1932

Abstract

We review an empirical literature that studies the role of social interactions in driving economic and financial decision-making. We first summarize recent work that documents an important role of social interactions in explaining household decisions in housing and mortgage markets. This evidence shows, for example, that there are large peer effects in mortgage refinancing decisions and that individuals’ beliefs about the attractiveness of housing market investments are affected by the recent house price experiences of their friends. We also summarize recent work showing that social interactions affect the stock market investments of both retail and professional investors as well as household financial decisions such as retirement savings, borrowing, and default. Along the way, we describe a number of easily accessible recent data sets for the study of social interactions in finance, including the Social Connectedness Index, which measures the frequency of Facebook friendship links across geographies. We conclude by outlining several promising directions for further research in the field of social finance.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-financial-101320-062446
2021-11-01
2024-06-16
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/financial/13/1/annurev-financial-101320-062446.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-financial-101320-062446&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Abel AB. 1990. Asset prices under habit formation and catching up with the Joneses. Am. Econ. Rev. 80:238–42
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Agarwal S, Chomsisengphet S, Mahoney N, Stroebel J. 2015. Regulating consumer financial products: evidence from credit cards. Q. J. Econ. 130:1111–64
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Agarwal S, Mikhed V, Scholnick B. 2016. Does inequality cause financial distress? Evidence from lottery winners and neighboring bankruptcies Work. Pap. 16-4 Fed. Reserve Bank Philadelphia Philadelphia, PA:
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Agarwal S, Qian W, Zou X. 2017. Thy neighbor's misfortune: peer effect on consumption SSRN Work. Pap. 2780764
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Allen L, Peng L, Shan Y. 2020. Social networks and supply and demand on online lending marketplaces SSRN Work. Pap. 3537714
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Angrist JD. 2014. The perils of peer effects. Labour Econ. 30:98–108
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Aral S, Walker D. 2012. Identifying influential and susceptible members of social networks. Science 337:6092337–41
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Arrondel L, Calvo Pardo HF, Giannitsarou C, Haliassos M 2019. Informative social interactions SSRN Work. Pap. 3171564
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Bailey M, Cao R, Kuchler T, Stroebel J. 2018a. The economic effects of social networks: evidence from the housing market. J. Political Econ. 126:62224–76
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Bailey M, Cao R, Kuchler T, Stroebel J, Wong A. 2018b. Social connectedness: measurement, determinants, and effects. J. Econ. Perspect. 32:3259–80
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Bailey M, Dávila E, Kuchler T, Stroebel J. 2019a. House price beliefs and mortgage leverage choice. Rev. Econ. Stud. 86:62403–52
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Bailey M, Farrell P, Kuchler T, Stroebel J. 2020a. Social connectedness in urban areas. J. Urban Econ. 118:103264
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Bailey M, Gupta A, Hillenbrand S, Kuchler T, Richmond R, Stroebel J 2021. International trade and social connectedness. J. Int. Econ. 129:103418
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Bailey M, Johnston DM, Koenen M, Kuchler T, Russel D, Stroebel J. 2020b. Social networks shape beliefs and behavior: evidence from social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic NBER Work. Pap. 28234
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Bailey M, Johnston D, Kuchler T, Stroebel J, Wong A. 2019b. Peer effects in product adoption NBER Work. Pap. 25843
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Bailey M, Kuchler T, Russel D, State B, Stroebel J. 2020c. The determinants of social connectedness in Europe. Social Informatics: 12th International Conference, SocInfo, Pisa, Italy, Oct. 6–9 S Aref, K Bontcheva, M Braghieri, F Dinum, F Giannotti et al.1–14 Cham, Switz: Springer Nat. Switz.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Bakshy E, Hofman JM, Mason WA, Watts DJ. 2011. Everyone's an influencer: quantifying influence on Twitter. WDSM '11: Proceedings of the Fourth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, Hong Kong, Febr. 9–1265–74 New York: Assoc. Comput. Mach.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Bali TG, Hirshleifer DA, Peng L, Tang Y. 2018. Attention, social interaction, and investor attraction to lottery stocks SSRN Work. Pap. 3343769
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Bayer P, Mangum K, Roberts JW. 2021. Speculative fever: investor contagion in the housing bubble. Am. Econ. Rev. 111:2609–51
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Bellet C. 2019. The McMansion effect: top house size and positional externalities in US suburbs SSRN Work. Pap. 3378131
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Bertrand M, Morse A. 2016. Trickle-down consumption. Rev. Econ. Stat. 98:5863–79
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Beshears J, Choi JJ, Laibson D, Madrian BC, Milkman KL. 2015. The effect of providing peer information on retirement savings decisions. J. Finance 70:31161–201
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Bikhchandani S, Hirshleifer D, Welch I 1992. A theory of fads, fashion, custom, and cultural change as informational cascades. J. Political Econ. 100:5992–1026
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Breza E, Chandrasekhar AG. 2019. Social networks, reputation, and commitment: evidence from a savings monitors experiment. Econometrica 87:1175–216
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Brown JR, Ivković Z, Smith PA, Weisbenner S. 2008. Neighbors matter: causal community effects and stock market participation. J. Finance 63:31509–31
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Burnside C, Eichenbaum M, Rebelo S. 2016. Understanding booms and busts in housing markets. J. Political Econ. 124:41088–147
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Bursztyn L, Ederer F, Ferman B, Yuchtman N. 2014. Understanding mechanisms underlying peer effects: evidence from a field experiment on financial decisions. Econometrica 82:41273–301
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Campbell JY, Giglio S, Pathak P. 2011. Forced sales and house prices. Am. Econ. Rev. 101:52108–31
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Chetty R, Hendren N, Jackson MO, Kuchler T, Stroebel J et al. 2021. Social capital in the United States: measurement, determinants, and associations with economic mobility. Work. Pap., Harvard Univ. Cambridge, MA: Forthcoming
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Cohen L, Frazzini A, Malloy C. 2008. The small world of investing: board connections and mutual fund returns. J. Political Econ. 116:5951–79
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Coleman JS. 1988. Social capital in the creation of human capital. Am. J. Sociol. 94:S95–120
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Coven J, Gupta A. 2020. Disparities in mobility responses to COVID-19. Work. Pap., Stern Sch. Bus., New York Univ. NY:
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Duesenberry JS. 1949. Income, Saving, and the Theory of Consumer Behavior. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Duflo E, Saez E. 2002. Participation and investment decisions in a retirement plan: the influence of colleagues' choices. J. Public Econ. 85:1121–48
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Duflo E, Saez E. 2003. The role of information and social interactions in retirement plan decisions: evidence from a randomized experiment. Q. J. Econ. 118:3815–42
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Enke B, Rodríguez-Padilla R, Zimmermann F. 2019. Moral universalism and the structure of ideology NBER Work. Pap. 27511
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Falk A, Ichino A. 2006. Clean evidence on peer effects. J. Labor Econ. 24:139–57
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Feng L, Seasholes MS. 2004. Correlated trading and location. J. Finance 59:52117–44
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Frydman C. 2015. Relative wealth concerns in portfolio choice: neural and behavioral evidence SSRN Work. Pap. 2561083
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Georgarakos D, Haliassos M, Pasini G. 2014. Household debt and social interactions. Rev. Financ. Stud. 27:51404–33
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Gerardi K, Rosenblatt E, Willen PS, Yao V. 2015. Foreclosure externalities: new evidence. J. Urban Econ. 87:42–56
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Glaeser EL, Sacerdote BI, Scheinkman JA. 2003. The social multiplier. J. Eur. Econ. Assoc. 1:2–3345–53
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Guiso L, Sapienza P, Zingales L. 2013. The determinants of attitudes toward strategic default on mortgages. J. Finance 68:41473–515
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Gupta A. 2019. Foreclosure contagion and the neighborhood spillover effects of mortgage defaults. J. Finance 74:52249–301
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Heimer RZ. 2016. Peer pressure: social interaction and the disposition effect. Rev. Financ. Stud. 29:113177–209
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Hirshleifer D. 2015. Behavioral finance. Annu. Rev. Financ. Econ. 7:133–59
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Hirshleifer D. 2020. Presidential address: social transmission bias in economics and finance. J. Finance 75:41779–1831
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Holtz D, Zhao M, Benzell SG, Cao CY, Rahimian MA et al. 2020. Interdependence and the cost of uncoordinated responses to COVID-19. PNAS 117:33202009522
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Hong H, Kubik JD, Stein JC. 2004. Social interaction and stock-market participation. J. Finance 59:1137–63
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Hong H, Kubik JD, Stein JC. 2005. Thy neighbor's portfolio: word-of-mouth effects in the holdings and trades of money managers. J. Finance 60:62801–24
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Hoxby C. 2000. Peer effects in the classroom: learning from gender and race variation NBER Work. Pap. 7867
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Hvide HK, Östberg P. 2015. Social interaction at work. J. Financ. Econ. 117:3628–52
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Ivković Z, Weisbenner S. 2007. Information diffusion effects in individual investors' common stock purchases: covet thy neighbors' investment choices. Rev. Financ. Stud. 20:41327–57
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Jackson MO. 2010. Social and Economic Networks Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Kalda A. 2020. Peer financial distress and individual leverage. Rev. Financ. Stud. 33:73348–90
