{"title":"Opaque payments, open wallets: The relationship between payment transparency and overspending","authors":"Amelina Apricia Sjam","doi":"10.1016/j.rie.2025.101045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>As payment methods evolve from cash to digital alternatives, their psychological and behavioural effects on spending behaviours, especially among young consumers, become increasingly important. Previous research has mainly compared credit cards and cash, showing that credit cards lead to more spending. However, the psychological mechanisms behind this are unclear due to differences in coupling time and transparency between the methods. This study bridges the gap by examining not just credit cards and cash, but also prepaid cards and cash, which have a similar coupling between consumption and payment but differ in transparency or payment format. By comparing prepaid cards with cash, the study explores whether the format of payment itself impacts spending behaviour. Drawing from a novel survey of Indonesian college students, this study presents empirical findings that credit card and prepaid card use (extensive margin) and payment frequency (intensive margin) are associated with overspending, whereas cash payments show no such association. The evidence suggests that payment transparency influences consumer behaviour, clarifying the underlying psychological mechanism of how payment methods affect spending. Further analysis shows that higher financial literacy helps mitigate the impact of less transparent payment methods on overspending. These insights suggest opportunities for developing digital payment solutions that minimize negative consequences, particularly for younger users. Educational initiatives tailored to promoting responsible digital payment usage could further reduce these effects.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46094,"journal":{"name":"Research in Economics","volume":"79 3","pages":"Article 101045"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090944325000225","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
As payment methods evolve from cash to digital alternatives, their psychological and behavioural effects on spending behaviours, especially among young consumers, become increasingly important. Previous research has mainly compared credit cards and cash, showing that credit cards lead to more spending. However, the psychological mechanisms behind this are unclear due to differences in coupling time and transparency between the methods. This study bridges the gap by examining not just credit cards and cash, but also prepaid cards and cash, which have a similar coupling between consumption and payment but differ in transparency or payment format. By comparing prepaid cards with cash, the study explores whether the format of payment itself impacts spending behaviour. Drawing from a novel survey of Indonesian college students, this study presents empirical findings that credit card and prepaid card use (extensive margin) and payment frequency (intensive margin) are associated with overspending, whereas cash payments show no such association. The evidence suggests that payment transparency influences consumer behaviour, clarifying the underlying psychological mechanism of how payment methods affect spending. Further analysis shows that higher financial literacy helps mitigate the impact of less transparent payment methods on overspending. These insights suggest opportunities for developing digital payment solutions that minimize negative consequences, particularly for younger users. Educational initiatives tailored to promoting responsible digital payment usage could further reduce these effects.
期刊介绍:
Established in 1947, Research in Economics is one of the oldest general-interest economics journals in the world and the main one among those based in Italy. The purpose of the journal is to select original theoretical and empirical articles that will have high impact on the debate in the social sciences; since 1947, it has published important research contributions on a wide range of topics. A summary of our editorial policy is this: the editors make a preliminary assessment of whether the results of a paper, if correct, are worth publishing. If so one of the associate editors reviews the paper: from the reviewer we expect to learn if the paper is understandable and coherent and - within reasonable bounds - the results are correct. We believe that long lags in publication and multiple demands for revision simply slow scientific progress. Our goal is to provide you a definitive answer within one month of submission. We give the editors one week to judge the overall contribution and if acceptable send your paper to an associate editor. We expect the associate editor to provide a more detailed evaluation within three weeks so that the editors can make a final decision before the month expires. In the (rare) case of a revision we allow four months and in the case of conditional acceptance we allow two months to submit the final version. In both cases we expect a cover letter explaining how you met the requirements. For conditional acceptance the editors will verify that the requirements were met. In the case of revision the original associate editor will do so. If the revision cannot be at least conditionally accepted it is rejected: there is no second revision.