Wendy De La Rosa

Wendy De La Rosa, Jackie Silverman, Abigail B. Sussman, Gwen Rino, Vince Dorie, Maximilian Hell, Eric Giannella, Lisa Dillman (2025), Using Expenditure Reframes to Increase Interest in Claiming Government Benefits, Journal of Marketing.

Abstract: Millions of eligible lower-income people do not apply for government benefits. Increasing interest in applying for these benefits is a crucial concern for marketers and economists, as the underutilization of benefits limits their effectiveness. This research proposes that expenditure reframes, descriptions translating monetary amounts into expense categories, can increase interest in government benefits. Expenditure reframes enhance a benefit’s psychological value, helping consumers better understand its impact on their financial lives. Evidence from a large-scale preregistered field experiment (N = 14,267) aimed at encouraging lower-income individuals to claim a tax credit demonstrates that expenditure reframe messages increased interest, increasing visits to the claiming website. A second preregistered large-scale field experiment among Medicaid recipients (N = 71,939) identifies a boundary condition for the effect of expenditure reframes on interest. A third preregistered large-scale field experiment replicates the efficacy of expenditure reframes (N = 36,081) and highlights how the expense type featured in the reframe moderates these effects. Results from three preregistered online experiments support these findings and further elucidate the impact of expenditure reframes on psychological value. This work underscores how marketers, practitioners, and policymakers shape perceptions of government benefits and illustrates key considerations for designing effective outreach campaigns targeting lower-income households.

Wendy De La Rosa and Christopher Bechler (2024), Unveiling the adverse effects of artificial intelligence on financial decisions via the AI-IMPACT model, Current Opinion in Psychology.

Abstract: There is considerable enthusiasm for the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) to improve financial well-being. Despite this enthusiasm, it is important to underscore AI's potential adverse effects on consumers' financial decisions. We introduce the AI-IMPACT model, a unifying theoretical framework for how AI can influence consumers' financial decisions. The model details how AI impacts the marketplace, affecting psychological processes and consumer traits core to financial decision-making (e.g., pain of payment, financial literacy). We use the AI-IMPACT model to illustrate one way AI can reduce financial well-being as its influence on the marketplace (e.g., facilitating biometric payment methods) decreases consumers' pain of payment, increasing spending. Lastly, we use the AI-IMPACT model to identify areas for future research at the intersection of AI and financial decision-making.

Wendy De La Rosa, Abigail B. Sussman, Eric Giannella, Gwen Rino (2022), Communicating amounts in terms of commonly used budgeting periods increases intentions to claim government benefits, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).

Abstract: Millions of eligible families did not claim their 2021 expanded child tax credit (CTC), collectively forgoing billions of dollars. To address this problem, many policymakers focused on increasing awareness of the CTC by highlighting that families could receive up to $3,600 a year per child. However, people rarely budget on a yearly basis. We propose that communicating the CTC benefit amount in terms of commonly used budgeting periods (e.g., $300 a month) instead of uncommonly used budgeting periods (e.g., $3,600 a year) could increase interest in claiming the CTC. Two large-scale field experiments (n=16,696) among low-income individuals support this account. Using common (vs. uncommon) budgeting periods to describe CTC benefit amounts increased CTC claiming intentions by 16 to 26%. A third large-scale field experiment (n=14,178) demonstrated that encouraging people to consider different budgeting periods moderated these effects. These results suggest that communicating amounts in terms of common budgeting periods is a simple, cost-effective way to stimulate interest in claiming government benefits.

Wendy De La Rosa and Stephanie M. Tully (2022), The Impact of Payment Frequency on Consumer Spending and Subjective Wealth Perceptions, Journal of Consumer Research.

Abstract: Payment frequency is a fundamental yet underexplored feature of consumers’ finances. As higher payment frequencies are becoming more prevalent, consumers are receiving more frequent yet smaller paychecks. An analysis of income and expenditure data of over 30,000 consumers from a financial services provider demonstrates a naturally occurring relationship between higher payment frequencies and increased spending. A series of lab studies support this finding, providing causal evidence that higher (vs. lower) payment frequencies increase spending. The effect of payment frequency on spending is driven by changes in consumers’ subjective wealth perceptions. Specifically, higher payment frequencies reduce consumers’ uncertainty in predicting whether they will have enough resources throughout a period, increasing their subjective wealth perceptions. As such, situational factors that reduce prediction uncertainty for those paid less frequently (e.g., the timing of consumers’ expenses, income levels) moderate the impact of payment frequency. The effects of payment frequency on subjective wealth and spending can occur even when objective wealth favors those with lower payment frequencies. More broadly, the current work underscores a need to understand how timing variations in consumers’ income impact their perceptions, behaviors, and general well-being.

Wendy De La Rosa, Eesha Sharma, Stephanie M. Tully, Eric Giannella, Gwen Rino (2021), Psychological ownership interventions increase interest in claiming government benefits, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS).

Abstract: Each year, eligible individuals forgo billions of dollars in financial assistance in the form of government benefits. To address this participation gap, we identify psychological ownership of government benefits as a factor that significantly influences individuals’ interest in applying for government benefits. Psychological ownership refers to how much an individual feels that a target is their own. We propose that the more individuals feel that government benefits are their own, the less likely they are to perceive applying for them as an aversive ask for help, and thus, the more likely they are to pursue them. Three large-scale field experiments among low-income individuals demonstrate that higher psychological ownership framing of government benefits significantly increases participants’ pursuit of benefits and outperforms other common psychological interventions. An additional experiment shows that this effect occurs because greater psychological ownership reduces people’s general aversion to asking for assistance. Relative to control messages, these psychological ownership interventions increased interest in claiming government benefits by 20% to 128%. These results suggest that psychological ownership framing is an effective tool in the portfolio of potential behavioral science interventions and a simple way to stimulate interest in claiming benefits.