Speaking of Debt: Framing, Guilt, and Economic Choices
Joint work with Cevat Giray Aksoy, Mathias Dolls, Justyna Klejdysz, Andreas Peichl, and Lisa Windsteiger
This paper is the first to causally identify the effect of language on attitudes and behaviors toward debt. Using observational data, randomized survey experiments, incentivized borrowing-to-invest decisions, and textual analyses, we show that the moral connotations inherent in debt-related language influence how individuals, firms, and policymakers perceive borrowing. In several languages, including German, Dutch, and Swedish, the standard term for “debt” also connotes “guilt.” Leveraging this semantic overlap, we conduct survey experiments embedded in three household surveys across seven countries and one business survey. By randomizing debt-related wording, we find that guilt-connoted language significantly reduces individuals’ willingness to borrow, their approval of public debt, and debt-financing plans among firm managers. This effect extends to an incentivized experiment, in which guilt-laden wording significantly reduces both the probability of borrowing and the amount borrowed. To complement the experimental results, we analyze three decades of German parliamentary speeches and find that politicians who oppose public debt systematically use guilt-connoted terms. A similar pattern emerges in financial advertising: guilt-laden language is concentrated in debt-relief campaigns, while neutral terminology dominates transactional promotions. Together, our findings demonstrate that moral connotations embedded in language shape economic behavior and are strategically employed in political and commercial discourse.
Keywords: public debt, private debt, linguistic framing, survey experiment, NLP
.png&w=3840&q=75)
