Who Borrows Money from Microloan Platform? - Evidence from Campus E-card

  • Chenghong Zhang
  • Shuaiyong XiaoEmail author
  • Tian Lu
  • Xianghua Lu
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11589)


As the microloan becomes popular with the advance of information technology, the assessment of credit risk and understanding borrowers become crucial. However, without antithetical individuals, the prediction of loan probability and risk control cannot be so accurate. As an important consumption group in current commercial society, college students usually don’t have enough disposable income thus very likely become active lenders in microloan platforms. For microloan platforms, a vital question is how to distinguish the individuals who use the loans for the right purposes. In this study, we combine the student loan data from a microloan platform with student daily consumption data recorded by a campus e-card system to examine the change of consumption behavior for those students who borrowed money from the microloan platform. Our study finds that students with loan do have distinct consumption patterns for both long and short terms. Furthermore, by applying a difference-in-difference regression method, we find significant increases in both consumption frequency and money after students borrow money from the microloan platform for both long and short terms. Our research enriches the literature on microloan in the context of college students as consumers.


Microloan Consumption flow data Risk control College students 



This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant # 91546104) and the Scientific Research Project of Shanghai Science and Technology Committee (grant #17DZ1101002).


  1. 1.
    Agarwal, S., Liu, C.: Determinants of credit card delinquency and bankruptcy: macroeconomic factors. J. Econ. Finance 27(1), 75–84 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Allen, T.: Optimal (partial) group liability in microfinance lending. J. Dev. Econ. 121, 201–216 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cai, S., Lin, X., Xu, D., et al.: Judging online peer-to-peer lending behavior: a comparison of first-time and repeated borrowing requests. Inf. Manag. 53(7), 857–867 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Canales, R., Greenberg, J.: A matter of (relational) style: loan officer consistency and exchange continuity in microfinance. Manag. Sci. 62(4), 1202–1224 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gonzalez, L.: Online Social Lending: The Effect of Cultural, Economic and Legal Frameworks. Economic and Legal Frameworks (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Guo B.: Research on the factors affecting the successful borrowing rate of P2P network lending in China—taking the case of Renrendai online lending as an example. In: International Conference on Industrial Economics System and Industrial Security Engineering, pp. 1–5. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Herzenstein, M., Andrews, R.L.: The democratization of personal consumer loans? Determinants of success in online peer-to-peer lending communities. Boston Univ. Sch. Manag. Res. Pap. 14(6), 1–36 (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Herzenstein, M., Dholakia, U.M., Andrews, R.L.: Strategic herding behavior in peer-to-peer loan auctions. J. Interact. Mark. 25(1), 27–36 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nan, J., Weisheng, X.: Student consumption and study behavior analysis based on the data of the campus card system. Microcomput. Appl. 31(2), 35–38 (2015)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lin, M., Prabhala, N.R., Viswanathan, S.: Judging borrowers by the company they keep: friendship networks and information asymmetry in online peer-to-peer lending. Manag. Sci. 59(1), 17–35 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lin, M., Viswanathan, S.: Home bias in online investments: an empirical study of an online crowdfunding market. Manag. Sci. 62(5), 1393–1414 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liu, D., Brass, D.J., Lu, Y., et al.: Friendships in online peer-to-peer lending: pipes, prisms, and relational herding. MIS Q. 39(3), 729–742 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lu, Y., Gu, B., Ye, Q., et al.: Social influence and defaults in peer-to-peer lending networks (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pötzsch, S., Böhme, R.: The role of soft information in trust building: evidence from online social lending. In: Acquisti, A., Smith, S.W., Sadeghi, A.-R. (eds.) Trust 2010. LNCS, vol. 6101, pp. 381–395. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). Scholar
  15. 15.
    Puro, L., Teich, J.E., Wallenius, H., et al.: Bidding strategies for real-life small loan auctions. Decis. Support Syst. 51(1), 31–41 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Serrano-cinca, C., Gutiérreznieto, B., Lópezpalacios, L., et al.: Determinants of default in P2P lending. PLoS ONE 10(10), e0139427 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rui, T.: The Study on Academic Record Prediction and Students’ Friendship Network Detection Based on Consumption Data of Campus Card. Central China Normal University, Hubei (2016)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fang, W., Zhuosheng, J.: Constructing student conduct analyzing system based on campus smart card system. Comput. Sci. 35(10), 212–215 (2008)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jian, X.: The research and analysis of consume behavior and grades relativity on the basis of campus cards’ data. Nanchang University, Nanchang (2010)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fu, Y., Jing, M., Cheng, D.: Analysis on data of the Campus IC Card based on Hadoop. Wirel. Internet Technol. 15, 77–79 (2016)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zvilichovsky, D., Inbar, Y., Barzilay, O.: Playing Both Sides of the Market: Success and Reciprocity on Crowdfunding Platforms. Social Science Electronic Publishing (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chenghong Zhang
    • 1
  • Shuaiyong Xiao
    • 1
    Email author
  • Tian Lu
    • 1
  • Xianghua Lu
    • 1
  1. 1.School of ManagementFudan UniversityShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations