1

Mortgage Journeys: A Video Ethnography 

of the Homebuying and Mortgage Process

Anna Jeffersona,b and Hannah Thomasa

a Abt Associates Inc.

b Author for correspondence: Anna_Jefferson@abtassoc.com

This paper is in draft form. Please contact the authors before citing.

Presented at the Symposium for Housing 

Tenure and Financial Security

March 21-22, 2019

Co-sponsored by the Joint Center for Housing Studies and Fannie Mae

Presented at the Joint Center for Housing Studies at Harvard University
2

Mortgage Journeys: A Video Ethnography 

of the Homebuying and Mortgage Process

Anna Jeffersona,b and Hannah Thomasa

a Abt Associates Inc.

b Author for correspondence: Anna_Jefferson@abtassoc.com

Abstract

This paper presents findings about lower-income first-time homebuyer mortgage shopping experiences 

emerging from a 2015 video ethnography study conducted by the authors for Fannie Mae. Specifically the 

paper makes the case for three distinct phases in the home buying process which set the parameters for the 

degree of mortgage shopping that lower-income first-time homebuyers engage in. Additionally five 

contextual factors further influence the mortgage shopping behavior of study participants in each stage of 

the process. Drawing on longitudinal ethnographic video and interview data collected from 14 lowincome first time homebuyers in Massachusetts and Tennessee in 2015, this paper describes the different 

paths lower-income, first-time homebuyers take to obtaining a mortgage; the kinds of mortgage search 

tools that lower-income, first-time homebuyers use in their searches; the different competencies, 

preconceptions, and shopping behavior that homebuyers draw on in the mortgage search process; and 

how these factors influence the kinds of mortgage products they seek or obtain. The findings from the 

paper illuminate the need to improve the ease of mortgage shopping for lower-income first-time 

homebuyers at all stages of the home buying process. 

Introduction1

Successful homeownership in the United States may offer a range of social and economic benefits for 

homeowners and their families. Benefits seem to include; an improved sense of psychological well-being 

(Manturuk, 2012; Manturuk, Riley and Ratcliffe, 2012); improved child outcomes such as educational 

attainment (Rohe and Lindblad, 2013); and social and political engagement (Manturuk, Linblad, and 

Quercia 2012). Research has also found a relationship between physical health and homeownership status 

(Rohe and Lindblad, 2013). For middle-class Americans that have net assets, housing wealth is the 

dominant form of wealth in their wealth portfolio (Kuhn, Schularick, and Steins, 2018). 

However the benefits of homeownership are not evenly distributed; low- and moderate-income 

Americans have historically faced challenges in achieving homeownership for the first time, a result of 

economic and underwriting barriers such as a lack of down payment or overall savings, low credit scores 

 

1 The view expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Abt 

Associates or Fannie Mae or its management. Any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the authors. This 

paper is in draft form. Please contact the authors before citing.
3

and debt-to-income ratios.

2 First-time homebuyers faced an additional set of challenges after the Great 

Recession—low wage growth, delayed family formation, and tighter mortgage lending standards (JCHS 

2017). These tighter lending standards, which have only recently loosened, exacerbated the historical 

challenges for even highly motivated first-time homebuyers to access homeownership.

Since homeownership offers both tenure stability along with social benefits and the opportunity for 

households to build wealth, policymakers understandably want to explore how to make homeownership 

more accessible. Research about the experiences of low- and moderate-income prospective homebuyers

in the wake of the Great Recession has provided helpful insights about consumer financial attitudes, 

housing views, and mortgage shopping behavior in the aggregate. For example, research suggests that a 

significant proportion of all homebuyers do not engage in shopping for a mortgage, and rely primarily on 

their friends, family and real estate agents for information when looking for a mortgage. However this

line of research has three main shortcomings: 1) it focuses on observable consumer behavior rather than 

seeking to understand that behavior; 2) it is survey research and thus subject to respondent image curation

and recall bias; and 3) it mostly focuses only on mortgage consumers who successfully purchase homes

rather than potential consumers who are not successful. 

First, consumer perspectives are important to understand because they offer insights into why consumers 

behave in certain ways. As consumers explain their behavior, researchers and policy makers are better 

able to understand the very contextually logical reasons behind consumer behavior; without consumer 

perspectives, we might hypothesize a range of motivations to explain what seems like illogical behavior 

and then put in place policies which will not be successful in changing consumer behavior. 

Image curation is the process whereby participants proactively or subconsciously share select information 

that matches their conscious or subconscious image of themselves. Information that does not match their 

self-image is omitted. For example, homebuyers might want to project an image of themselves as a 

“rational” consumer who followed best practices and got a good deal on a mortgage, even if that was not 

objectively true. To understand consumer behavior, researchers and policymakers need to draw on data 

that is not as impacted by image curation. Recall bias, the process of forgetting important details about 

events in the past, means that research participants may simply not remember the details of a closed 

mortgage transaction well or, now that they know how the story ends, only remember details that make 

the present outcome seem linear and inevitable.

Finally, due to data limitations, most research on prospective homebuyers focuses on those who 

successfully purchase homes or those who have a mortgage denial. The latter body of research, primarily 

using Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data, can provide important insights into the 

characteristics of denied applicants compared to successful ones and has been particularly important for 

assessing lending standards and patterns of lending discrimination (e.g., Cherian 2014; Hirasuna and 

Allen 2012; Wei and Goodman 2014). What both these types of research cannot show is the experiences 

 

2 Other factors limiting low-income and minority homeownership include racial discrimination in lending, 

household composition and age (Haurin, Herbert, and Rosenthal 2007). 
4

of prospective homebuyers along the way to getting a mortgage or the experiences of those who become 

discouraged before submitting a mortgage application. 

This paper addresses these three shortcomings. It draws on data from consumers’ own perspectives, in 

real time, and from successful and unsuccessful aspiring homeowners. The paper draws on data from a 

“Mortgage Journeys Study,” conducted with a video ethnographic approach with 14 aspiring homebuyers 

in Massachusetts and Tennessee in 2015.

3 This real-time and longitudinal data collection allowed us to 

build strong enough rapport with participants so that they more openly shared details about their home 

search. Notably, participants shared sensitive emotions and financial information, talked about issues in 

their lives, such as relationship tensions, and job anxieties; and effused excitement and frustration over 

their home searches. The research team was able to observe this range of emotions in real time over the 

course of the study period. This data allowed us to observe the different emotional tenor of the three 

different home purchase stages (presented below) and to note the differences in mortgage shopping 

behavior at each stage. We were also able to observe how contextual life factors, which differed by 

participant, impacted the mortgage shopping trajectory of each participant. 

The paper reveals three key findings. First, study participants’ mortgage journeys were shaped by five 

factors, anticipated in prior research. These included three contextual factors which set the stage for 

participants’ engagement with the homebuying process: participants’ financial self-perceptions, personal 

relationships, and access to resources. These contextual factors interacted with two homebuying specific 

factors—the trusted professionals that participants interacted with, and participants’ mortgage product 

preferences. The trusted professionals and the mortgage product preferences were influenced by a 

participant’s financial self-perception, personal relationships and access to resources.

Second, Mortgage Journey study participants moved through three different stages of the mortgage and 

homeownership process: a preparation stage in which they focused on activities to prepare for 

homeownership and getting a mortgage; a decision stage where they evaluated homes and mortgages and 

decided which house they would purchase; and a purchase stage where they completed the activities 

associated with getting a mortgage and purchasing a house. We suspect that these stages are not unique to 

first-time homebuyers. Not all participants were successful in moving through each of the three stages in 

the study period; some had cycled between the preparation and decisions phase prior to the study period

and did not move to the purchase phase during the study, while others cycled between different phases 

during the study. 

Finally, mortgage shopping activities differed for each of these phases and was influenced by the five 

factors noted above. For example, mortgage shopping activities in the preparation phase included using 

online mortgage calculator tools, whereas mortgage shopping activities in the decisions phase involved 

getting a pre-approval. Critical for providing insight to the mortgage industry, participant mortgage 

shopping attitudes and behaviors do not match mortgage industry expectations of mortgage shopping 

behaviors.

 

3 Key results of the Mortgage Journeys Study have been released by Fannie Mae. For details, please see 

http://www.fanniemae.com/portal/research-insights/perspectives/mortgage-focus-home-purchase-palim052418.html
5

The next section of the paper situates the research within the literature on accessing first-time 

homeownership experiences of the mortgage process for low- and moderate-income families and provides 

detail on the importance of mortgage shopping for first-time homebuyers. The following section reviews 

the data collected with prospective homebuyers in Massachusetts and Tennessee, the methodological 

approach, and the analytical process. Following this, we review the key insights that emerge from the 

data. Finally we turn to a discussion of the findings and implications for policy. 

Background and Literature Review 

As noted in the introduction, homeownership has several potential social and economic benefits 

associated with it. It is linked with improved psychological and physical health, improved child outcomes, 

and greater political and social engagement (Rohe and Lindblad, 2013). It can be an important route for 

households to build wealth either through appreciation of a home, or through forced savings.

4 However, 

to successfully attain these social and economic benefits, a homeowner needs to first be able to purchase 

the home, maintain ownership over the long-term, and (for wealth accumulation) the home must rise in 

value. To attain successful and stable homeownership, a potential first-time homebuyer’s mortgage 

journey will ideally involve overcoming a potential set of barriers to getting a mortgage and shopping 

around for a mortgage lender and mortgage product to get a mortgage suitable for their personal financial 

situation and for the home they are buying. 

The literature review that follows begins by briefly discussing changes in the mortgage lending market 

since 2008 that have potentially increased the barriers that first-time homebuyers face in getting a 

mortgage, before moving on to discuss what research has revealed to date about homebuyer’s mortgage 

shopping behavior and why mortgage shopping matters. While the study itself does not specifically 

address issues related to access to credit or racial discrimination, they provide important context for 

understanding the attitudes of the study participants. 

