Social Excuse Mechanism in Transnational Transfers

In Simple Words

Imagine wanting to give a relative a gift certificate instead of cash so they buy groceries, but feeling awkward imposing that restriction yourself. If the card issuer automatically triggers a small donation to a local community center whenever the gift certificate is chosen, you can blame the bank's promotional rule for your choice, protecting your personal relationship.

Research question

Migrants who try to restrict or condition remittance funds risk signaling a lack of trust to their home households, which can generate social friction or resentment. Consequently, senders require a socially acceptable pretext that attributes transfer restrictions to an external entity's policy rather than personal distrust.

Participants

N = 167 Filipino migrant workers in Rome randomly assigned to the Social Excuse treatment (out of N = 501 total study participants).

Study Design

Randomized controlled experiment where recipient households were informed of sender choices, but senders choosing committed options were told a community organization donation would be made to provide a plausible social excuse.

Results

Providing a social excuse resulted in a 36.35 € increase in remittances under education labeling compared to private information (102.7 €), but across all 28 information treatment tests, 23 showed no statistically significant differences (e.g., p = 0.127 for equality of labeling effects across information treatments).

Takeaway

Frame formal remittance restrictions using third-party institutional mandates to minimize interpersonal conflict between senders and recipients.

Read alongside the research

Plain-English glossary

Original explanations, informed by the references below. Examples are illustrations, not data from the studies above. The research text stays unchanged.

Statistically significant

A label used when a result passes a chosen statistical threshold, often p < 0.05. It does not show how large or useful an effect is. A result that is not statistically significant does not prove there is no effect.

ExampleA study reports p = 0.03 against a 0.05 threshold. It passes that test, but the effect could still be too small to matter.

American Statistical Association · Statement on p-values ↗Read more about statistically significant →

Related findings

• Recipient Time-Inconsistency in Remittance Spending →Behaviour & psychology

  Imagine sending money to a relative with the plan that they buy an annual computer pass for school. Because present temptations are immediate while educational rewards take years to materialize, the relative spends the cash on instant daily comforts instead of the long-term investment.

• Transient Remittance Belief Misalignment →Behaviour & psychology

  Think of putting a "Keep Off the Grass" sign on a lawn; people initially send more garden care money believing the sign keeps intruders away, but once they discover visitors walk on the lawn anyway, they stop spending extra money on grass care.

• Action-Plan Prompts for Behavioral Search Barriers →Behaviour & psychology

  Think of a person wanting to get fit who buys a gym membership but never goes because deciding what to do each day feels overwhelming. Writing down a concrete, step-by-step weekly schedule specifying exactly when, where, and how many gym visits will occur removes decision fatigue and turns vague intentions into automated habits.

• Adult Non-Cognitive Personality Trait Malleability →Behaviour & psychology

  Think of adult personality traits like set concrete paths across a public park. Structured workplace practice—such as role-playing assertive communication and executing daily goal-setting—acts like repaving those paths, proving that adults can forge wider, more confident walking routes even late in life.