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Katz LF, Kling JR, Liebman JB. 2001. Moving to opportunity in Boston: early results of a randomized mobility experiment. Q. J. Econ. 116:2607–54
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Kaustia M, Knüpfer S. 2012. Peer performance and stock market entry. J. Financ. Econ. 104:2321–38
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Kuchler T, Li Y, Peng L, Stroebel J, Zhou D. 2020. Social proximity to capital: implications for investors and firms NBER Work. Pap. 27299
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Kuchler T, Russel D, Stroebel J 2021. The geographic spread of COVID-19 correlates with the structure of social networks as measured by Facebook. J. Urban Econ. In press. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jue.2020.103314
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  60. Kuhn P, Kooreman P, Soetevent A, Kapteyn A. 2011. The effects of lottery prizes on winners and their neighbors: evidence from the Dutch postcode lottery. Am. Econ. Rev. 101:52226–47
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Kurlat P, Stroebel J. 2015. Testing for information asymmetries in real estate markets. Rev. Financ. Stud. 28:82429–61
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Li E, Liao L, Wang Z, Wang X 2019. Peer effect on consumer default decision: evidence from online lending platform SSRN Work. Pap. 3399515
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Lieber EM, Skimmyhorn W. 2018. Peer effects in financial decision-making. J. Public Econ. 163:37–59
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Manski CF. 1993. Identification of endogenous social effects: the reflection problem. Rev. Econ. Stud. 60:3531–42
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Maturana G, Nickerson J. 2019. Teachers teaching teachers: the role of workplace peer effects in financial decisions. Rev. Financ. Stud. 32:103920–57
    [Google Scholar]
  66. McCartney WB, Shah A. 2019. Household mortgage refinancing decisions are neighbor influenced SSRN Work. Pap. 2882317
    [Google Scholar]
  67. McPherson M, Smith-Lovin L, Cook JM. 2001. Birds of a feather: homophily in social networks. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 27:415–44
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Milani F. 2020. COVID-19 outbreak, social response, and early economic effects: a global VAR analysis of cross-country interdependencies. J. Popul. Econ. 34:223–52
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Mobius MM, Niehaus P, Rosenblat TS. 2005. Social learning and consumer demand. Mimeogr., Dec., Harvard Univ. Cambridge, MA:
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Ouimet P, Tate G. 2020. Learning from coworkers: peer effects on individual investment decisions. J. Finance 75:1133–72
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Pedersen LH. 2021. Game on: social networks and markets SSRN Work. Pap. 3794616
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Piazzesi M, Schneider M, Stroebel J. 2020. Segmented housing search. Am. Econ. Rev. 110:3720–59
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Pool VK, Stoffman N, Yonker SE. 2015. The people in your neighborhood: social interactions and mutual fund portfolios. J. Finance 70:62679–732
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Przybylski AK, Murayama K, DeHaan CR, Gladwell V. 2013. Motivational, emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29:41841–48
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Rehbein O, Rother S. 2020. Distance in bank lending: the role of social networks Tech. Rep., Univ. Bonn Ger:.
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Sacerdote B. 2001. Peer effects with random assignment: results for Dartmouth roommates. Q. J. Econ. 116:2681–704
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Shefrin H, Statman M. 1985. The disposition to sell winners too early and ride losers too long: theory and evidence. J. Finance 40:3777–90
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Shiller RJ. 2007. Understanding recent trends in house prices and home ownership NBER Work. Pap. 13553
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Shiller RJ. 2016. Irrational Exuberance: Revised and Expanded Third Edition Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Shiller RJ, Pound J. 1989. Survey evidence on diffusion of interest and information among investors. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 12:147–66
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Shue K. 2013. Executive networks and firm policies: evidence from the random assignment of MBA peers. Rev. Financ. Stud. 26:61401–42
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Stroebel J. 2016. Asymmetric information about collateral values. J. Finance 71:31071–112
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Towe C, Lawley C. 2013. The contagion effect of neighboring foreclosures. Am. Econ. J. Econ. Policy 5:2313–35
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Tucker C. 2008. Identifying formal and informal influence in technology adoption with network externalities. Manag. Sci. 54:122024–38
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Wilson R. 2021. The impact of social networks on EITC claiming behavior. Rev. Econ. Stat In press. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_00995
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-financial-101320-062446
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-financial-101320-062446
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error