Debit cards are overtaking credit cards as the most prevalent form of electronic payment at the point of sale, yet the determinants of a ubiquitous consumer choice-"debit or credit?"-have received relatively little scrutiny. Several stylized facts suggest that debit-card use is driven by behavioral factors. The popular view is that debit-card use presents a puzzle for canonical economic models. However, we should not overlook standard cost-based motives for using debit cards. Principally, the 50 percent of debit-card users who revolve credit-card balances would pay interest to charge purchases on the margin and hence might rationally choose to use debit rather than credit to minimize transaction costs. Debit-card use might also be rational for consumers lacking access to a credit card or facing a binding credit limit. I document robust effects of these types of credit-card use on debit use and show that such effects are consistent with a canonical model of consumer choice. This paper also shows, however, that it is difficult to distinguish sharply between canonical and behavioral motives for debit-card use in publicly available data. More generally, I develop analytical frameworks for testing competing canonical and behavioral models and find evidence consistent with important roles for both pecuniary and psychological motives.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by Federal Reserve Bank of New York in its series Staff Reports with number
191.
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
Canner, Niko & Mankiw, N Gregory & Weil, David N, 1997.
"An Asset Allocation Puzzle,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 87(1), pages 181-91, March.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Other versions:
Niko Canner & N. Gregory Mankiw & David N. Weil, 1994.
"An Asset Allocation Puzzle,"
NBER Working Papers
4857, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
David Laibson & Andrea Repetto & Jeremy Tobacman, 2000.
"A Debt Puzzle,"
Documentos de Trabajo
80, Centro de EconomÃa Aplicada, Universidad de Chile.
[Downloadable!]
Other versions:
David Laibson & Andrea Repetto & Jeremy Tobacman, 2000.
"A Debt Puzzle,"
NBER Working Papers
7879, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
Cited by: (explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)