Hostname: page-component-5d84bcc8dc-qx8mr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-08-14T00:17:31.572Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

JUST VENMO ME: Does form of payment affect risk taking and intertemporal choice?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 January 2025

Jessica B. Hoel ,
Prachi Jain  and
Bridget Galaty
Jessica B. Hoel*
Affiliation:
Colorado College, Colorado Springs, CO, USA
Prachi Jain
Affiliation:
Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles, CA, USA
Bridget Galaty
Affiliation:
University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
*
e-mail: jhoel@coloradocollege.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We use an experiment to examine whether form of payment (cash or mobile money) affects estimates of intertemporal choice and risk taking. We find that form of payment does not affect temporal discounting and risk taking. Given that participants prefer payment via mobile money, the results suggest that there are minimal concerns with using mobile money to pay participants in experimental studies.

Keywords

Risk takingTemporal discountingMobile moneyForm of payment

JEL classification

C91: Laboratory, Individual Behavior

Information

Type
Original Paper
Information
Journal of the Economic Science Association , Volume 8 , Issue 1-2 , December 2022 , pp. 16 - 33
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Economic Science Association 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

We would first like to thank our respondents, without whom this research would not have been possible. This project was first conceived as a group project with 12 students in the Fall 2018 course entitled “Experimental and Behavioral Economics: Time and Uncertainty." One student is a co-author, and we are indebted to our other class colleagues: Taylor Bigony, Anna Brent, Lilly Chen, Rae Conlon, Annie Engen, Jack Gu, Jackson Lovejoy, Matthew Maciag, Chris Maurice, Jacob Miller, and Brooke Veale. We appreciate feedback from Keith M Marzilli Ericson, Michael Kuhn, Karen Levy, Christina Rader, and seminar audiences at Colorado College, LACBEE, University of Massachusetts-Amherst, the Colorado Economics Workshop, and Jain’s ESA mentoring group. We appreciate data assistance from Kevin Rask. We gratefully acknowledge funding from the Colorado College SEGway fund, the Colorado College Social Science Executive Committee, the Colorado College Bruni fund, and the Colorado College Chapman and Souchek research funds. The replication materials for the study are available at https://doi.org/10.3886/E171061V1.

