How Credit Cards Affect Our Brains

It’s been known for decades that credit cards encourage spending. But why that happens still isn’t entirely clear. New research offers some fresh insight into the causes—and how consumers might be manipulated in an increasingly cashless society.

Research on credit-card spending has tended toward the explanation that delaying payment removes a barrier to purchases in shoppers’ minds. A study published in February in Scientific Reports found evidence of another kind of trigger. Differences it found in brain activity between shoppers planning to use a credit card and those planning to buy with cash indicate that buying on credit doesn’t just ease shoppers’ inhibitions, it actively encourages purchases, the researchers say.

The upshot: When people are shopping with credit cards and see a product they like, the neural network in the brain that produces a sensation of reward perks up, which seems to create a craving to spend, says Sachin Banker, assistant professor at the University of Utah, who worked on the study as a Ph.D. student at the MIT Sloan School of Management.

“You’re basically feeling more reward when you shop with credit cards,” he says. “We don’t see that with cash. It was actually a very stark difference.”

Researchers used a form of magnetic resonance imaging to measure the brain activity of the study subjects as they participated in a shopping exercise. Each participant was shown a total of 84 everyday products over the course of three sessions and was asked whether they would buy each product at the stated price. Half the products were offered for purchase by credit card and half for purchase with cash. None of the products cost more than $50.

The differences in the shoppers’ brain activity support the hypothesis that after repeated credit-card purchases over time the brain learns to anticipate the rewards of credit-card shopping, according to the report. And that suggests that consumers could be conditioned to spend through the use of various sensory rewards in new payment systems, Dr. Banker says. For instance, with digital payments the use of particular sounds or vibrations on your smartphone when you make certain purchases but not others could, over time, teach your brain to anticipate rewards for buying specific products while you’re shopping.

Dr. Banker adds that further research could be done to see if the study’s theories hold true at higher prices. It also could study consumers who tend to overuse or misuse credit cards, to understand further why they act as they do. This study focused on people who mostly paid on time and used credit cards appropriately. Understanding brain patterns for other types of consumers could help lead to solutions that attempt to pre-empt harmful spending behaviour, Dr. Banker says.

Could a recession be the best time to launch a tech startup?

A recent study suggests that is the case. The authors found that tech startups that began operations during the 2007-09 recession—and received their first patent in that time—tended to last longer than tech startups founded a few years before or after. And those recession-era companies also tended to be more innovative than the rest.

“The effect of macroeconomic trends is not always intuitive,” says Daniel Bias , an assistant professor of finance at Vanderbilt University’s Owen Graduate School of Management, who co-wrote the paper with Alexander Ljungqvist, Stefan Persson Family Chair in Entrepreneurial Finance at the Stockholm School of Economics.

Drawing on data from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the authors examined a sample of 6,946 tech startups that launched and received their first patent approval between 2002 and 2012.

One group—about 5,734 companies—launched and got their patent outside of the 2007-09 recession. Of those, about 70% made it to their seventh year. But the startups that launched and got their first patent during the recession—about 1,212 companies—were 12% more likely to be in business in their seventh year.

These recession-era firms were also more likely to file a novel and influential patent after their first one. (That is, a patent the researchers determined was dissimilar to patents in the same niche that came before it, but similar to ones that came after it.)

So, why did these recession-era firms outperform their peers? Labor markets played a big role.

A widespread lack of available jobs meant that the startups were able to land more productive and innovative employees, especially in their research and development groups, and then hold on to them. More important, the tight labor markets also meant that the founding inventors—the people named on the very first patent—were more likely to stick around rather than try for opportunities elsewhere.

For startups started during the 2007-09 recession, founding inventors were 25 percentage points less likely to leave their company within the first three years. On average, about 43% of founding inventors in the entire sample left their startup within the first three years.

“Our study really highlights the importance of labor retention for young innovative startups. Retaining founding inventors cannot only help them survive, but also thrive,” Bias says.

How Credit Cards Affect Our Brains

Buying with plastic doesn’t just eliminate a barrier to buying. It actively encourages purchases.

A study suggests that when jobs are hard to come by, the best workers are more available—and stay longer