Access to Homeownership since 2008: Tightened Credit Markets

Mortgage lending has been profoundly reshaped in response to the post Great Recession. Mortgage 

lenders tightened underwriting standards in response to the large losses experienced during the Great 

Recession. Federal programs like the Federal Housing Authority (FHA) kept the mortgage market 

functioning for first-time homeowners and others shut out of the conventional mortgage market during 

this time period (Goodman et al. 2016). FHA increased its share of the mortgage market from 4.5 percent

in 2005 and 2006 to 32.6 percent by 2009 (HUD 2012a; JCHS 2017). In the post-Great Recession period 

FHA mortgages remain an important part of the mortgage market, especially for first-time homebuyers.

Responding to the financial crisis, federal policy makers established new rules to prevent some of the 

worst excesses seen in the subprime mortgage market. Specifically Congress passed the Dodd-Frank Wall 

Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (Dodd-Frank) to achieve this goal. This legislation 

most importantly established a number of mortgage lending consumer protections including the criteria 

 

4 Note that in some situations houses decrease in value over time, and in these scenarios, homeownership can 

lead to wealth depletion. 
6

for a Qualified Mortgage (QM) (Bocian 2012).5 The intent of the qualified mortgage rule was to establish 

that a mortgage must be suitable for the borrower’s financial situation. As a result of this legislation, most 

of the predatory mortgage products, products designed to strip equity from a borrower, were regulated out 

of the marketplace.

The impact of the Great Recession on homeownership was drastic: homeownership rates plummeted to 

the lowest levels since 1965 according to one study, as a result of lower rates of families entering 

homeownership, foreclosures, and a preference to rent over purchase (Acolin et al. 2017). The trend is 

something for policymakers to worry about since homeownership confers a range of social and economic 

benefits for both adults and children in a home-owning family. A major motivation for the current study 

was understanding the experiences of first-time homebuyers trying to get a mortgage in the postRecession era while credit standards were still recovering.6

Research has shown over the last twenty years that low- and moderate-income families and families of 

color often face specific social and economic contexts which can create barriers to homeownership and 

getting a mortgage. The result is that these families typically have lower homeownership rates, entering 

homeownership for the first time at later ages than the average American. The kinds of barriers lowincome families and families of color typically face include: (1) access to economic resources; (2) 

housing affordability; and (3) social capital and knowledge about the process (human capital). 

Access to limited economic resources can present a significant barrier to low-income families accessing 

homeownership for the first time. Both U.S. research and international research points towards the critical 

role that extended family help through gifts or inheritances, play in helping households move into 

homeownership sooner than households without this financial help (Shapiro 2004; Druta and Ronald 

2016; Williams 2017). This financial help is often used to pay for the down payment on the home. Single 

households and those without such down payment help have to delay the purchase of a home while they 

build up savings (Herbert et al. 2013). Government (state and federal) mortgage products seek to provide 

mortgage products with reduced down-payment sizes which helps lower-income families and families of 

color access homeownership. Since 2008, debt-to-income ratios have become a challenge for families 

particularly due to increases in student debt levels (National Association of Realtors 2018). The other 

aspect of access to economic resources is the credit score of the individual or family applying for a 

mortgage. In response to the Great Recession the average credit score for getting a mortgage has 

increased, shutting more low-income families out of the mortgage market. Before the Great Recession (in 

 

5 For a comprehensive review of the Dodd Frank Act, see 

https://www.responsiblelending.org/sites/default/files/uploads/3-mortgages.pdf

6 After plummeting during the Great Recession, the proportion of GSE-backed first-time homebuyers appears to 

have been increasing steadily since 2012. The first quarter of 2018 marked first-time homebuyers’ highest share 

of overall Freddie Mac-backed mortgages since Q1 2012 reaching almost half of these originations (Gopal 

2018). By contrast, the FHA share of the mortgage lending market has been dropping (Bai, Zhu and Goodman,

2015).
7

2005) the median homebuyer’s credit score was 696 and in 2006 705. By contrast the median credit score 

for a purchase mortgage in April 2018 was 738 (Goodman et al. 2018).7

Housing affordability varies considerably by state, from metropolitan to rural areas, and between 

neighborhoods within metropolitan areas. Housing affordability has been worsening since prices 

bottomed out during the Great Recession and, by 2018, housing prices were less affordable than historic 

averages (ATTOM Data Solutions 2018). This study was conducted during this period of worsening 

affordability. Drawing on 2017 data,8the national housing affordability index was 25.4 for purchases with 

a 3.5 percent down payment. Our project’s sites represented one high-cost area—Massachusetts with a

30.5 affordability index—and a lower-cost area—Tennessee with a 22.4 affordability index (Urban 

Institute 2018).9 Low-income families trying to purchase a home in a more expensive state like 

Massachusetts may face greater barriers to successful homeownership than in a lower-cost state like 

Tennessee. 

Access to social capital and human capital or “knowledge about the mortgage process” can present a 

barrier to purchasing a home for lower-income and other first-time homebuyers who do not have parents 

or other close relations who are homeowners who can share firsthand knowledge (Pittman 2008). Nonprofit organizations have provided classes for first-time homebuyers based on the premise that buying a 

home is complicated and most first-time homebuyers do not know a lot about the process. 

Mortgage Quality and Mortgage Shopping

The U.S. mortgage market is characterized by a large array of private and government mortgages, from 

30-year, fixed rate mortgages backed by government-sponsored entities like Fannie Mae, to adjustable 

rate mortgages, to subsidized Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans. Mortgages originated and 

backed by state housing finance agencies (HFAs) often come with additional grant programs that cover 

some of the closing costs for a first-time homebuyer, or have lower down-payment requirements. Each of 

these products has different down-payment and underwriting criteria. While the mortgage industry 

understands these differences clearly, consumers often do not have a good sense of different mortgage 

qualification criteria (Fannie Mae survey 2015). 

The Great Recession highlighted the importance of two aspects of mortgage product quality in the 

sustainability of homeownership: whether or not a mortgage product was safe, and how well suited the 

mortgage product was to a household’s financial situation. Unsafe mortgage products had significantly 

higher rates of foreclosure, or failed homeownership; these mortgages have largely been regulated out of 

the mortgage market. Still of importance for the current mortgage market is the suitability of a mortgage 

product for a household’s financial situation. For any given homebuyer, a mortgage may be more or less 

 

7 A credit score below 620 is generally considered subprime, scores between 620-700 generally seen as prime, 

and scores above 700 as excellent.

8 Data is not available at the state level for 2015.

9 The affordability index is defined as “portion of the state’s median income needed to pay the state’s median 

monthly mortgage with a 3.5 percent down payment; a higher index indicates a less affordable housing market 

because a greater portion of income is dedicated to the mortgage” (Urban Institute 2018). 
8

suitable given that homebuyer’s unique set of circumstances, particularly financial.

10 Mortgage lenders 

have to weigh the unique consumer characteristics against their own risks in lending to that individual, 

along with the characteristics and risks of the home that will secure the mortgage note. 

Mortgage shopping is important because it has been documented (in pre-Recession research) to improve 

the suitability of the mortgage, and (in post-Recession research) to lower the costs of the mortgage over 

its lifetime.

11 For example, mortgage rates can vary as much as fifty basis points for a conventional 

mortgage for a high-credit borrower with a 20 percent down payment, amounting to $3,500 more in 

interest payments over just the first five years of the loan (CFPB 2015). Differences could be greater or 

lesser for borrowers with lower credit or down payments. According to Freddie Mac research, borrowers 

that got five different rate quotes saved on average 0.166 percent on their interest rate which would 

translate to almost $3,000 over the life of the mortgage on a $250,000 mortgage.12

Surveys reveal that anywhere from one third to half of mortgage borrowers did not shop around for a 

mortgage. In a nationally representative survey of 1,922 homebuyers conducted by the Consumer 

Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and Federal Housing Finance Authority, researchers found that 

almost half of those surveyed did not shop around for a mortgage. Borrowers who were less familiar with 

the mortgage process tended to shop less. A Fannie Mae study of recent homebuyers found that 

approximately one third of all homebuyers do not obtain multiple quotes for their mortgage. First-time 

homebuyers did not appear to shop around more or less frequently than repeat buyers (Fannie Mae, 2015).

A shortcoming of the latter Fannie Mae study is that the survey data does not reveal what respondents 

mean by a mortgage quote: whether respondents mean getting a pre-qualification, a pre-approval, or 

submitting multiple mortgage applications. Receiving multiple pre-qualification letters is significantly 

less meaningful than submitting multiple applications to assess the actual terms and conditions of a 

mortgage associated with a particular property along with the borrowers’ credit risk. Even when 

homebuyers do shop around for mortgages, they often have difficulties interpreting complex transactions 

like a mortgage, leading to difficulties comparing offers of credit (Woodward and Hall 2012).

Care needs to be taken not to conflate the mortgage originator with the mortgage product. The mortgage 

originator is the organization that is either directly lending the mortgage or acting as a broker for the 

mortgage lender. The degree of diversity of mortgage products available through a mortgage originator 

can differ: some offer a large variety of both private and public mortgage products, while others have a 

more limited set of products. No data on the impact of mortgage originator on mortgage product exists for 

 

10 On the extreme end of low mortgage quality are predatory mortgage products which were designed to strip 

equity from the borrower—they were not designed to be suitable mortgage products for the family who got 

them. Some mortgage products, while not predatory, were subprime and poorly designed to meet the needs of a 

borrower—in those cases low-income families were given three year fixed adjustable rate mortgages and the 

borrower did not expect to increase their income when the interest rate was expected to increase. These 

mortgage products have largely been regulated out of the market through the QM rule.

11 By mortgage quality, we mean that a mortgage is the most, or as close as possible to being, suitable mortgage 

for a particular borrower and home. In other words a suitable mortgage will meet the needs of the borrower in 

terms of interest rate, points, down-payment, monthly payments, term and the type of rate.

