Collaborative Research: Multiplexing: Theories and Tests of Interactions Between Types of Relationships

朋友和熟人在许多重要的经济需求上相互依赖：他们非正式地借贷。他们分享有关就业、消费品和政府项目的信息。他们在紧急情况和日常事务(如照看孩子)方面提供并寻求帮助。这些交互都非常不同，因此最适合每种需求的合作伙伴可能会有所不同。尽管如此，在实践中，人们会将他们的许多关系层次化。例如，他们依赖相同的朋友提供贷款，获得有关新产品或就业机会的信息。PI调查人们如何选择要分层的关系，以及这如何影响他们的福利。有多少可以简单地用朋友在不同活动中的兼容性来解释分层，又有多少是因为捆绑关系效果更好的事实？用于日常人情交易的网络如何塑造谁与谁交谈，以及信息在社会中的流动方式？更富有的个人之所以能够获得更有用的信息，是因为他们的网络不那么受满足日常需求的限制，尤其是金融需求？这对求职和不平等有何影响？PI开发了多关系网络形成的第一个基础理论，这是现有模型没有涵盖的。它们提出了不同类型的连接相互叠加的四个原因：(1)节省成本，(2)协同作用，(3)协调，(4)兼容性。然后，他们检验了这些理论的一些含义，提出了对所得模型的实证检验，并使用现有和新的现场数据进行了初步分析。项目的第二部分集中在多关系网络的一个特别与政策相关的方面。无论在哪里获得金融服务的机会有限--在发展中国家以及在发达国家的许多社区--形成许多其他社区的一个基本网络是风险分担网络：非正式借贷和借贷，用于紧急情况和普通活动。由于分层，风险分担网络成为社区社会结构的关键驱动力，例如，包括其信息链接。因此，风险分担对结果的影响远远超出了相互保险的范围，例如谁了解各种话题以及人们如何形成观点。由于获得金融服务的机会有限而造成的贫困陷阱影响的远不止是投资和消费行为，而且还可能因偏向获取信息而加剧不平等。例如，如果人们只从失业的邻居那里获得工作机会的信息，他们将发现更难寻找工作。因此，在网络中分担风险的动机的变化--比如，通过获得农作物保险、银行账户或其他收入平滑手段--对一个社会如何能够处理信息具有深远的影响。人们面临的经济负担可能会使他们的网络产生偏见，导致低效的社会学习；将个人从不得不分担风险的状态中解放出来，可能会导致更有效的信息网络。PIS将开发针对这些问题的理论，并进行现场和实验室实验，以测试理论和潜在的改进政策。拟议研究的最后一个组成部分更深入地挖掘信息网络，其功能对上面提出的问题至关重要。在该项目的这一部分中，私人情报员计划审查分享信息的动机和隐瞒信息的动机之间的紧张关系。一个人可能希望告诉她的朋友一个宝贵的机会，例如一个新的保险计划。然而，如果只有有限的人可以从一条信息中受益，例如关于职位空缺的信息，一个人可能不希望它传播得太广。这对信息共享有重大影响，但关于这些问题的理论或实证研究很少。PIs建议进行理论调查和实地试验，以了解新经济机会的性质--例如，它是否具有竞争性--如何影响其扩散。在实证工作方面，拟议的研究将收集大量农村社区的网络数据，并进行几次实地和实验室试验，以调查这些主题。

Friends and acquaintances rely on one another for many important economic needs: They informally borrow and lend. They share information about jobs, consumer products, and government programs. They offer and seek help with emergencies and daily tasks such as childcare. These interactions are all quite different, and so the partners who are best for each need may differ. Nonetheless, in practice, people layer many of their relationships. For example, they rely on the same friends for loans and for information about new products or job opportunities. The PIs investigate how people choose which relationships to layer, and how this affects their welfare. How much of layering is explained simply by the compatibility of friends across many different activities, and how much is due to the fact that bundled relationships work better? How does the network used for daily favor-trading shape who talks to whom, and how information flows in society? Are wealthier individuals able to get more useful information because their networks are less constrained by meeting daily needs, especially financial ones? How does this affect job search and inequality? The PIs develop first foundational theory for multi-relational network formation, which is not covered by existing models. They present four reasons for the layering of different kinds of connections on top of each other: (1) cost savings, (2) synergies, (3) coordination, and (4) compatibility. They then examine some of the implications of these theories, propose empirical tests of the resulting models, and conduct preliminary analysis using existing and new field data.The second part of the project focuses on a particularly policy-relevant aspect of multi-relational networks. Wherever access to financial services is limited - in the developing world and also in many communities in the developed world - a fundamental network that underlies the formation of many others is that of risk-sharing: informal borrowing and lending, for emergencies and for ordinary activities. Due to layering, the risk-sharing network becomes a crucial driver of the social structure of a community, including, for example, its informational links. Risk-sharing therefore influences outcomes well beyond mutual insurance, such as who is informed about various topics and how people form opinions. Poverty traps caused by limited access to financial services affect much more than investment and consumption behavior, and can exacerbate inequality by biasing access to information. For instance, if people only obtain information about the availability of jobs from their unemployed neighbors, they will find it harder to search for a job. Thus, changes in the motives to share risk within a network - say, through the availability of crop insurance, bank accounts, or other means of income smoothing - has profound implications for how a society is able to process information. Financial burdens that people face can bias their networks in ways that lead to inefficient social learning; freeing individuals from having to share risk may result in more efficient information networks. The PIs will be developing theory that speaks to these issues and performing field and lab experiments to test the theories and potential policies for improvement.A final component of the proposed research digs deeper into information networks, whose functioning is critical to the questions raised above. In this part of the project the PIs plan to examine a tension between motives to share information and motives to conceal it. A person may wish to tell her friends about a valuable opportunity, such as a new insurance program. However, if only a limited number of people can benefit from a piece of information, for instance regarding a job opening, a person may not want it to spread too broadly. This has major implications for information-sharing, but there is very little theoretical or empirical study of these issues. The PIs propose theoretical investigations and field experiments to understand how the nature of a new economic opportunity - e.g., whether it is rivalrous - affects its diffusion.In terms of empirical work, the proposed research will collect network data across a large set of rural communities and conduct several field and lab experiments to investigate these topics.