Psychological Factors of Formal and Informal Monetary Borrowing

The social category ‘borrowers’ is heterogeneous in a number of indicators. The article raises the problem of differences in the psychological characteristics of borrowers who prefer formal loans and loans from private individuals. The purpose of the study is to analyze the psychological characteristics of consumers of various types of loans. Based on previous research, the authors identified for analysis variables such as time perspective and long-term orientation of the individual, consideration of the consequences of one’s behavior, level of generalized trust, moral foundations, social beliefs and attitudes towards debt, which were presumably associated with people’s preferred type of borrowing. The sample consisted of users of financial services with various types of loans ( N = 1974); they were divided into three groups, homogeneous by type of loans: (1) the respondents who had only loans received from relatives, friends or acquaintances ( N = 97), (2) the respondents who had only loans from microfinance organizations (MFO) ( N = 97), and (3) the respondents who had only consumer loans ( N = 103). The analysis was carried out using the following methods and techniques: The Moral Foundations Questionnaire (MFQ) by J. Haidt (adapted by O.A. Sychev), The Long-Term Orientation of Personality (LTOP) by T.A. Nestik, The Consideration for Future Consequences (CFC) by A. Strathman (adapted by T.A. Nestik), a short version of The Dual Process Model Scales by J. Duckitt (adapted by D.S. Grigoriev), a short version of The Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI) , The World Value Survey (WVS) , The Personal Belief in a Just World Scale by K. Dalbert with two subscales: belief in the justice of the world and belief in the justice of the world in relation to oneself (adapted by S.K. Nartova-Bochaver), and The Debt Behavior Express Inventory . In each group of the respondents, significant differences were found in the structure of relationships among the studied parameters. The results showed that the respondents who had only non-institutional loans, in contrast to those who had exclusively bank or MFO loans, were less loyal to their group (low traditionalism), which in their perceptions was associated with reduced trust in (regional) authorities. This may indicate the autonomy of these borrowers in social terms. The limitations of the study were also noted. Finally, the prospects for further research were outlined and the possibilities of practical use of the results obtained were determined.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
RUDN Journal of Psychology and Pedagogics
Published
2024-11-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-1683-2024-21-1-135-156
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Financial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.95
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Psychological Factors of Formal and Informal Monetary Borrowing

М.А. Гагарина, Tatyana P. Emelyanova, Eva N. Vikentieva
1 citations
RUDN Journal of Psychology and Pedagogics
Financial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
0.95
article

Psychological Factors of Formal and Informal Monetary Borrowing

М.А. Гагарина, Tatyana P. Emelyanova, Eva N. Vikentieva
article en
1 citations

Abstract

The social category ‘borrowers’ is heterogeneous in a number of indicators. The article raises the problem of differences in the psychological characteristics of borrowers who prefer formal loans and loans from private individuals. The purpose of the study is to analyze the psychological characteristics of consumers of various types of loans. Based on previous research, the authors identified for analysis variables such as time perspective and long-term orientation of the individual, consideration of the consequences of one’s behavior, level of generalized trust, moral foundations, social beliefs and attitudes towards debt, which were presumably associated with people’s preferred type of borrowing. The sample consisted of users of financial services with various types of loans ( N = 1974); they were divided into three groups, homogeneous by type of loans: (1) the respondents who had only loans received from relatives, friends or acquaintances ( N = 97), (2) the respondents who had only loans from microfinance organizations (MFO) ( N = 97), and (3) the respondents who had only consumer loans ( N = 103). The analysis was carried out using the following methods and techniques: The Moral Foundations Questionnaire (MFQ) by J. Haidt (adapted by O.A. Sychev), The Long-Term Orientation of Personality (LTOP) by T.A. Nestik, The Consideration for Future Consequences (CFC) by A. Strathman (adapted by T.A. Nestik), a short version of The Dual Process Model Scales by J. Duckitt (adapted by D.S. Grigoriev), a short version of The Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory (ZTPI) , The World Value Survey (WVS) , The Personal Belief in a Just World Scale by K. Dalbert with two subscales: belief in the justice of the world and belief in the justice of the world in relation to oneself (adapted by S.K. Nartova-Bochaver), and The Debt Behavior Express Inventory . In each group of the respondents, significant differences were found in the structure of relationships among the studied parameters. The results showed that the respondents who had only non-institutional loans, in contrast to those who had exclusively bank or MFO loans, were less loyal to their group (low traditionalism), which in their perceptions was associated with reduced trust in (regional) authorities. This may indicate the autonomy of these borrowers in social terms. The limitations of the study were also noted. Finally, the prospects for further research were outlined and the possibilities of practical use of the results obtained were determined.

RUDN Journal of Psychology and PedagogicsVol. 21(1)
Financial University (RU), Institute of Psychology (RU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Financial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
0.95
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.