12 http://www.freddiemac.com/research/insight/20180417_consumers_leaving_money.html
9

the post-Recession period. Analysis of mortgage data from the Great Recession suggested that mortgage 

broker-originated loans were significantly more likely to go into foreclosure than correspondent lenders13

(Jiang, Nelson and Vytlacil, 2014). This suggests a relationship between mortgage channel and the quality 

of the mortgage product. Several other pre-Recession studies found that the route a borrower took in 

getting a mortgage (whether through a retail bank, a mortgage lender, or a mortgage broker) influenced

the specific type of mortgage product that the borrower ends up with (Apgar, Bendimerad, and Essene 

2007; Jiang, Nelson, and Vytlacil 2014). Analysis of post-Recession data is needed to understand the new 

relationship between mortgage product, cost and mortgage originator since the Great Recession and QM 

rule.

Limited data exist on how borrowers shop for their mortgage lender. Reid (2010) found in 100 interviews 

in California among low-income and minority communities, that borrowers were most likely to get 

referrals for mortgage brokers from their close families and friends: borrowers preferred mortgage 

brokers who were part of the local community. Reid found that borrowers felt that sharing sensitive 

financial information with members of their social network more distant than family and friends would 

have felt like an invasion of their privacy, thereby limiting their capacity to get more advice on their 

homeownership bid. Research by the CFPB suggests that factors such as the geographic proximity of the 

mortgage lender or the lender’s reputation influenced a borrower’s decision to work with a particular 

mortgage lender as much as the mortgage product they offered (CFPB 2015). 

Borrowers’ information sources might be expected to impact their mortgage shopping behavior either for 

the mortgage product or for the mortgage originator. Research suggests that the greater the diversity of 

sources of information about the mortgage, the lower the borrower’s interest rates are (Pittman 2008).

However it is unclear from this research whether the borrower was obtaining information about the 

mortgage originator, the mortgage product, or both. The CFPB’s nationally representative survey found 

that homebuyers’ primary source of information about mortgages was a mortgage lender or broker, 

followed by a real estate agent. Fewer consumers obtain information from outside sources, such as 

websites, financial and housing counselors, or personal acquaintances (such as friends, relatives, or 

coworkers) (CFPB 2015). Results from the National Housing survey in 2015 suggest that while survey 

respondents draw on multiple sources of information, in-person information sources such as lenders, real 

estate agents and family and friends are more trusted (Fannie Mae 2015). 

Economic status influences where borrowers get information about their mortgage. In comparing 

mortgage shopping behavior between higher- and lower-income borrowers, Fannie Mae’s National 

Housing Survey found that higher-income borrowers are more likely to use online tools or applications 

while lower-income borrowers are more likely to rely on real estate agents, mortgage lenders, family, and 

friends for advice and recommendations (Fannie Mae 2014). 

 

13 Correspondent lenders are whole sale lenders who underwrite and fund mortgages using their own money. This 

contrasts with mortgage brokers who originate a mortgage on behalf of a lender for a fee, but do not fund the 

mortgage.
10

The literature indicates that shopping for a mortgage product is important. Yet we have very few studies 

that include the direct consumer experience of these activities to understand what factors influence firsttime homebuyers’ mortgage shopping activities. The Mortgage Journeys Study discussed in this paper

helps us better understand low- to moderate- income households’ (LMI) mortgage shopping experiences 

in buying their first homes and getting a mortgage. The data reveal three key stages in the mortgage 

shopping experience and the key influences on the mortgage shopping process. The following section 

reviews our research approach, then provides more detail on the specific methods used for this study. We 

then discuss the key study findings before broadening into a discussion of the policy implications of the 

study findings. 

Research Approach and Data

Mortgage Journeys Study Design

To address limitations in prior studies of first-time homebuyer’s experiences with getting a mortgage, the 

Mortgage Journeys Study design incorporated five key elements of longitudinal data collection as study 

participants moved through the process of buying a home: (1) participant video diaries (2) in-depth 

interviews; (3) observations of mortgage and home purchase events; (4) short weekly online surveys 

(about their housing search, attitudes, and mortgage knowledge); and (5) review of participants’ finances 

and any mortgage related documents they obtained. Data collection occurred over six months between 

December 2014 and July 2015. Each research participant was enrolled in the study before they were prequalified for mortgages, in most cases; in other cases, participants enrolled in the time between their prequalification and up to a month before their closing.14 Each research participant’s involvement in the 

study varied in length of time, depending on the timeline of their homebuying and mortgage experience—

for example, multiple rounds of mortgage shopping and attempts at prequalification if he or she had credit 

problems, or renegotiating the purchase and sale price (and perhaps mortgage) if a home did not appraise 

as expected. 

 

14 Due to challenges recruiting all participants before prequalification, we accepted one household in Tennessee 

that had placed an offer on a home.
11

Researchers visited each participant in-person at least three times at different points in their homebuying

journey. Each visit included an in-depth interview and, as appropriate to their stage in the process, an 

observation of an appointment or event, for example observing a meeting with a bank about the mortgage. 

We gathered copies of relevant documents, such as 

mortgage applications, credit reports, and good faith 

estimates. Visits helped maintain participants’ engagement 

with the study, including trouble-shooting with conducting 

video diaries. Researchers also spoke with participants on 

the phone as needed to manage survey data collection and 

help participants with conducting video diaries.

Video diaries: Video diaries (with a few audio-only entries) 

created by participants provided ongoing, participantdriven insights into first-time homebuyers’ mortgage

experiences. These diaries allowed participants to capture 

their thoughts and experiences in real time to help 

overcome problems of the recall of their search behavior. 

Participants were encouraged to record as much as they like 

but asked to make at least one video entry per week in 

response to a prompt sent by the research team. In order to 

help participants overcome camera shyness, Abt staff 

developed a guide to making mortgage video diaries which 

included a set of prompts to respond to each week in case

participants did not know what to share in the diary. 

In-Depth Interviews: Each participant was interviewed in person at three points in their home search, for 

an average of ten hours of interviews per person. Interview topics included: updates on home buying and 

mortgage process, financial life story, housing history and goals, mortgage search experience to date, and 

household finances and budgeting. Interviews also revealed participants’ aspirations, social networks, 

including trusted advisers’ experiences with home purchases, and our participants’ preferred methods of 

research, shopping, and decision-making. The final interview included some validated questions to assess 

financial and mortgage literacy15 along with viewing a credit report with participants if participants had not 

provided a credit report by that time, and reviewing mortgage documents for those who had purchased homes. 

We took detailed notes on all interviews and selectively transcribed sections. The second and third interviews 

were video recorded.

Observations: We observed a range of mortgage related activities including: prequalification appointments 

with mortgage brokers (n=2), one of which was at a non-profit housing counseling agency and also included 

housing counseling advice; loan closings (n=3); and online house and mortgage research (n=8). We also 

observed some broader home buying activities in both markets where participants lived: a real estate seminar 

 

15 We held any formal assessment of financial literacy until the end of data collection so that the content of the quizzes 

did not influence participants to seek out certain kinds of information they would not have otherwise sought. 

Sample Video Diary Prompts

 Why do you want to buy a house? 

What does it mean to you buy a 

house? And why do you want to 

do it now?

 What do you think about when 

you think about getting a 

mortgage? How do you feel about 

it—both the idea of having a 

mortgage and the process of 

getting one? Tell us all the details 

– no detail is too small.

 Have you had any setbacks or 

surprises trying to buy a house?
12

in Boston, a homebuyer education course in Knoxville, and a day of a mortgage broker’s work in Boston. 

These observations allowed the researchers to take detailed notes on the topics that were discussed during 

these real-time exchanges, including questions raised by participants, how professionals addressed questions, 

what advice professionals gave, and participants’ body language (indicating stress, relaxation, confusion, etc.).

Weekly surveys: Each week we emailed participants a short (approximately 5-question) survey asking 

about what they had done that week related to the home or mortgage search, their feelings about 

homeownership and their search, and financial literacy questions. Many of the questions were drawn from 

Fannie Mae’s National Housing Survey.16

Relevant financial documents: During their last interviews, we reviewed mortgage documents with 

participants who purchased homes. We asked participants to walk us through the documents and explain them 

and tell us about remaining questions they had about the documents. We also reviewed other relevant 

documents, including a lease-purchase agreement and prequalification letters. 

Participant Characteristics

We recruited a small (n=14) purposive sample of prospective homebuyers in two different states. As 

shown in Exhibit 1, most participants lived in high-cost urban Massachusetts (n=9 in greater Boston, n=1 

in Worcester) while fewer lived in lower-cost Tennessee (n=4).17 Most participants (n=10) were female, 

white (n=8), and partnered (n=8). No participants had minor children living with them at the time of the 

study. Participants’ incomes ranged from 26 percent Area Median Income (AMI) (in both sites) to 105

percent AMI in our Massachusetts site and 97 percent AMI in our Tennessee site.18 By the end of the 

study, half of participants (7) had purchased homes. 

Exhibit 1. Participant Characteristics 

Massachusetts (n=10) Tennessee (n=4) Total

Gender (F/M) 8/2 2/2 10/4

Race

White 5 3 8

 

16 http://www.fanniemae.com/portal/research-insights/surveys/national-housing-survey.html

17 Our recruitment criteria were that households earn less than Area Median Income, be first-time homebuyers, 

were sure of their decision to purchase a home within the next six months; were not yet prequalified for a 

mortgage; and regular access to the internet to complete study activities. We recruited through public flyers at 

financial institutions, public places, libraries, and community centers; online and newspaper advertisements; 

real estate agents; and housing counseling agencies. 

18 We chose these sites in order to have one site in a higher-than-average cost housing market and one in a lowerthan-average cost market where the lead researchers had existing connections to real estate professionals. 
13

African-American

Latino

Asian-American

Other

3

0

1

1 (Haitian American)

1

0

0

0

4

0

1

1

Income Range

(AMI)

$24,000-95,000*

($90,000)

$15,600-$58,000

($60,000)

n/a

Single 3 3 6

Partner/married 7 1 8

Children present 1 (adult child)

1 (pregnancy)

0 1

Purchased home as of 9/16/15 5/10 2/4 7/14

Analysis

We conducted interpretive analysis of interviews and participant video diaries focused on beliefs, 

concepts, and values about homebuyer experiences. Interpretive analysis is designed to understand the 

meaning of events from the perspective of those experiencing them; it is explicitly about discovery of new 

information rather than testing hypotheses. We conducted ongoing analysis during data collection to make 

sense of each participant’s journey as data was collected and to inform additional data collection. Once all 

data was collected, we used a combination of qualitative coding in NVivo 10 software and team analytic 

debriefings to draw together key themes that provided insights and responses to the study research 

questions. Emergent themes related to the research questions were incorporated into the analysis as 

relevant, particularly where they provided helpful context in understanding participant behavior. Video 

material was organized into key themes that emerged from the analysis process.

