Acta psychologica · 2025
Lend to a friend, lose a friend? Guilt, shame, and the emotional costs of informal borrowing.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Douglas Mwirigi, Fekete-Farkas Mária, Csaba Borbély
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Informal borrowing from friends and acquaintances is a common financial practice in contexts where formal credit is limited, yet it carries significant emotional and relational implications.
AIMS: This study investigates how moral emotions, specifically guilt and shame, influence borrowing behavior, repayment decisions, and post-borrowing relationship quality.
METHODS: Drawing on prospect theory and cognitive dissonance theory, we conducted a cross-sectional survey (N = 384) among individuals with past peer-borrowing experiences and used regression model to analyze the data. The questionnaire was administered online to examine borrowers' psychological mechanisms before, during, and after borrowing.
FINDINGS: We found that shame significantly reduces borrowing willingness and impairs repayment behavior, while guilt positively predicts repayment, but has no effect on borrowing decisions. Demographic factors, such as gender and age moderate the effect of guilt, but not shame. Most notably, shame emerged as the strongest predictor of strained interpersonal relationships after borrowing.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the emotional costs embedded in peer lending and suggest the need for peer-lending interventions and financial inclusion strategies that account for psychological and social dynamics. Addressing shame may be key to fostering emotionally safe borrowing environments and maintaining social cohesion in informal financial systems.
AIMS: This study investigates how moral emotions, specifically guilt and shame, influence borrowing behavior, repayment decisions, and post-borrowing relationship quality.
METHODS: Drawing on prospect theory and cognitive dissonance theory, we conducted a cross-sectional survey (N = 384) among individuals with past peer-borrowing experiences and used regression model to analyze the data. The questionnaire was administered online to examine borrowers' psychological mechanisms before, during, and after borrowing.
FINDINGS: We found that shame significantly reduces borrowing willingness and impairs repayment behavior, while guilt positively predicts repayment, but has no effect on borrowing decisions. Demographic factors, such as gender and age moderate the effect of guilt, but not shame. Most notably, shame emerged as the strongest predictor of strained interpersonal relationships after borrowing.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight the emotional costs embedded in peer lending and suggest the need for peer-lending interventions and financial inclusion strategies that account for psychological and social dynamics. Addressing shame may be key to fostering emotionally safe borrowing environments and maintaining social cohesion in informal financial systems.