IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jconrs/v50y2023i4p765-786..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Loan Amount versus Monthly Payments: The Effect of Loan Application Formats on Consumer Borrowing Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Alicia M Johnson
  • Daniel Villanova
  • Ronn J Smith
  • Amna Kirmani
  • Stacy Wood
  • Amar Cheema

Abstract

Do different loan application formats affect consumer loan requests? Six studies show that when consumers are asked to provide a preferred monthly payment (MP) (vs. loan amount [LA]), they request different principal amounts. This is because these loan application formats differ in the scale-compatible information they bring to consumers’ mind. When LAs are elicited, consumers think of and request the cost of the expenditure they seek to finance. When MPs are elicited, however, consumers think of their monthly budget slack to construct and then request MPs they perceive to be affordable. For lower cost loans with a given term and interest rate, the MP (vs. LA) format results in larger principal requests. This effect reverses for higher cost acquisitions because individuals’ budget slack caps out around $500 per month. These studies provide insight into how consumer loan application formats can affect consumer borrowing, as well as the psychological underpinnings responsible for the effect. Theoretical, managerial, and consumer welfare implications of the findings are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Alicia M Johnson & Daniel Villanova & Ronn J Smith & Amna Kirmani & Stacy Wood & Amar Cheema, 2023. "Loan Amount versus Monthly Payments: The Effect of Loan Application Formats on Consumer Borrowing Decisions," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 50(4), pages 765-786.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:50:y:2023:i:4:p:765-786.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jcr/ucad015
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jconrs:v:50:y:2023:i:4:p:765-786.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jcr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.