Figure - available via license: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
Content may be subject to copyright.
Analysis of the impact of Construal and Regulatory Focus on likelihood to borrow score: Bonferroni-adjusted pairwise comparisons Treatment 1 Treatment 2 Estimated marginal mean a Sig. diff. between levels of Treatment 2
Source publication
The regulatory protection of credit consumers, in general, is paramount due to the considerable use of credit, the imbalanced bargaining positions of the contracting parties and the adverse effect of over-indebtedness on individuals and society alike. These concerning factors are worsened in the case of High-Cost Short-Term Credit (HCSTC) consumers...
Context in source publication
Context 1
... gain insight into how the interventions might impact on the likelihood to borrow and their direction of effect, we examine the estimated marginal means of the four treatment conditions and perform Bonferroni-adjusted multiple pairwise comparisons. As depicted in Table 2, we find strong evidence of a statistically significant reduction in mean likelihood scores across the concrete (2.813) versus abstract (1.882) construal levels under the promotion treatment for regulatory focus. If attention is directed towards the attainment of positive outcomes (promotion focus), when individuals are required to think about why the objective (eg saving money to buy a smartphone) is important they are less likely to borrow money via HCSTC to fund another course of action (eg to go on a stag/hen weekend) with an associated opportunity cost (eg a delay in the purchase of the smartphone) than when required to think about how the objective might be achieved. ...Similar publications
In-depth changes are now taking place in the audit services market in Europe. They are mainly caused by the implementation of new rules laid down in European regulations. However, Member States have relatively broad freedom in drafting detailed regulations. In light of the above, the main purpose of this article is to identify disparities between f...
Citations
The impact of climate change on human health was identified as a priority for the UN COP26 conference. In this article, we consider climate-induced changes to mortality risks and how to incorporate these formally in the policy appraisal process. In the United Kingdom (UK), the Value of Statistical Life (VSL) is used to monetarize the benefits of policies to reduce mortality risks but it remains an open, empirical question as to whether the current VSL (£2.14 million per fatality prevented, December 2021 values) for traffic accidents should be applied in other contexts without any modification and particularly for extreme weather event fatalities. Using a representative sample of the UK population, we aim to estimate and better understand the trade-offs people make when comparing mortality risks, drawing on psychological insights from construal level and regulatory focus theories. We design a stated preference survey using a relative valuation framework with nonmonetary, risk-risk trade-off questions between extreme weather event and traffic accident mortality risks. We find evidence of an extreme weather event risk premium of 1.2-1.6 (implying a climate-related VSL of £2.52-£3.41 million). We also find that participants who are psychologically close to climate change (based on construal level theory), weigh reducing extreme weather event mortality risks almost two times that of reducing traffic accident mortality risks.