References

Aker, J. C., Boumnijel, R., McClelland, A., Tierney, N. (2016). Payment mechanisms and antipoverty programs: evidence from a mobile money cash transfer experiment in Niger. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 65(1), 1–37. 10.1086/687578Google Scholar
Alter, A. L., Oppenheimer, D. M. (2008). Easy on the mind, easy on the wallet: the roles of familiarity and processing fluency in valuation judgments. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15(5), 985–990. 10.3758/PBR.15.5.985Google ScholarPubMed
Arechar, A. A., Gächter, S., Molleman, L. (2018). Conducting interactive experiments online. Experimental Economics, 21(1), 99–131. 10.1007/s10683-017-9527-2Google ScholarPubMed
Ashton, L. (2014). Left-digit bias and inattention in retail purchases: evidence from a field experiment. Available at SSRN 2538816.Google Scholar
Bushong, B., King, L. M., Camerer, C. F., Rangel, A. (2010). Pavlovian processes in consumer choice: the physical presence of a good increases willingness-to-pay. American Economic Review, 100(4), 1556–71. 10.1257/aer.100.4.1556Google Scholar
Buso, I. M., Di Cagno, D., Ferrari, L., Larocca, V., Lorè, L., Marazzi, F., Panaccione, L., Spadoni, L. (2021). Lab-like findings from online experiments. Journal of the Economic Science Association, 7(2), 184–193. 10.1007/s40881-021-00114-8Google Scholar
Chakravorti, B. (2014). The hidden costs of cash. Harvard Business Review, June 26.Google Scholar
Clifford, S., Jerit, J. (2014). Is there a cost to convenience? An experimental comparison of data quality in laboratory and online studies. Journal of Experimental Political Science, 1(2),120. 10.1017/xps.2014.5Google Scholar
Coller, M., Williams, M. B. (1999). Eliciting individual discount rates. Experimental Economics, 2(2), 107–127. 10.1023/A:1009986005690Google Scholar
Gogol, F. (accessed July 1, 2020). Venmo vs. Zelle - Who’s Winning P2P Transfers? https://www.stilt.com/blog/2020/06/venmo-vs-zelle/.Google Scholar
Harrison, G. W., Lau, M. I., Williams, M. B. (2002). Estimating individual discount rates in Denmark: a field experiment. American Economic Review, 92(5), 1606–1617. 10.1257/000282802762024674Google Scholar
Hernandez, L., Jonker, N., Kosse, A. (2017). Cash versus debit card: the role of budget control. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 51(1), 91–112. 10.1111/joca.12112Google Scholar
Holt, C. A., Laury, S. K. (2002). Risk aversion and incentive effects. American Economic Review, 92(5), 1644–1655. 10.1257/000282802762024700Google Scholar
Jonker, N. (2016). Cash as a budget control device. In SUERF Conference Proceedings, 1, 37–44.Google Scholar
King, D., Janiszewski, C. (2011). The sources and consequences of the fluent processing of numbers. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(2), 327–341. 10.1509/jmkr.48.2.327Google Scholar
Lacetera, N., Pope, D. G., Sydnor, J. R. (2012). Heuristic thinking and limited attention in the car market. American Economic Review, 102(5), 2206–36. 10.1257/aer.102.5.2206Google Scholar
Li, J., Leider, S., Beil, D., Duenyas, I. (2021). Running online experiments using web-conferencing software. Journal of the Economic Science Association, 7(2), 167–183. 10.1007/s40881-021-00112-wGoogle Scholar
Luccasen III, R. A. and Grossman, P. J. (2018). The Ring of Gyges in the laboratory: the effect of tangibility and earned money on giving and taking. Available at SSRN 3106194.Google Scholar
Mazzotta, B., Chakravorti, B. (2014). Who pays more to use cash? Journal of Payments Strategy & Systems, 8(1), 94–107.Google Scholar
Mishra, H., Mishra, A., Nayakankuppam, D. (2006). Money: a bias for the whole. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(4), 541–549. 10.1086/500484Google Scholar
Myrseth, K. O. R., Riener, G., Wollbrant, C. E. (2015). Tangible temptation in the social dilemma: cash, cooperation, and self-control. Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics, 8(2),61. 10.1037/npe0000035Google Scholar
Paolacci, G., Chandler, J., Ipeirotis, P. G. (2010). Running experiments on Amazon mechanical Turk. Judgment and Decision Making, 5(5), 411–419.Google Scholar
Raghubir, P., Srivastava, J. (2009). The denomination effect. Journal of Consumer Research, 36(4), 701–713. 10.1086/599222Google Scholar
Reinstein, D., Riener, G. (2012). Decomposing desert and tangibility effects in a charitable giving experiment. Experimental Economics, 15(1), 229–240. 10.1007/s10683-011-9298-0Google Scholar
Runnemark, E., Hedman, J., Xiao, X. (2015). Do consumers pay more using debit cards than cash? Electronic Commerce Research and Applications, 14(5), 285–291. 10.1016/j.elerap.2015.03.002Google Scholar
Shen, J., Takahashi, H. (2017). The tangibility effect of paper money and coins in an investment experiment. Economics and Business Letters, 6(1), 1–5.Google Scholar
Shevlin, R. (February 11, 2019). Venmo Versus Zelle: Who’s Winning The P2P Payments War? https://www.forbes.com/sites/ronshevlin/2019/02/11/venmo-versus-zelle/.Google Scholar
Spantig, L. (2021). Cash in hand and savings decisions. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 188, 1206–1220. 10.1016/j.jebo.2021.06.008Google Scholar
Strulov-Shlain, A. (2019). More than a penny’s worth: left-digit bias and firm pricing. Available at SSRN 3413019.Google Scholar
Svirsky, D. (2014). Money is no object: testing the endowment effect in exchange goods. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 106, 227–234. 10.1016/j.jebo.2014.07.003Google Scholar
Szaszi, B., Palinkas, A., Palfi, B., Szollosi, A., Aczel, B. (2018). A systematic scoping review of the choice architecture movement: toward understanding when and why nudges work. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 31(3), 355–366. 10.1002/bdm.2035Google Scholar
Thaler, R. H. and Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness.Google Scholar
Thaler, R. H., Sunstein, C. R., and Balz, J. P. (2013). Choice architecture. In The behavioral foundations of public policy, pp. 428–439. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Vandoros, S. (2013). My five pounds are not as good as yours, so I will spend them. Experimental Economics, 16(4), 546–559. 10.1007/s10683-013-9351-2Google Scholar
Wadhwa, M., Zhang, K. (2015). This number just feels right: the impact of roundedness of price numbers on product evaluations. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(5), 1172–1185. 10.1086/678484Google Scholar