Buy Now, Pay Later Cost Disclosure and Consumer Payment Choice: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment in Retail Stores

Last registered on May 11, 2026

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Buy Now, Pay Later Cost Disclosure and Consumer Payment Choice: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment in Retail Stores
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0018591
Initial registration date
May 09, 2026

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
May 11, 2026, 9:29 AM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information

Primary Investigator

Affiliation

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2026-05-10
End date
2026-06-10
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
This study tests whether point-of-sale disclosure of the full cost of installment payments / buy-now-pay-later (BNPL) affects consumers' payment choices and purchasing behavior. In the treatment condition, sales staff disclose the upfront payment price, the total amount payable under the installment option, and the implied overpayment before the customer finalizes the payment decision.

In the control condition, stores follow the standard price presentation and sales process. The primary outcome is the share of purchases made using installment/BNPL payment. Secondary outcomes include total sales, average transaction value, conversion, product mix, and returns where available.

The study will be conducted over approximately three months, with two phases, across a small number of comparable retail stores.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Akebayev, Dastan and Birzhan Batkeyev. 2026. "Buy Now, Pay Later Cost Disclosure and Consumer Payment Choice: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment in Retail Stores." AEA RCT Registry. May 11. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.18591-1.0
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
The intervention consists of a standardized verbal disclosure of the full cost of installment payment / buy-now-pay-later (BNPL) options at the point of sale. In treatment stores or treatment time blocks, sales staff are trained to inform customers who consider an installment or BNPL payment option of: (i) the immediate payment price, (ii) the total amount payable under the installment plan, calculated as the monthly payment multiplied by the number of months, and (iii) the implied overpayment in absolute and/or percentage terms. The disclosure is delivered before the customer finalizes the payment decision. Staff are instructed to communicate this information neutrally and not to recommend either immediate payment or installment payment.
Intervention Start Date
2026-05-10
Intervention End Date
2026-06-10

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Share of purchases made via BNPL/installment payment
Primary Outcomes (explanation)
The primary outcome is the proportion of completed transactions in which the customer chooses a BNPL/installment payment method rather than immediate payment. Immediate payment includes cash, card, or other non-installment payment methods. BNPL/installment payment includes BNPL products and any equivalent installment-based payment options offered at the point of sale.

Construction

The outcome is constructed from transaction-level sales data. For each completed transaction, the following variables are recorded:
* Transaction ID: unique identifier for each purchase
* Payment method: immediate payment vs. BNPL/installment payment
* Store ID: to distinguish stores in the between-store design
* Date and time slot: to distinguish treatment and control blocks in the within-store design
* Treatment/control status: assigned at the store or time-slot level
* Product category and transaction value, where available

At the transaction level, the outcome is defined as:
BNPL=1
if transaction is paid via BNPL/installment, and:
BNPL=0
if transaction is paid via immediate payment.

The BNPL share is then calculated as the ratio of number of BNPL/installment transactions and total number of completed transactions. This share can be calculated daily, by time slot, by store, or by treatment/control condition.

Interpretation

A statistically significant reduction in BNPL/installment share in the treatment condition relative to the control condition would be interpreted as evidence that transparent disclosure of the full installment cost affects consumers’ payment choices and reduces the likelihood of choosing BNPL/installment payment.

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary outcomes include:

* Average transaction value
* Total sales volume
* Number of completed transactions
* Product category composition / product shifts
* Conversion rate, if customer traffic or store-visit data are available
* Returns, if available
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
Overview

This study uses a randomized controlled field experiment to evaluate the effect of transparent payment cost disclosure on customer payment choice and purchasing behavior in a retail setting.

Two Complementary Designs

The study combines two randomization approaches implemented during the same study period.

1. Between-Store Design

A pair of comparable retail stores is selected and matched on key pre-intervention characteristics, including historical sales, average transaction value, traffic patterns, and historical share of BNPL/installment purchases. Within this matched pair, one store is randomly assigned to the treatment condition and the other to the control condition. The treatment store implements the intervention, while the control store continues standard operations unchanged.

2. Within-Store Design

A third store serves as its own control through time-slot randomization. Each business day is divided into two half-day blocks. For each day, one block is assigned to the treatment condition and the other to the control condition. The allocation schedule is randomized and balanced so that treatment and control blocks occur approximately equally often in the first and second halves of the day and across days of the week.


Randomization

Treatment assignment in the between-store design is determined randomly within the matched store pair. In the within-store design, treatment and control status is assigned at the half-day time-slot level, with a 50/50 treatment-control ratio maintained over the study period.

Control Condition

In control store and control time slots, standard pricing communication practices remain in place. Staff do not introduce the additional standardized disclosure of total installment/BNPL cost beyond existing practice.

Baseline Period

Data collected before the start of the intervention, prior to May 10, are used to assess baseline comparability across stores and to support difference-in-differences analysis.

Unit of Randomization

* Between-store design: store
* Within-store design: half-day time slot


Unit of Analysis

The unit of analysis is the individual transaction.

External Validity

The study is conducted across a small number of comparable retail stores in one geographic area. Because the sample of stores is limited and the intervention is implemented in a specific retail context, external validity will be interpreted cautiously. The main objective of the pilot is to obtain internally valid evidence on whether full BNPL/installment cost disclosure affects payment choice and purchasing behavior in the participating stores.

The study will be conducted in 3 retail stores. The primary unit of observation is the individual transaction. The expected number of transaction-level observations will depend on realized sales during the study period and will be reported after data collection.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Lottery
Randomization Unit
Retail stores
Was the treatment clustered?
Yes

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
3 stores total. Between-store design: 1 treatment store and 1 control store. Within-store design: 1 store with approximately 60 half-day time blocks over one month, split 50/50 between treatment and control.
Sample size: planned number of observations
3 retail stores
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
3 retail stores; approximately 60 half-day time-block clusters in the within-store component; approximately 1,200 completed transaction-level observations over one month.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number