Limitations

This study allowed for longitudinal and in-depth understanding of a small sample of low- to moderateincome, first-time homebuyers’ experiences. A primary limitation of this study is its small sample size. 

The study provides exploratory insights into homebuyer perspectives, offering demonstration of the social 

processes of getting a mortgage and buying a home rather than a representative sample of homebuyer 

experiences across the country, or even within a state or housing market. Our focus was on low- to 

moderate-income first-time homebuyers; the homebuying process may differ substantially for repeat 

homebuyers of any income or asset level, as it may for first-time buyers with higher incomes or assets. 

Only conducting the research in two markets also limits the generalizability of the study. The study was 
14

also conducted before the QM rule and new mortgage disclosure documents were implemented, so 

findings on those topics should be read in that context. 

The technological requirements of being involved with the study likely introduce a degree of bias into the 

sample. Some study participants found it difficult to engage and dropped out despite wishing to 

participate, e.g. families with young children. Older and less technology savvy participants may have also 

self-excluded because of these requirements. The study was also conducted only in English: non-English 

speaking individuals and families experiences may be considerably different. The study only followed 

households over the course of a six month window. Some participants’ home buying journeys took much 

longer than this, and as a result we did not gain the full range of insights that might have been possible 

from conducting a longer study, for example spending a year following participants.

The following sections present our findings in two major sections: First, we present a set of five factors 

that influenced the mortgage shopping process. Next, we present three phases of the home and 

mortgage shopping process. We highlight how the five factors were at play and how mortgage shopping 

behavior varied in each stage. 

Five Factors Shaped Participants’ Mortgage Pathways

We identified a set of five factors that interacted dynamically to influence each individual’s mortgage 

pathway: three contextual factors—financial self-perception, resources, and personal relationships—and 

two home buying-specific factors—professional relationships and product preferences. Contextual factors 

were established before and outside of the home buying process but they could significantly influence 

participants’ motivations, orientation to the mortgage, and access to different professionals and products. 

Once the home search was underway, the two drivers specific to the homebuying process emerged: 

trusted professionals and mortgage product preferences. Participants then drew on contextual factors in 

different ways in response to needs or challenges that arose in the home buying process. The degree to 

which homebuyers were able to leverage these contextual factors—or supplement them with professional 

relationships and products—influenced how their mortgage pathway developed and sometimes whether 

they were able to successfully purchase a home. 

Contextual Factors

Financial self-perception

Homebuyers’ self-perceptions about themselves as financial managers generally and as creditworthy (or 

not) specifically affected how they approached the mortgage process, including the mortgage products 

they researched, product preferences they developed, and lenders they were willing to approach. Three 

identities that we saw most explicitly influencing participants’ behavior were: understanding themselves 

as “low credit” or “not creditworthy”; being averse to debt; and identifying as black consumers. 
15

Previous negative financial experiences especially impacted study participants’ self-assessed 

creditworthiness.19 Such experiences led Mortgage Journeys participants to avoid or gravitate to certain 

types of lenders—either a whole category of lender (e.g., credit unions over retail banks) or a specific 

lender because of its reputation. A research participant, Duncan,20 had previously been denied a business 

loan and, because of this, wanted to avoid mainstream lenders, potentially cutting him off from valuable 

and reliable information. He explained, I “actually Googled mortgages for bad credit.” Through these 

results, he learned about FHA mortgages and later connected to the non-profit Neighborhood Assistance 

Corporation of America that provides financing and housing counseling. 

Another participant, Joshua, illustrates how both self-perception as debt-averse and having a negative 

credit experience influenced the mortgage search.21 Joshua was averse to debt overall and saw a mortgage 

as a “necessary evil” to accomplish his goal of homeownership. Because of his aversion to debt, he had 

never taken out loans, including to cover his college education, or used credit cards because he believed it 

was prudent to only purchase things he could afford with cash on hand. As a result he was initially denied 

a mortgage prequalification due to having a thin credit file. When he resumed his home search two years 

later, he chose to work with a mortgage broker, both because she was recommended by his realtor and 

because he perceived she would have access to a wide range of products that, given his thin credit history 

and preference for a conventional mortgage, he felt he might need.

Finally, while our sample is small, we saw three of our four black22 participants’ racial identity play an 

important role in strategic decisions about the mortgage.23 These participants talked about explicit 

decisions they made in response to anxiety about how they might be treated as black people by financial 

institutions. These participants perceived themselves to be financially vulnerable resulting from a 

combination of historical and recent trends in national mortgage lending, narratives about lending in the 

black community, personal experiences, and reported experiences of close friends and family. These 

participants were aware of larger trends and, regardless of their own creditworthiness or the behavior of 

specific lenders they approached, that awareness shaped their attitudes about and behavior in the 

mortgage search process. For example, Duncan, whose business loan denial was mentioned above, felt 

that his denial was partly related to being black. Another participant, Nancy, witnessed her parents 

refinance into an adjustable rate mortgage which had significantly impacted their financial security. 

Anxious that as a young black woman she might be more likely to be marketed a similar mortgage, she 

had worked hard to present herself as organized and informed as a defense strategy. She put together a 

professional-looking binder of information about the home search and brought it to all appointments 

 

19 This makes sense given the brain’s inherent negativity bias to remember previous negative events more strongly 

than positive events, even of similar intensity (e.g., Baumeister, Bratslavsky, and Finkenauer 2001).

20 All names in the paper are pseudonyms.

21 More detail on Joshua’s story is provided in relation to home purchase motivations and barriers. Study 

participants Steve and Joelle, also profiled below, also held a strong identity as aspiring to live debt-free.

22 These participants identified as African American or Haitian American.

23 We did not see this self-perception arise for any white participants. 
16

(including study interviews). She made sure to dress professionally and to project herself in a way she 

thought mortgage professionals would be less likely to mistreat her. As we discuss below in “Access to 

Resources,” another black participant, Patricia drew on knowledge she gained from several black friends 

who had been through foreclosures.

Personal Relationships

Personal relationships impacted decision-making in the home buying and mortgage pathway. Family

structure was the most frequent deciding factor in Mortgage Journeys participants’ decisions about 

housing tenure; it also mattered greatly for the mortgage process. Having more income earners in the 

family was a major asset. Four of the seven successful homebuyers in the study were partnered in dualincome households and a fifth pooled finances with her family to buy a multifamily home. Expectations 

about family structure affected access to the mortgage in product-specific ways. For example, Abby and 

her partner, motivated to buy a home on learning they were expecting their first child, did not want to get 

legally married. However in order to jointly own the home, a financially attractive Veteran’s 

Administration loan would have required them to be married; this created a sticking point in their home 

buying journey. Participants also attempted to navigate program requirements by being strategic about 

family structure. Nancy and her fiancé needed to access first-time homebuyer assistance to afford a home 

in Boston but their combined income was over the program’s threshold. They strategically pre-qualified 

for a mortgage before they got married, using only her income, although she and her partner were pooling

their finances to pay the mortgage. 

Echoing findings from the literature, personal relationships influenced the information that participants 

accessed about home buying and the mortgage. Many participants relied on family (most often parents) 

and friends for advice on the home buying process. Most participants had grown up in households where 

their parents owned their homes and so they approached the home buying process with some tacit 

knowledge about homeownership, had role models or warnings (for unsuccessful cases) to look to, and 

personal advisors to rely on for advice. Parents and older family members were able to offer guidance 

based on successfully navigating previous home purchases and other financial management. Peers were 

able to use their recent home buying experience to update parents’ general advice on principles of 

working with a realtor and mortgage broker to include additional advice like referrals to professionals 

they had worked with. In this study, Patricia, the Haitian American woman introduced above, had several 

friends who had obtained subprime adjustable-rate mortgages that precipitated foreclosures. These stories 

helped her to grasp much more about taking out a mortgage than she was understanding from 

conversations with the banks. Her friends who’d lost their homes had all gotten mortgages from the same 

national lender. This influenced her to consider not taking out a mortgage with this lender, and to

carefully look at the long-term interest rates on her mortgage. The stories also helped her to understand 

the financial implications of taking out a mortgage, and helped her to take seriously how she could 

experience negative consequences as a result of buying a home.

Sometimes participants did not have personal advisors or had people inexperienced in home buying

advising them. Some participants were able to make up for deficits in their personal networks with advice 

from trusted professionals, while others either did not or could not. For example, James did not trust his 

family for advice because his parents kept their money in the fridge. He aspired to obtain a real estate 

license and was also driving for Uber to make extra money. Because he did not have family and friends 
17

providing trusted advice in the process, he relied on his mentor in real estate. That is, he was able to 

compensate for the lack of trustworthy advice in his personal relationships by bringing in a professional. 

Access to Resources

Mortgage Journeys participants drew on a range of financial and non-financial resources to facilitate their 

home purchases. Two of our participants received financial support to cover their down payments: Steve, 

as described above, and Betsy, whose mother-in-law offered the couple an extraordinary gift of $250,000 

for a down payment.

While money was of course an important resource, non-financial resources were also very helpful in some 

cases—for example, having a social network with experience and knowledge of home buying (discussed 

above), flexible time, and access to technology. Participants’ work conditions sometimes facilitated their 

job searches if they offered either flexible schedules or down time, or access to technology. For example, 

Joshua enjoyed flexibility and some down time at his job and he also had access to a fax machine he 

could use at work. Both of these features let him be responsive to paperwork requests from his realtor 

(when he renegotiated the contract several times due to needed repairs) and his lender. Nancy, too, 

benefitted from flexibility at work to be able to talk to housing professionals and view properties in 

Boston’s tight real estate market during the day. Since her fiancé, a teacher, did not have flexibility during 

his workday, Nancy’s flexibility gave them an advantage in being able to stay organized and move 

quickly in approaching multiple lenders for quotes and qualifying for a down payment assistance 

program. Access to transportation also proved to be an issue for Barbara: because she was not ready to 

work with a realtor yet, she was exploring neighborhoods and available listings by driving through areas 

she might want to live. Her car began breaking down and contributed to her putting her home search on 

hold, both because she needed to divert money she otherwise would have saved into car repairs and 

because she could not look at prospective houses since they were not served by bus lines. 

Home Buying Specific Factors

Trusted professionals 

Trusted Professionals worked in a variety of roles: mortgage brokers, realtors, housing counselor, lawyer, 

and a financial advisor. Realtors appeared most often to be the key channels of information about 

mortgage brokers and they often had either explicit or implicit partnerships. It appeared common for 

realtors to co-sponsor home buying seminars with mortgage brokers, with participants then understanding 

them to be a “package deal” whether the realtor and broker had any formal relationship or not. In Boston, 

we observed the work of a realtor who works in a firm with an in-house mortgage brokerage. Therefore, 

in understanding how to reach first-time homebuyers with high-quality information about affordable 

products, realtors are a crucial audience. 

While all of our participants relied on professional advisors to some degree, two of our participants 

explicitly used relationships with professionals to overcome deficits in knowledge in their personal 

relationships. Rose and her partner were isolated from their families in their home buying process. Her 

family was in another country and they felt his family was judgmental about their desire to purchase a 
18

home. Rose’s partner worked for a mortgage company and they relied on advice from his boss, a 

mortgage broker. While this gave them advantageous access to resources (contextual financial 

knowledge), they also felt it would be “taboo” not to take a mortgage through the company he worked for 

(relationships and product preferences). 

The strength of trusted advisors’ recommendations was a crucial factor in steering participants towards 

shopping around for the mortgage—either a lender (mortgage channel) or product as they entered the 

decisions stage of homebuying. The most common pathway we observed was for realtors’ existing 

partnerships with mortgage brokers or institutions to steer participants towards a specific mortgage 

channel or lender. For example, Betsy and her partner “literally took the guy’s word who worked with 

our realtor...We did no shopping, no research, nothing.” Participants in our sample who had connected 

with a homebuyer education program took that advice and focused on pre-qualifying for certain 

products, such as housing finance agency loans, sometimes in conjunction with a preferred mortgage 

channel, too.

Mortgage Product Preferences 

Through self-perceptions, access to resources, and impressions formed early in the home buying process, 

participants developed product preferences that were relatively durable. Joshua, for example, aspired to 

live debt-free and saw homeownership as a chance to build wealth along with housing stability. Because 

of his general discomfort with taking on debt and desire to build wealth, he developed a strong preference 

to avoid primary mortgage insurance (PMI), so he constrained his price range so he could put down a 

large enough down payment to take out a conventional mortgage. 

Study participants who took a first-time homebuyer course or attended a real estate presentation 

gravitated to affordable loan products with features like lower down payments, suggesting that these 

avenues provide valuable consumer education. Learning about these products was often the only route 

some participants could foresee to homeownership, as a lack of down payment was a primary barrier for 

several. The products also often have lower credit score thresholds than conventional mortgages, which 

help participants like Barbara, who faced both a lack of savings and a lower credit score. 

How These Factors Converge: Steve and Joelle’s Story

In our study, Steve and Joelle aspired to live debt-free and had been deeply influenced by Dave Ramsey’s 

Financial Peace program they had taken through their church. They kept strictly to a budget and were 

following Ramsey’s “debt snowball” program to reduce their medical and student debts. They were 

focused on paying off debts and were not willing to draw down their savings for a down payment so they 

could have cash on-hand for other priorities, including ongoing repairs to their house. They viewed home 

buying simultaneously as an investment and utilitarian purchase but also as a sign of maturity and that 

they were putting down roots. Joelle met a realtor and mortgage broker team at a one-hour seminar they 

put on for first-time homebuyers. She had good rapport and a high level of trust in them from the 

beginning; Steve called it “a match made in heaven” and the mortgage broker prequalified them for a no 

down payment housing finance authority (HFA) first-time homebuyer mortgage. They found a home and 

had an offer accepted after a few weeks but the closing got delayed because the inspection suggested that 

several substantial repairs should be done. 
19

They relied heavily on advice from Joelle’s father, a master builder, in advocating for the necessity of the 

repairs, obtaining estimates, and pushing back against the low quality of repairs they felt the sellers 

initially provided. These issues absorbed a significant amount of Steve’s energy and attention in the time 

leading up to closing. During the final underwriting of their loan, they learned from their broker that they 

were slightly over income for the HFA mortgage. While they qualified with their regular salaries, Steve 

does freelance graphic design work that, once accounted for, pushed them over the income threshold. The

day before their rescheduled closing, they switched from the HFA loan to an FHA loan. They had to 

borrow $5,000 from Joelle’s parents as a loan to cover the down payment. 

Steve and Joelle’s experience illustrates how their financial self-perception (as debt-free) influenced their 

product preferences (for a no down payment loan). They formed a close relationship with professionals 

whose advice they trusted throughout the process, despite a setback in being able to obtain the loan they 

planned for—though the new loan came with a lower interest rate and monthly payment. When they 

encountered challenges with the home purchase, they had personal relationships that offered them both 

knowledge (Joelle’s father’s expertise on repairs) and access to resources (being able to borrow a down 

payment rather than dig into other savings). It is unclear if they would have been able to successfully 

purchase a home without these relationships and resources. 

The next section introduces the three phases of the home buying and mortgage journey observed among 

Mortgage Journeys participants. Discussion of each phase includes an overview of all the components of 

that phase, barriers participants encountered in the phase and strategies they used to overcome them. 

Then, we focus specifically on how mortgage shopping varied in each phase. In transitioning to a focus 

on phases of the mortgage journey, readers should keep in mind that the five factors described above 

continue operating in each phase. We did not observe a consistent pattern in the way participants drew on 

these five factors as they progressed through a home purchase. There was not, for example, a trend for 

contextual factors to be more important early on but give way to reliance on trusted professionals and 

products in later phases. Indeed, as Steve and Joelle’s story shows, participants sometimes (but not 

always) had to draw heavily on contextual factors (family support, job flexibility) to successfully 

complete the purchase phase. In other cases, guidance from trusted professionals became more crucial in 

the stressful days leading up to a closing. 

Phases of the Home Buying and Mortgage Journey

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Mortgage Journeys study participants’ path to getting a mortgage and buying a 

home was not a linear one. The experiences of the study participants revealed three main phases in the 

homebuying process: (1) Preparation, (2) Decisions, and (3) Home Purchase. Exhibit 2 provides an 

overview of each phase. Each phase included different mortgage-related activities. Participants might 

move easily from one phase to the next, or they may experience flux, moving from one to the next, only 

to move back to a prior phase as a result of a failed house offer or after discovering a major fault with the 

home. Although the graphic shows a linear progression, the process was usually non-linear as participants 

faced a range of different barriers along the way in purchasing their home. Homebuyers’ timelines ranged 
20

from six months to more than two years;24 during the course of the study, a few put their home searches 

on hold indefinitely. Participants faced barriers related to both their home and mortgage searches in all 

phases of the process, from the preparation phase to the active search, until purchase.

Exhibit 2: Three non-linear phases of homebuying for MJ participants

Preparation Phase

In the preparation phase, participants in the Mortgage Journeys study did preparation work such as 

improving their credit score; saving for the down payment; and, in some cases attending home-buyer 

education, either short events presented by realtors or longer courses offered by non-profit housing 

counseling agencies. At this stage, they had limited preconceptions and preferences about their desired 

area, desired housing characteristics (e.g., condo, multi-family, fixer-upper or move-in ready), and 

mortgage terms or lenders, although some were starting to form. Four of the Mortgage Journeys study 

participants were still in the preparation phase at the end of the study.25

Home Purchase Motivation 

The decision to buy a home for the first time is influenced by many non-housing related factors the 

prospective homebuyer is considering related to life stage, household members, and lifestyle. These issues 

often get expressed as statements about identity, such as wanting to “grow up”—meaning, purchase a 

 

24 Where a participant’s journey lasted longer than the study period, that participant reported being engaged in the 

home search process prior to the study period.

25 Two participants, both in Boston, ended their home purchase pursuit by the end of the study: Abby and her 

partner ended their purchase pursuit when her partner lost his job in the summer of 2015 and Abby was due 

with their first child in fall of 2015. Nina had been working to repair her low credit score, having raised it from 

388 to 580 when she was beginning her home search. Her teenage son was arrested and this derailed her ability 

both to continue searching for a home and participating in the study. 
21

single-family home in which to raise future children or a desire to purchase in an up-and-coming area to 

maximize the wealth-building potential of a purchase. Since these motivations and identities have 

implications for the type of housing, location, and potentially mortgage products prospective buyers seek, 

we cannot understand the financial decision-making framework of a household without understanding the 

underlying contextual factors and motivations for purchasing a home. 

Among the contributing motives we saw, in order of prevalence, were: a desire for a different structure 

of family; “growing up”; dissatisfaction with renting; a desire to build wealth; and occasionally 

these combined with an opportunity not previously available. The following sections briefly describe 

the range of motivations that influenced Mortgage Journeys participants’ decisions to purchase. 

Family Structure and “Growing Up”

Overall, family and lifestyle considerations were the most important motivations for study participants. 

Owning a home meant participants could access more personal space that offered space, privacy, and/or 

place for a newly formed or growing family. In our study, Duncan, recently married, wanted to have 

personal space with his new husband while Abby and her partner sought to buy a house when she found 

out she was pregnant. 

All but one participant had homeowner parents (though not all were successful cases) and saw 

homeownership as the template to aspire towards. Three participants talked explicitly about the social 

expectations they held for themselves, influenced by having parents who owned a home or seeing peers 

buying homes. They saw owning a home as the next step in the adult trajectory, the right thing to do at a 

certain life-stage, or the perceived route to building wealth. One participant said, “People like me” can do 

this. Another couple said, “It’s time for us to grow up.” They, like many Americans, fused the identities 

of “adult” and “homeowner.” 

Dissatisfaction with renting

Dissatisfaction with renting was the second most common motivation for wanting to own a home. 

Participants were dissatisfied with renting for a number of different reasons. Particularly in high-cost 

Boston, renting often meant living with roommates and having to share space. Renting was also 

experienced as inherently unstable while owning was seen as more stable. Barbara, a 62-year-old woman 

from Tennessee, lived the first fifty years of her life in her family home until after her father whom she 

cared for passed away. This offered her unparalleled housing stability that was about to change because 

when she enrolled in the study, she was living in an apartment complex undergoing a change in 

management. She hoped to buy a home with the assistance of state homebuyer programs so that she could 

establish greater housing stability. Another participant, Lisa, did not have homeowner parents but 

“wanted homeownership in the family” to provide greater stability for herself and her disabled adult son.

Wealth-building

Wealth-building strongly motivated four buyers but was not a major consideration for most. This is not to 

say that prospective homebuyers did not have this as one among several considerations but it was not the 
22

primary motive most articulated. Among the wealth-motivated participants were Cortney and Justine, 

both white participants in the Boston area in their mid-thirties who found the rental market too expensive 

and wanted to build equity. 

Opportunity 

In the Boston area, an unexpected opportunity motivated two participants. In one case, a participant 

became aware of a condo that someone in his social network hoped to sell well below market price 

through a lease-purchase arrangement. The opportunity meant the participant could pursue his goal to 

provide more private space for himself and his new husband. Another Boston couple had been stimulated 

to pursue first time homeownership (something they considered previously unattainable given the 

expensive Boston housing market) by the offer of a large down payment ($250,000) by a family member.

Multiple Motivations and Multiple Barriers: Joshua’s Story

Mortgage Journeys study data revealed that homebuyers often have multiple motivations for purchasing a 

home and that it can be the combination of several factors that push someone to pursue homeownership at 

a given time. Joshua illustrates how multiple influences resulted in the tipping point decision to purchase 

for the first time, as well as barriers he encountered and mitigating strategies (to which we turn below) he 

used. In 2012, Joshua was dating someone who owned properties that she rented out. Having rented with 

roommates since college, he was both tired of moving frequently and was interested in having stability in 

his housing situation and the opportunity to build wealth. He made a decision to purchase a large building 

he could live in and rent out as a youth hostel, combining his desires to create housing stability, have 

decision-making power about his residence, and build wealth. 

However, he encountered barriers from the city government in understanding and approving his idea so 

he transitioned to searching for a single-family home. When he applied for a prequalification, he was 

denied for having no credit history. As discussed above, Joshua believed it was most responsible to only 

pay for what he could afford in cash. He also did not have proof for alternative forms of credit, such as a 

lease or utilities in his name (always having been a sub-letter) or a cell phone (being part of a family plan 

with his parents). The denial was emotionally unsettling because it contradicted what he thought was his 

financial prudence and reinforced his sense that his housing situation (e.g., as a sub-letter) was a 

hindrance to his life. This reinforced his desire to purchase a home and he spent a year working to build 

credit by opening a credit card he used for small purchases. He resumed his home search in 2014, during 

which he remained anxious about the mortgage because of his previous denial.

Preparation Phase Barriers and Strategies to Overcome Them 

In the preparation phase, participants encountered barriers based on their past circumstances, current 

circumstances, or both. Barriers related to their past included having no or thin credit files, low credit 

scores, low levels of savings, a history of credit denials, or a lack of income history. Joshua’s story

presented above illustrates how thin credit file and credit denial created barriers in his home purchase: at 

first, by delaying it in 2012, then by creating an emotional challenge (anxiety about approval in 2014).
23

Contemporary barriers participants faced included unemployment, job loss, family crises that derailed 

homebuyers’ preparation for buying a home, and a lack of knowledge about home buying. In the current 

study, Franklin, the expecting father and veteran considering a Veterans Administration loan introduced 

above, was waiting to gain sufficient employment history at his new job before applying for a mortgage. 

However, he was laid off close to the end of the study period and the couple put their home search 

indefinitely on hold. Another participant, Gina, had been saving money and working on her credit but a 

family crisis of her son being arrested along with an already unstable housing situation meant she had to 

put her homebuying journey indefinitely on hold. This was the second time that she had started down the 

path of preparing to buy a home and had needed to postpone it. 

Participants used various strategies to overcome these barriers. When faced with a lack of savings, two 

participants moved in with their parents and others with roommates to save money. Participants worked 

to reduce their expenses and build savings by closely watching their budget. Rose and Philip cut down on 

many expenses, including not eating out and checking their budget weekly to find ways to save money for 

a down payment. Another strategy to build up savings was to increase income through extra jobs. James, 

a twenty-one year old single man, started driving for Uber to save extra money. To deal with poor credit, 

participants worked to pay off debts. 

To compensate for a lack of knowledge about the home buying process, participants also engaged in this 

stage with homebuyer courses offered by both non-profits and realtors. Both non-profit classes and realtor 

company homebuyer classes tend to be focused on providing relatively impartial information along with a 

set of real estate professionals (realtors, mortgage lenders/brokers, insurance brokers). Observation of 

both types of classes suggests that information shared in the non-profit provided classes tends to include 

questions to ask of real estate professionals, and other more critical lenses through which to assess the 

homebuying process. There is a lack of good information on whether the non-profit homebuyer classes 

offer a more “protective” context to ensure higher rates of success in the homeownership endeavor.
24

Mortgage Shopping in the Preparation Phase 

In the preparation stage, participants formed vague 

preconceptions about mortgages as they weighed the costs 

of their tenure choice, most often a monthly mortgage 

payment against rent. At this stage, participants focused on 

the total monthly mortgage payment and not its 

composition—such as principal, interest, taxes, insurance—

or the interest rate or whether it was a fixed or adjustable 

rate. Online mortgage calculators were a tool some 

participants used in this phase to make estimates of 

affordability, though these calculators cannot take into 

account specific factors about a particular home, nor details 

such as the interest rate or type (fixed or adjustable) it was 

advertising. 

As discussed above, participants’ self-perceptions are an 

important contextual factor that shapes the mortgage search 

from the beginning. Participants’ self-perceptions 

specifically influenced the lenders they approached and 

products they sought at the pre-qualification stage—for 

example, if they considered themselves “low credit” or 

“uncreditworthy.” Some Mortgage Journeys participants 

focused on improving their credit and did preparatory 

activities such as attending home buying classes that 

provided participants with valuable information about low 

down payment products for first-time homebuyers. Some 

Mortgage Journeys participants started to use online tools 

like mortgage calculators to get a sense of how much house 

they could afford. These tools focused consumer attention

on the down payment and monthly mortgage payments. 

These kinds of activities helped participants prepare for 

shopping for a mortgage but did not constitute active 

shopping either for a mortgage originator or a mortgage 

product.

Decisions Phase

The decisions phase is characterized by looking at homes, obtaining a pre-qualification letter, analyzing 

budgets, thinking about the quality and location of the home, and synthesizing all this information. This 

phase is characterized by timelines related to putting in offers on a home and ends with putting in an 

offer. By the time of putting in an offer, the potential homebuyer has usually developed more precise 

mortgage information from the pre-qualification. One participant termed this the “cycle of decisions” 

phase, meaning that it was cyclical and governed by the housing stock available within the search area 

under consideration. When, for example, there were no affordable properties in a chosen geographic area, 

participants had to go begin the cycle of decisions again. Two study participants were still involved in the 

“cycle of decisions” by the end of the study.

Exhibit 3: Preparation Stage Barriers 

and Strategies to Overcome Them
25

One study participant, Cortney from Boston, was earning $52,000 a year at the time of the study, 

employed as a teacher and working over the summer at a summer camp. She was living with her parents 

in order to save money. Her key motivation to own a home was the high cost of renting, and she also 

wanted to build equity. In the spring of 2015 she met with a realtor, then started attending open houses to 

get a sense of the housing stock available. She got a pre-qualification by a mortgage broker recommended 

by the realtor she met with. In the summer of 2015 she was still looking at homes. She saw the summer as 

a key opportunity to work at the process, since once the school year began, it was harder to carve out time 

to go and see properties. She was very focused on whether a property was the “right” one and was willing 

to wait or continue saving to purchase a more expensive property. She got pre-qualified for a mortgage 

when she found a potential property. She was guided in her decision-making by her a financial advisor 

who was also a family friend. He provided suggestions to her about how much to put down for the down

payment and how to budget as a homeowner. By the end of the study she was still looking for the “right” 

home, continuing to live with her parents and save for a down payment.

Decision Stage Barriers and Strategies to Overcome Them 

The decision stage is a tumultuous, cyclical one where participants explored housing options in their 

preferred neighborhoods, learned about costs, and financing options through pre-qualifications. As the 

numbers became more specific, individuals reported being able to make more sense of whether and how 

they would be able to manage the mortgage. Patricia, a Haitian-American woman in her late twenties, had 

gone through a previous cycle of trying to purchase a home prior to being in the Mortgage Journeys

study. During her first attempt to buy a home, as she’d become more interested in making an offer on a 

condo, the information from the seller had got more specific and she was able to see that the combination 

of the condo fees, and the likely mortgage payment would not be affordable for her. With a renewed 

understanding that a higher credit score could lower her interest rate and mortgage payment she had gone 

back to the drawing board and started working on improving her credit score to over 700.

Families also learned during this phase that their savings were insufficient to cover a down payment on 

their preferred house. This might send a participant back to the preparation phase, or in search of 

additional resources to help with the down payment, including down payment assistance through a firsttime homebuyer program, or a low down payment government or non-profit mortgage product. Indeed, in 

order to afford a mortgage to buy a home, six participants focused on various first-time homebuyer 

programs and mortgage products. Programs that participants were considering included: the 

Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America, the Veterans Administration, the Federal Housing 

Authority, municipal down payment assistance programs, and state housing finance authority first-time 

homebuyer loans. 

