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。他们分享有关工作、消费品和政府计划的信息。他们提供和寻求紧急情况和日常任务的帮助，如儿童保育。这些互动都是完全不同的，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分层。例如，他们依靠相同的朋友来获得贷款和新产品或工作机会的信息。PI调查人们如何选择分层的关系，以及这如何影响他们的福利。有多少分层是简单地通过朋友在许多不同活动中的兼容性来解释的，又有多少是由于捆绑关系更好地工作这一事实？用于日常电子商务交易的网络如何塑造谁与谁交谈，以及信息如何在社会中流动？富裕的个人是否能够获得更多有用的信息，因为他们的网络不太受日常需求的限制，特别是金融需求？这如何影响求职和不平等？PI开发了多关系网络形成的第一个基础理论，这是现有模型所不包括的。他们提出了将不同类型的连接分层的四个原因：（1）节省成本，（2）协同作用，（3）协调和（4）兼容性。然后，研究这些理论的含义，对由此产生的模型进行实证检验，并使用现有的和新的实地数据进行初步分析。第二部分的研究重点是多关系网络的一个特别与政策相关的方面。 在获得金融服务机会有限的地方-在发展中世界和发达世界的许多社区-形成许多其他金融服务的一个基本网络是风险分担网络：非正式借贷，用于紧急情况和日常活动。由于分层，风险分担网络成为社区社会结构的关键驱动力，包括其信息联系。因此，风险分担对结果的影响远远超出了相互保险的范围，比如谁被告知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，其影响远远超过投资和消费行为，而且由于信息的获取存在偏差，可能加剧不平等。例如，如果人们只从失业的邻居那里获得有关工作机会的信息，他们会发现找工作更难。因此，在网络中分担风险的动机的变化--比如通过农作物保险、银行账户或其他收入平滑手段的可用性--对社会如何处理信息有着深远的影响。人们面临的经济负担可能会使他们的网络产生偏见，导致社会学习效率低下;让个人不必分担风险可能会导致更有效的信息网络。PI将开发理论来解决这些问题，并进行现场和实验室实验来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是深入挖掘信息网络，其功能对上述问题至关重要。 在项目的这一部分，PI计划研究分享信息的动机和隐藏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有价值的机会，比如一个新的保险计划。然而，如果只有有限数量的人可以从一条信息中受益，例如关于一个职位空缺，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，但对这些问题的理论或实证研究很少。PI提出了理论研究和实地实验，以了解新的经济机会的性质-例如，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，并进行几个实地和实验室实验来调查这些主题。

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.