Dealing with an Anchoring Bias in the Mortgage Market: A Regulatory Approach

  • Nelson Camanho
  • Ronit Levine-SchnurEmail author
  • Tal Farber


This chapter investigates whether mortgage regulation assures proper decision-making by borrowers. It offers regulatory responses to mitigate a “mortgage illusion” phenomenon revealed in recent experimental studies. According to these experiments, buyers are influenced by the comparison between the monthly rental payment and the monthly mortgage installment for fixed-rate mortgages. Therefore, consumers are more likely to buy a house when the rent is higher than the mortgage installment. The chapter suggests that regulators account for this phenomenon when designing mortgage policies.


  1. Adelino, M., Schoar, A., & Severino, F. (2016). Loan originations and defaults in the mortgage crisis: The role of the middle class. The Review of Financial Studies, 29(7), 1635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aikman, D., et al. (2014). Taking uncertainty seriously: Simplicity versus complexity in financial regulation. Financial Stability Paper No. 28, Bank of England.Google Scholar
  3. Amar, M., et al. (2011). Winning the battle but losing the war: The psychology of debt management. Journal of Marketing Research, 48, S38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderssen, E., et al. (2006). Reducing over-optimism in variable selection by cross-model validation. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, 84, 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Atlas, S. A., Johnson, E. J., & Payne, J. W. (2017). Time preferences and mortgage choice. Journal of Marketing Research, 54(3), 415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ayal, S., Bar-Haim, D., & Ofir, M. (2018). Behavioral biases in peer-to-peer (P2P) lending. In I. Venezia (Ed.), Behavioral finance: The coming of age (pp. 367--400). Singapore: World Scientific Publishers.Google Scholar
  7. Baldwin, R. (2014). From regulation to behaviour change: Giving nudge the third degree. The Modern Law Review, 77(6), 831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barberis, N., & Huang, M. (2001). Mental accounting, loss aversion, and individual stock returns. The Journal of Finance, 56(4), 1247–1292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barberis, N., & Xiong, W. (2009). What drives the disposition effect? An analysis of a long-standing preference-based explanation. The Journal of Finance, 64(2), 751.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bar-Gill, O. (2014). Consumer transactions. In E. Zamir & D. Teichman (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of behavioral economics and the law (pp. 465–490). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Berman, J. Z., et al. (2016). Expense neglect in forecasting personal finances. Journal of Marketing Research, 53(4), 535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brueckner, J. K., Calem, P. S., & Nakamura, L. I. (2012). Subprime mortgages and the housing bubble. Journal of Urban Economics, 71(2), 230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brunnermeier, M. K., & Julliard, C. (2008). Money illusion and housing frenzies. The Review of Financial Studies, 21(1), 135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Camanho, N., & Fernandes, D. (2018, September 16). The mortgage illusion. Retrieved from
  15. Camerer, C., et al. (1997). Labor supply of New York City cabdrivers: One day at a time. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2), 407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Case, K. E., & Shiller, R. J. (1988). The behavior of home buyers in boom and post-boom markets. New England Economic Review, November, 29.Google Scholar
  17. Crowe, C., et al. (2013). How to deal with real estate booms: Lessons from country experiences. Journal of Financial Stability, 9(3), 300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dinner, I., et al. (2011). Partitioning default effects: Why people choose not to choose. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17(4), 432.Google Scholar
  19. Egan, M. L., Matvos, G., & Seru, A. (2018). Arbitration with Uninformed Consumers No. w25150. National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
  20. Fernandes, D., Jr, J. G. L., & Netemeyer, R. G. (2014). Financial literacy, financial education, and downstream financial behaviors. Management Science, 60(8), 1861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Genesove, D., & Mayer, C. (2001). Loss aversion and seller behavior: Evidence from the housing market. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(4), 1233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gerardi, K., Goette, L., & Meier, S. (2013). Numerical ability predicts mortgage default. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110, 28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hardisty, D. J., Appelt, K. C., & Weber, E. U. (2013). Good or bad, we want it now: Fixed-cost present bias for gains and losses explains magnitude asymmetries in intertemporal choice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 26, 4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. International Monetary Fund. (2011). Macro prudential policy: An organizing framework. IMF Policy Paper SM11/54.Google Scholar