In the decisions phase participants also faced barriers that were beyond their control and that precluded 

them from moving forward in their home purchase. These included unemployment and family crises, or a 

change in household composition that changed the parameters of the home search. The consequence of 

facing and dealing with barriers in the cycle of decisions phase resulted in extending the anticipated 

timeline for purchasing the home.
26

Barbara’s case illustrates how despite overcoming a barrier 

of insufficient savings through a Housing Finance Authority 

(HFA) product, other barriers sent her from the decisions 

phase back into preparation. Barbara had attended a 

homebuyer education course at a non-profit in Knoxville as 

part of her preparation to buy a home. She frequently 

referred back to materials in the binder given to participants 

and was trying to follow the instructors’ advice closely. 

Because of this, she had become focused on obtaining a low 

down payment first-time homebuyer loan through the 

Tennessee Housing Development Authority and on using a 

credit union instead of a bank; however, she discovered her 

preferred credit union did not offer her preferred mortgage. 

Barbara was shopping for both mortgage product and 

mortgage originator, but found a mismatch. 

Her savings were insignificant and she could not increase

her income due to medical conditions that limited how 

much she could work. She researched neighborhoods and 

available housing stock by driving through neighborhoods 

and doing some limited online research. However, as noted 

above, her car needed several costly repairs that limited 

both her ability to search for housing and to build her 

savings. During the course of the study, she moved from the 

cycle of decisions phase back to preparation: researching 

neighborhoods, looking at homes, rebuilding her credit after 

amassing debt on a store credit card, and trying to continue 

saving even as she encountered unexpected expenses.

Mortgage Shopping in the Decisions Phase 

During the decisions phase, participants’ main mortgage-related focus was in obtaining a pre-approval

letter. Mortgage Journeys participants worked hard to get mortgage pre-approvals for loan products that 

they perceived would make financial sense for them, based on their available financial resources for a 

down payment and closing costs. Similarly to the preparation phase, Mortgage Journeys participants 

continued to focus closely on the monthly mortgage payment and the total mortgage amount, which 

would determine whether or not they could buy their preferred home. 

We observed Mortgage Journeys participants selecting lenders for pre-approval based on several factors, 

including: their self-conceptions (discussed above), trusted advisors (discussed above), misinformation 

and confusion about the mortgage process, and the contextual factors discussed above set the stage for 

which lenders they might consider.

Echoing research suggesting homebuyers are not always informed about the mortgage process, a few 

participants were confused about the mortgage process. One study participant, Nancy, provides an 

Exhibit 4: Decision Phase Barriers 

and Strategies
27

example of how misinformation about the mortgage process could influence participants shopping 

behaviors. In the current study, Nancy explained the common fear that too much shopping around for a 

mortgage can lower one’s credit score and therefore lead to obtaining worse mortgage terms: 

One fast-talking mortgage guy, that I didn’t like because he sounded like a salesman, 

said that I could pre-qual everywhere in 30 days and it won’t affect my credit score. 

And somebody told me that wasn’t true. I think it was our friend at [financial 

institution they used]. I was like, concerned. Your credit score drives your interest 

rate on the mortgage. So the more mortgage shopping you do, it would negatively 

affect your credit score...and that probably drove the number of people I let draw prequals for me. I just didn’t want that many people looking at my credit and showing up 

as several queries.

Once prospective buyers selected a lender for a pre-approval based on the buyer’s characteristics, it set 

the mortgage process in motion and buyers who moved into the purchase phase very rarely re-evaluated 

lender or mortgage choices afterward. The only times we saw Mortgage Journeys participants reevaluating mortgage choices made in the decisions phase was in a reactive way if something went wrong 

with either their lender or product (as we discuss below). 

Purchase Phase

The purchase phase is the final phase of the homebuying process and requires homebuyers to focus on 

multiple aspects of the home purchase simultaneously and within a short amount of time. These can be 

broken down into three main categories: (1) activities related to the house and home contract, (2) 

activities related to the lender, and (3) activities related to the mortgage product and loan terms. Slippage 

in any of these areas can jeopardize the closing date. With a great deal of emotion-excitement, 

anticipation, and nervousness-riding on the successful completion of the home purchase, Mortgage 

Journeys participants were overwhelmingly focused on activities related to completing the home purchase 

such as the inspection, reviewing condo documents, negotiating or completing repairs, and submitting a 

variety of different documents necessary for the mortgage application to move ahead. Homebuyers were 

actively involved in both the home- and mortgage-related parts of this phase but in different ways. They 

were active participants in the home-related parts of this process, especially negotiating on terms of the 

purchase agreement, such as repairs and price concessions. In Tennessee, the inspection could be an 

opportunity for homebuyers to improve the quality of the home and/or lower the purchase price. Both 

Steve and Joshua in Knoxville negotiated on repairs after they had a signed purchase agreement and the 

house went through inspection. In Joshua’s case, he was able to negotiate for the seller to complete 

repairs of plumbing, electrical, exhaust, and subfloor issues. Steve and Joelle had repairs, including of 

their electrical unit, completed at the seller’s expense. We did not see any buyers in Boston use this 

strategy, perhaps because of the tight housing market/higher competition for houses so sellers could reject 

demands for repairs more easily.

Mortgage Journeys participants were more passive or reactive (as opposed to proactive) about mortgagerelated parts of the purchase phase compared to the home-related tasks. Homebuyers’ participation at this 
28

stage was primarily putting in a formal loan application with their selected lender and providing 

documentation such as tax returns, bank statements, and pay stubs. After submitting their loan 

documentation, the title search and underwriting process happened largely out of homebuyers’ view and 

homebuyers did not have a way to be involved with these stages. Indeed, Rose’s husband who worked in 

a mortgage broker’s underwriting department confessed to becoming irritated with buyers who asked 

questions at this stage. A few participants did mention getting calls from unknown professionals at this 

stage—such as the title insurance agent—and not being sure who they were or how they were involved in 

the process. Seven Mortgage Journeys participants reached the purchase phase by the end of the study. 

We review one below for illustrative purposes.

Rose and Philip 

Rose and her husband Philip together earned $74,000. Prior to 2014, Philip had a period of 

unemployment. His job, starting in 2014 was supporting a mortgage broker team. At that point, Rose and 

Philip decided they wanted to save for a down payment to buy a home before they had children. Rose was 

a Filipina immigrant who did not have family with knowledge about home buying in the United States 

and Philip had tense and difficult relations with some of his family members, resulting in them having a 

limited kin and social network to draw on. They had some down payment savings which they had worked 

hard to accumulate through careful budgeting and cutting back on expenditures. Although his family had 

financial assets that they might have shared with him, Philip did not feel comfortable asking for financial 

assistance. When pushed by Rose to ask for help with the down payment, his family members refused. 

While looking for a home, the couple noted the fast turnover of properties in Boston. Rose and Philip put 

in an offer on a home for $400,000 in the spring of 2015 but realized after the inspection that it needed a 

gut rehab. They also felt that the monthly mortgage payments would have stretched them too far, and it 

was with a great deal of relief that they did not buy the property and returned to the “cycle of decisions” 

phase. In late spring 2015, they put down an offer on a single family home for $274,000. They signed a 

30 year fixed rate mortgage and moved into the property in a residential neighborhood in a middle-class 

suburb of Boston.

Purchase Phase Barriers and Strategies 

Study participants in the purchase phase reported overwhelming levels of stress with tight timelines to 

review large numbers of documents, communicate with real estate professionals, and complete closing. 

During this final and high-pressure phase, Mortgage Journeys participants also learned more specific 

information about first time homebuyer programs. Although participants had learned some details about 

these programs in the decisions phase, actually qualifying for the programs happened in the purchase 

phase. Sometimes, as in Steve and James’ cases (reviewed above), participants encountered problems 

qualifying for these programs at the last minute in ways that put their home purchases in jeopardy. 

Study participants reported frustrations with often unresponsive real estate professionals that sometimes 

put the closing date in jeopardy. Participants felt helpless, and that they would do whatever they were told 

or needed to do to finalize the closing, whether or not that was the optimal decision for them financially. 

In scenarios where participants decided not to move forward 

with the purchase, they returned to the decisions phase.

Exhibit 6: Purchase Phase Barriers 

and Strategies to Overcome Them
29

Mortgage Shopping in the Purchase Phase 

At the purchase stage, details about the home purchase 

became much more concrete. Mortgage Journeys participants 

discovered relevant details about the home’s characteristics, 

such as the need for repairs and the appraisal value. For 

example, Rose and Phillip, mentioned above, had discovered 

the need for expensive repairs to a home that made the home 

too expensive and they walked away from the property.

Details about the mortgage sometimes shifted at this stage. 

For example, one participant discovered they did not qualify 

for the first time homebuyer program they thought they 

qualified for and needed to find an additional $5,000 for a 

down payment. Another participant discovered their lender 

did not provide the first-time homebuyer program he had 

anticipated and had to reapply for another mortgage through 

a different lender at the last minute. 

Recommended best practice for mortgage shopping is to ask 

for multiple loan estimates from different lenders after 

selecting a home.26 Yet this high-stress and deadline-driven 

purchase phase did not create an environment conducive for 

Mortgage Journeys participants to engage in comparison 

shopping. A signed purchase agreement sets a firm deadline 

with an aggressive timeline, often 30-45 days, which leaves 

very little room for slippage for the typical closing process. 

A typical closing process includes many steps that can, in 

broad brush, be broken down into steps related to the house 

itself and those related to the mortgage. In this compressed, high-stress, and deadline-driven process, 

homebuyers had limited ability to engage with all aspects of the process. 

While many Mortgage Journeys participants showed themselves to be savvy in shopping around for a 

mortgage in the preparation and decisions phase of the process (primarily looking for pre-qualifications)

and also in shopping for homes, they did not shop around for multiple loan estimates once they had 

selected a home. This was not because of a general challenge with shopping around or negotiating, or 

even doing so in the context of home buying. Mortgage Journeys participants demonstrated the capacity 

 

26 For example, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau recommends this practice in several resources, 

including Your Home Loan Toolkit and its Owning a Home portal. See 

https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/201503_cfpb_your-home-loan-toolkit-web.pdf and 

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/owning-a-home/process/compare/request-multiple-loan-estimates/. 
30

to shop around for lenders for pre-approvals and negotiated on home purchase terms. However, they did 

not get multiple mortgage quotes later in the process when they had an accepted offer on a home. 

