Search Papers

Michael J. Seiler

Cited by*: 2 Downloads*: 1

In this study, I examine relative private signal strength and find that offered advice is significantly more influential in changing strategic mortgage default proclivity than is observed actions. Moreover, these private signals are more reflective of financial herding than they are of an information cascade. From a policy perspective, herds are easier to reverse than are cascades making more effective policies aimed at curbing the incidence of strategic mortgage default. Interestingly, an informationally equivalent change in private signal strength across actions and advice alters strategic default willingness, but not the moral stance of borrowers, which demonstrates the complexity of this life-altering financially and emotionally impactful decision.

Michael J. Seiler

Cited by*: 2 Downloads*: 0

This study identifies a severe gap between the financial backlash borrowers believe awaits them after strategic mortgage default and the reality that lenders rarely pursue deficiency judgments. This coupled with the social norm finding that borrowers widely view strategic default as immoral, leads us to recommend lenders and policymakers seeking to stem the tide of defaults to pursue a policy of informational opacity. We make several recommendations for how to carry out such a policy as well as what might need to change in society before the alternative policy of informational transparency becomes ideal.

Michael J. Seiler

Cited by*: 0 Downloads*: 0

Defaulting on a mortgage is widely viewed as being immoral, but no prior study has examined the intervening roles of financial outcome and default intent. We find that the public is significantly more accepting of a defaulting borrower who earns a zero or negative return on his investment than one who earns a positive return. This moral viewpoint changes significantly when the default is strategic in nature. Defaulters are judged significantly less harshly by those who more so blame the lender for the current financial crisis, those who have previously strategically defaulted, and males. When asked to suggest a "morally appropriate" settlement offer to lenders to resolve the distressed debt, beyond the financial outcome and default intent remaining significant, we further find that those who more so blame the lender, those view their home as more of an investment rather than a consumption good, those who have previously strategically defaulted, those with lower income levels, and minorities suggest significantly lower settlement offers.

Eric Cardella, Michael J. Seiler

Cited by*: 0 Downloads*: 1

When selling a home, an important decision facing the homeowner is choosing an optimal listing price. This decision will depend in large part on how the chosen list price impacts the post negotiation final sale price of the home. In this study, we design an experiment that enables us to identify how different types of common list price strategies affect housing negotiations. Specifically, we examine how rounded, just below, and precise list prices impact the negotiation behavior of the buyer and seller and, ultimately, the final sale price of the home. Our results indicate that the initial list price strategy does play an important role in the negotiation process. Most notably, a high precise price generates the highest final sale price, smallest percentage discount off the list price, and the largest fraction of the surplus to the seller, while just below pricing leads to the lowest final price, largest percentage discount, and smallest fraction of the surplus to the seller. This pattern seems to be largely driven by sellers making persistently higher and more precise counter-offers throughout the negotiation process when the initial list price is high precise. Interestingly, these effects generally attenuate with negotiating experience. Importantly, our experimental results are generally consistent, both in direction and magnitude, with the limited transactions-based empirical studies relating to real estate listing prices.

Michael J. Seiler, Eric Walden

Cited by*: 0 Downloads*: 0

In this study, we use functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to understand how homeowners process non-financial information when considering strategic mortgage default. We find that borrowers initially attempt to inhibit their knee-jerk reaction to retaliate against a lender who has engaged in egregious lending practices when compared to a financially conservative lender. Moreover, when defaults are rare, borrowers are less likely to default because violating the social norm results in feelings of disgust. Finally, when a lender refuses a loan modification, the borrower is found to seek retribution. Interestingly, granting even a modest loan modification removes the desire of homeowners to seek retribution towards their lender no matter what their impression of the lender may be. The results carry a number of policy implications.

David M Harrison, Mark A. Lane, Michael J. Seiler

Cited by*: 4 Downloads*: 0

This study examines the herding behavior of individuals in the context of their willingness to strategically default on a mortgage based on the (falsely) observed behavior of those around them. We find that homeowners are easily persuaded to follow the herd and adopt a strategic default proclivity consistent with that of their peers. Herding behavior is stronger when a Maven, or thought leader, is involved and weaker when the person finds strategic default to be morally objectionable. Homeowners appear to herd more for informational gains rather than for social reasons, and do not herd differentially based on signal strength. In a robustness check using a sample of real estate professionals, the strong mimetic herding result continues to hold.

Matthew Cypher, S McKay Price, Spenser Robinson, Michael J. Seiler

Cited by*: 0 Downloads*: 5

Using a sample of CCIM designees and candidates in an experimental setting, this study examines the impact of broker signaling in commercial real estate transactions. It also explores the effect of certainty of closure in commercial real estate transactions. Findings suggest brokers are able to influence transaction pricing. Moreover, detailed analysis reveals that when a signal is above a reference point implied by previous transactions, the strength of the signal matters; privately communicated signals from reliable sources have significantly greater impact than signals which are made widely available. Additionally, we find an approximately 10% premium in transactions with lower certainty of closure than one with high certainty. The latter result varies by transactional participant type; owner/developers require a larger premium than institutional sellers.

Michael J. Seiler

Cited by*: 0 Downloads*: 5

We test the disjunctive hypothesis as it relates to mortgage contracts and find that a liquidated damages clause shifts one's view of a mortgage from a promise to perform to either a promise to perform or pay compensatory damages. However, when a strategic mortgage default is responsible for the breach, the perceived immorality of this action overwhelms the liquidated damages clause effect in support of the disjunctive thesis. We also find that people's conscious "experimentally stated preference" moral stance on installment loan (mortgages, auto loans, credit card debt and even cell phone contracts) default significantly differs from their subconscious "experimentally revealed preference" moral stance indicating a difference between what people say they believe and what they actually believe.

Michael J. Seiler

Cited by*: 4 Downloads*: 0

Inequity Aversion has long been applied in a game theoretic setting to explain that individuals are willing to sacrifice personal wealth in order to financially penalize players they perceive to be acting selfishly or unfairly. I apply inequity aversion to strategic mortgage default decisions and find that individual homeowners (as well as a second sample of professional mortgage lenders) have a differential stated willingness to walk away from their mortgage based on the perceived characteristics of their lender. Importantly, these significant differences can be removed even with extremely modest loan modifications. Finally, I document that regular homeowners and even professional lenders do a poor job differentiating between the owner of their loan and the servicer of their loan. This is particularly troubling given the extreme misconception of their bank's true character. As a result, much of their willingness to penalize is misplaced resulting in an unnecessary number of strategic mortgage defaults.

Aaron Arndt, David M Harrison, Mark A. Lane, Michael J. Seiler, Vicky L Seiler

Cited by*: 0 Downloads*: 17

We investigate whether customers' overall impression of online property listings can be influenced by the real estate agent, and whether this influence depends on the customer's demographic characteristics. A sample of 1,594 potential homebuyers took an online audio/visual tour of a typically priced home in their area. Subjects were shown one of eight conditions in which we varied agent gender (male/female), agent attractiveness (attractive/less attractive), and pathos (used/not used). The results show that segments of customers are drawn to different real estate agents, but contrary to our expectations, customers were not necessarily drawn to similar agents or more attractive ones.

Eli Beracha, Michael J. Seiler

Cited by*: 0 Downloads*: 0

In this study, we examine whether homebuyers favor homes associated with just below pricing strategies or those with rounded prices (e.g., $199,900 vs. $200,000). The inclination for just below pricing allows sellers that use just below pricing to set a higher asking price without driving away potential buyers. Rounded priced homes, on the other hand, sell significantly faster and at a smaller discount from list price compared with just below priced homes. We find that the just below pricing strategy yields the highest transaction price relative to the true underlying home value. This suggests sellers exploit buyers' preference for just below priced homes with a higher initial listing price that outweighs the lower discount and shorter time on market associated with similar round priced homes, making just below pricing the more effective pricing strategy.

Mark A. Lane, Michael J. Seiler, Vicky L Seiler

Cited by*: 0 Downloads*: 0

This study is the first to examine the widely debated merits of staging a home for sale. We find that both homeowners and real estate agents believe staging conditions (furnishings and wall color) will significantly impact homeowners' willingness to pay for a property. Our results show that homeowners rationally do not significantly differ in their valuations based on staging conditions. However, staging conditions do influence the process, as we find a neutral wall color and good furnishings do significantly influence a buyers' perceived liability and overall opinion of the home. While these are a necessary condition for purchase, staging is not enough to result in a higher selling price.

Michael J. Seiler, Eric Walden

Cited by*: 0 Downloads*: 0

This study examines strategic mortgage default on a neurological level. Specifically, we test two mainstream behavioral finance/economic theories: sunk cost fallacy and cognitive dissonance. Using fMRI technology, we identify a number of substrates within the brain that provide a neurobiological explanation for why some homeowners exercise their mortgage put option while others do not. We find that borrowers rationally do not suffer from the sunk cost fallacy as it relates to strategic default in that stye significantly prioritize their negative equity position over the amount of their initial down payment. We do, however, find neurological support that cognitive dissonance is relevant in homeowners' thought processes as they toil with the hesitancy brought on by the belief that strategic default is immortal against strong financial incentive to walk away from a substantially underwater mortgage.

Michael J. Seiler, Eric Walden

Cited by*: 0 Downloads*: 1

Great debate is being waged between whether strategic mortgage defaulters follow a herd for social reasons or mimic others' behavior for informational gain. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), the latest neurological technology allowing for observation of brain activity during strategic mortgage default decision-making, we find that when defaulters learn of peer default behavior, they acknowledge the social component of the decision, but feel freer to make their own decisions. Alternatively, when observing the behavior of a maven (real estate expert), borrowers still consider the social aspect of the decision (although to a lesser extent), but ultimately follow the maven who presumably possesses a greater information set. Alarmingly, borrowers only significantly follow the herd when mavens advocate strategic default, not when they recommend against it.

Uri Gneezy, Moshe Hoffman, Mark A. Lane, John A List, Jeffrey A Livingston, Michael J. Seiler

Cited by*: None Downloads*: None

Recent theoretical work shows that the better-than-average effect, where a majority believes their ability to be better than average, can be perfectly consistent with Bayesian updating. However, later experiments that account for this theoretical advance still find behavior consistent with overconfidence. The literature notes that overoptimism can be caused by either overconfidence (optimism about performance), wishful thinking (optimism about outcomes), or both. To test whether the better-than-average effect might be explained by wishful thinking instead of overconfidence, we conduct an experiment that is similar to those used in the overconfidence literature, but removes performance as a potential channel. We find evidence that wishful thinking might explain overconfidence only among the most optimistic subjects, and that conservatism is possibly more of a worry; if unaccounted for, overconfidence might be underestimated.