NYU Law School. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 1(1), 1–21.  https://doi.org/10.1257/app.1.1.1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Friedman, M. (1955). The role of government in public education. Economics and the public interest, 117, 123–153.Google Scholar
  15. Guiso, L., Jappelli, T., & Terlizzese, D. (1996). Income risk, borrowing constraints, and portfolio choice. The American Economic Review, 86 (1), 158–172. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/2118260
  16. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kooreman, P. (2000, June). The labeling effect of a child benefit system. American Economic Review, 90 (3), 571–583. Retrieved from http://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.90.3.571 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mincer, J. (1974). Schooling, Experience, and Earnings. Human Behavior & Social Institutions No. 2. National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc., 261 Madison Ave., New York, New York 010016. Retrieved from http://papers.nber.org/books/minc74-1
  19. Odean, T. (1998). Are investors reluctant to realize their losses? Journal of Finance, 53(5), 1775–1798.  https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-1082.00072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Palacios, M. (2004). Investing in human capital: A capital markets approach to higher education funding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511585982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Palacios-Huerta, I. (2003). An empirical analysis of the risk properties of human capital returns. American Economic Review, 93(3), 948–964.  https://doi.org/10.1257/000282803322157197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Psacharopoulos, G., & Patrinos, H. A. (2004). Returns to investment in education: A further update. Education Economics, 12(2), 111–134.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0964529042000239140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rasmussen, C. J. (2006). Effective cost-sharing models in higher education: insights from low-income students in Australian universities. Higher Education, 51(1), 1–25.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-004-6373-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Zhang, H. H. (1997). Endogenous borrowing constraints with incomplete markets. Journal of Finance, 52 (5), 2187–2209. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/2329481 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of GeorgiaAthensUSA
  2. 2.Haskayne School of BusinessUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada
  3. 3.The World BankWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations