Using quasi-random variation from Facebook’s entry to college campuses, I exploit a natural experiment to estimate the effect of online social network access on future earnings. I estimate that access to Facebook for an additional year in college causes a .62 percentile increase in a cohort’s average earnings, translating to an average wage increase of around $970 in 2014, and decreases income inequality within a cohort. I provide indirect evidence that wage increases come through the channel of increased social ties with college alumni, strengthened employment networks, and increased match value between students’ majors and later occupations.

Home price expectations are believed to play an important role in housing dynamics, yet we have limited understanding of how they are formed and how they affect behaviour. Using a unique “information experiment” embedded in an online survey, this article investigates how consumers’ home price expectations respond to past home price growth, and how they impact investment decisions. After eliciting respondents’ priors about past and future local home price changes, we present a random subset of them with factual information about past (one- or five-year) changes, and then re-elicit expectations. This unique “panel” data allows us to identify causal effects of the information, and provides insights on the expectation formation process. We find that, on average, year-ahead home price expectations are revised in a way consistent with short-term momentum in home price growth, though respondents tend to underpredict the strength of momentum. Revisions of longer-term expectations show that respondents do not expect the empirically-occurring mean reversion in home price growth. These patterns are in line with recent behavioural models of housing cycles. Finally, we show that home price expectations causally affect investment decisions in a portfolio choice experiment embedded in the survey.

For-profit providers have become an important fixture of US higher education markets. Students who attend for-profit institutions take on more educational debt and are more likely to default on their student loans than those attending similarly-selective public schools. Because for-profits tend to serve students from more disadvantaged backgrounds, it is important to isolate the causal effect of for-profit enrollment on student debt and repayment outcomes as well as the educational and labor market mechanisms that drive any such effects. We approach this problem using a novel instrument combined with comprehensive institution-level data on student debt, default, educational attainment, and labor market outcomes. Our instrument leverages the interaction between changes in the demand for college due to labor demand shocks and the baseline supply of for-profit schools. We compare how enrollment and subsequent outcomes change across areas that experience similar labor demand shocks but that have different latent supply of for-profit institutions. The first-stage estimates show that students are much more likely to enroll in a for-profit institution for a given labor demand change when there is a higher supply of such schools in the base period. Among four-year students, for-profit enrollment leads to more loans, higher loan amounts, an increased likelihood of borrowing, and an increased risk of default. Two-year for-profit students also take out more loans, originate more student debt, and have higher default rates. We present evidence that these debt and default outcomes are driven by higher for-profit tuition and a negative effect of for-profit enrollment on labor market outcomes. Our results point to high costs and low returns to for-profit enrollment that generate worse student debt and repayment outcomes. These findings have important implications for public investments in higher education as well as for how students make postsecondary choices.