  25. Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002). Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 49–81). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Korniotis, G. M., & Kumar, A. (2011). Do older investors make better investment decisions? The Review of Economics and Statistics, 93(1), 244–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Krznar, I., & Morsink, J. (2014). With great power comes great responsibility: Macroprudential tools at work in Canada. IMF Working Paper No. 14/83.Google Scholar
  28. Levitt, S. D., & Syverson, C. (2008). Market distortions when agents are better informed: The value of information in real estate transactions. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 90(4), 599–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lim, C. H., et al. (2011). Macroprudential policy: What instruments and how to use them? Lessons from country experiences. IMF Working Paper No. 11/238.Google Scholar
  30. Mayer, C., Pence, K., & Sherlund, S. M. (2009). The rise in mortgage defaults. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 23(1), 27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. McGlothlin, W. H. (1956). Stability of choices among uncertain alternatives. The American Journal of Psychology, 69(4), 604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Meier, S., & Sprenger, C. D. (2013). Discounting financial literacy: Time preferences and participation in financial education programs. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 95, 159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mellers, B., et al. (2015). The psychology of intelligence analysis: Drivers of prediction accuracy in world politics. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 21(1), 1.Google Scholar
  34. Mian, A., & Sufi, A. (2009). The consequences of mortgage credit expansion: Evidence from the US mortgage default crisis. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124(4), 1449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mian, A., & Sufi, A. (2011). House prices, home equity-based borrowing, and the US household leverage crisis. American Economic Review, 101(5), 2132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Mian, A., Sufi, A., & Verner, E. (2017). Household debt and business cycles worldwide. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 132(4), 1755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mugerman, Y., & Ofir, M. (this volume). Anchoring and adjustment in the mortgage market: A regulatory experiment. In R. Levine-Schnur (Ed.), Measuring the effectiveness of real estate regulation. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  38. Mugerman, Y., Tzur, J., & Jacobi, A. (2018). Mortgage loans and bank risk taking: Finding the risk “sweet spot”. Quarterly Journal of Finance, 8(4), 1840008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rabin, M., & Thaler, R. H. (2001). Anomalies: Risk aversion. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15(1), 219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Simmons, J. P., LeBoeuf, R. A., & Nelson, L. D. (2010). The effect of accuracy motivation on anchoring and adjustment: Do people adjust from provided anchors? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(6), 917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Simonsohn, U., & Loewenstein, G. (2006). Mistake# 37: The effect of previously encountered prices on current housing demand. The Economic Journal, 116(508), 175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Slovic, P. (1995). The construction of preference. American Psychologist, 50(5), 364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Soll, J. B., Keeney, R. L., & Larrick, R. P. (2013). Consumer misunderstanding of credit card use, payments, and debt: Causes and solutions. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 32(1), 66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Stango, V., & Zinman, J. (2009). Exponential growth bias and household finance. Journal of Finance, 64, 2807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sunstein, C. R. (2006). Boundedly rational borrowing. University of Chicago Law Review, 73, 249.Google Scholar
  46. Sunstein, C. R. (2013). Simpler: The future of government. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  47. Sussman, A. B., & O’Brien, R. L. (2016). Knowing when to spend: Unintended financial consequences of earmarking to encourage savings. Journal of Marketing Research, 53(5), 790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tetlock, P. E., & Garder, D. (2015). Superforecasting: The art and practice of prediction. New York: Crown Publishers.Google Scholar
  49. Thaler, R. (1985). Mental accounting and consumer choice. Marketing Science, 4(3), 199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211(4481), 453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1986). Rational choice and the framing of decisions. The Journal of Business, 59(4), S251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Van Exel, N. J. A., et al. (2006). With a little help from an anchor: Discussion and evidence of anchoring effects in contingent valuation. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 35, 5.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nelson Camanho
    • 1
  • Ronit Levine-Schnur
    • 2
    Email author
  • Tal Farber
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Economics and FinanceQueen Mary University of LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.Harry Radzyner Law SchoolInterdisciplinary Center HerzliyaHerzliyaIsrael

Personalised recommendations