From observing seven Mortgage Journeys participants completing the home purchase phase, we conclude 

several factors influence the lack of shopping at the purchase phase. First, the structure of the mortgage 

closing process is high-pressure with limited time, deadlines and a fear of being rejected from the 

mortgage process (for example, in Joshua’s case described above). Participants nervously “waited” for 

their “approval” and reported being very happy when they got it. Second, Mortgage Journeys participants 

were fearful of the consequences of not purchasing the home or meeting deadlines, as described in James’ 

case below. Third, the stressful emotional tenor of the purchase phase, coupled with doing a complex and 

large financial transaction for the first time, resulted in heavy reliance on trusted advisors and a lack of 

focus on mortgage details compared to home selection. Participants described the large volume of 

paperwork required and the associated stress of not understanding what was in the documents. Even after 

having it explained by mortgage and real estate professionals, participants did not understand what was in 

the documents after the loan closing. 

Barriers to Mortgage Shopping and Decision Fatigue

In contrast to their proactive home shopping, and in some cases higher degrees of shopping for mortgage 

prequalification, participants encountered multiple barriers to shopping around for mortgages at the 

purchase stage including: inaccurate information about the negative effect of multiple mortgage 

applications on their credit (discussed in the decisions phase); overreliance on trusted advisors; decision 

fatigue; and feeling they did not have the time to reach out to multiple lenders to compare loan terms. No 

one mentioned considering submitting multiple mortgage applications. 

As discussed in the preceding section, homebuyers relied on trusted advisors to guide them to mortgage 

products and through the application and closing process. They responded to mortgage professionals who 

were understanding of and responsive to their personal situations and demonstrated accessibility. In our 

study, Patricia chose a lender who “seemed reasonable, she seemed understanding, maybe she was a 

family person and understood where I was coming from” in purchasing a multifamily home with her 

sibling. Yet these professionals often discouraged shopping around both implicitly and explicitly. For 

example, just not mentioning the need to shop around allows for momentum to carry participants forward 

with the same lender recommended by a trusted advisor. Only non-profit entities (housing counseling 

agencies and a non-profit lender) encouraged their clients to do so. Further, realtors who have strong 

professional networks with mortgage brokers implicitly discouraged shopping around because that broker 

is seen as “the” person who works with that realtor, as if in a “package deal.” At later stages of the 

process, a mortgage underwriter described to us how he became irritated with buyers who asked questions 

once the paperwork reached his desk and that he would respond curtly, further discouraging questionasking at the same time that buyers’ attention is being called to myriad other tasks such as inspections, 

repairs, and title insurance. 

Another key aspect of homebuyers’ flagging attention to the mortgage is offered by the “decision 

fatigue” literature. Taken together, these psychological and economic studies show that humans all—

from impoverished rural villagers to experienced judges—perform worse on mental tasks the more 
31

decisions and trade-offs we have had to make (e.g., Spears 2010; Levav, Reinholtz, and Lin 2013; 

Danzinger, Levav, and Avnaim-Pesso 2013). The effect can be seen both within a day (e.g., decisions 

deteriorating over the course of a day) or over a sustained period of time (e.g., living in poverty). Buying 

a home, including both the home search and mortgage, is a process that Mortgage Journeys participants 

lumped into a single mental bucket and so may draw on the same set of decision-making resources. It is 

worth exploring in further research whether homebuyers’ decision-making capabilities get depleted by 

making early-stage decisions—such as whether, where, and which house to buy—leaving less decisionmaking power for later decisions, such as obtaining multiple mortgage quotes. 

Given these barriers at the purchase stage, the choices that buyers had made about lenders and products in 

earlier phases of the process were by and large “sticky” at the time of actually applying for the mortgage. 

In other words, while the industry and consumer advocates separate the process of preapproval and 

mortgage application, in practice borrowers in our study collapsed these phases: The shopping around 

participants in our study did occurred during the preparation and cycle of decisions phase before they had 

chosen a specific house, and therefore before they could know the terms of an actual mortgage. When 

things went awry at the purchase stage with one of these earlier decisions, homebuyers were not in a 

position to adjust their choices and shop around again. This was driven by the pressure of meeting the 

closing date in their contract (and perhaps by decision fatigue). 

As discussed earlier, a sense of urgency and a lack of time fed into participants’ lack of mortgage 

shopping behavior at the purchase stage. Indeed recent research has documented how humans tend to 

choose an urgent activity with a deadline over a more important activity (Zhu, Yan and Hsee, 2018) 

suggesting that in the case of the home purchase phase, the set of deadlines pushes forward decisions 

towards purchasing the home and getting the mortgage, even though doing multiple mortgage 

applications (mortgage shopping) might be a better decision for the prospective homebuyer than 

continuing down the home purchase path irrespective of the mortgage product.

James’ experience illustrates how time pressure inhibits comparison shopping for even a highly 

motivated, informed, and savvy homebuyer. James, who planned to become a realtor, began his home 

search by engaging closely with and thinking about the mortgage. However, as the timeline progressed 

and he neared the mortgage closing and home purchase, the details became overwhelming. Soon before 

closing, he realized that he needed to get the city of Worcester’s down-payment assistance program 

because his savings would not cover the down payment and the closing costs. The mortgage lender that he 

was working with was not actually qualified to provide that program, due to some bureaucratic problems 

with the city, and so within the last 24 hours before the loan closing, James had to find another bank with 

whom to get a mortgage. Understandably, he talked about this experience as highly stressful.

As he explained, “I would have loved” to have seen all the options for every lender who was qualified to 

work with the HFA down payment assistance program he used. “But given I was so crunched for time I 

felt like I needed to rush so I used the general guidelines I had for what I wanted, a 30-year loan product” 

and did not have time to compare specific loans, “I just went with the first thing that I could.” While 

James was more specific about his preference to shop around at the purchase stage, his experience of the 

high time and emotional pressure leading to suboptimal comparison shopping was typical of other 

participants who went through the complete home purchase process. 
32

Study Participants’ Mortgage Shopping Varied by Stage in the Homebuying Process

As shown in the preceding sections, Mortgage Journeys participants’ mortgage shopping behavior varied 

by the stage they were at in the homebuying process. Exhibit 7 below summarizes Mortgage Journeys

participants’ shopping behavior through the different stages. The table also includes best practice 

recommendations from consumer advocacy and homebuyer education, to highlight where Mortgage 

Journeys participants converged and diverged from these best practices. Note that the home purchase 

phase incorporates several sub-phases: the home contract terms; lender selection, mortgage product 

selection and finally loan terms selection.

Exhibit 7: Mortgage Shopping by Stage in Homebuying Process

Homebuying

Phase

Best Practices from 

Homebuyer 

Education

Emotional 

Layers

MJ Participants’ 

Home Shopping 

Actions

MJ Participants’ Mortgage 

Shopping Actions

Preparation Phase Build credit.

Attend a first time 

homebuyer course.

Build savings toward a 

down payment.

Consider costs of 

homeownership, 

including monthly 

mortgage payment, 

insurance, monthly 

costs, and 

maintenance. 

Decide to 

purchase a home 

now, with several 

motivations likely. 

Can include 

identity shift 

toward “growing 

up” or putting 

down roots. 

Worked on credit score. 

Learned about range of products 

available to them.

Discuss home buying with friends 

and family.

Decisions Phase Shop for prequalification letters and 

first-time homebuyer 

programs.

The home search 

was exciting, 

motivating, 

interesting, and 

stressful, and 

sparked attention 

to detail.

Search for homes 

with realtor or 

online.

Shop for pre-qualification letters 

and first-time homebuyer 

programs.

Consider monthly mortgage 

payment in relation to their budget, 

down payment requirements 

related to any savings, and the size 

of the mortgage they qualify for. 
33

Homebuying

Phase

Best Practices from 

Homebuyer 

Education

Emotional 

Layers

MJ Participants’ 

Home Shopping 

Actions

MJ Participants’ Mortgage 

Shopping Actions

Participants did not focus on other 

terms of mortgage.

Purchase Phase: 

Home Contract 

Terms

N/A Significant time 

and mental focus 

as closing 

approached, 

inhibiting further 

mortgage 

shopping.

 Review condo 

agreements

 Negotiate repairs

 Acquire lawyer

N/A

Purchase Phase: 

Lender

Choose lender 

based on service 

and product.

Fear and stress 

about all the 

pieces of the 

process meant 

trusted advisors 

steered 

participants 

towards lenders. 

N/A Participants chose lenders based 

on one or a combination of 

1) offering a product they 

desired, 

2) referral from a realtor,

3) emotional reassurance/ 

guidance from lender.

Lender selection from preapproval 

stage is “sticky” by and large. 

Purchase Phase: 

Mortgage Product

Research loan 

types and costs, 

looking beyond 

monthly payment

Overwhelmed by 

stress of closing 

deadlines and 

long list of items 

to complete and 

documentation.

Product selected based on specific 

features that met their financial 

needs, e.g. low or no down 

payment. 

Focus on monthly mortgage 

payment and how it fit their budget.

Purchase Phase: 

Loan Terms

Buyers request 

loan estimates from 

least 3 lenders 

Participants did 

not talk about 

applying for more 

than one 

mortgage.

Research participants applied for 

only one mortgage. They had 

already selected a lender and felt 

under pressure to close by their 

desired date.

Mortgage Journeys participants conducted the most research and comparison shopping for their 

mortgages at the decisions phase; the purchase phase was largely for them to execute those decisions. By 
34

contrast, industry and consumer protection best practices are to keep open one’s field of choices partway 

through the purchase phase (that is, to submit multiple mortgage applications). This may explain some 

differences in understanding between consumers and professionals (industry, consumer advocates, and 

policymakers). Our study suggests that homebuyers perceive shopping around at the pre-qualification 

stage to be sufficient, not fully understanding the difference that shopping around at the application 

stage—when a specific home has been selected—can make to their costs of homeownership. Mortgage 

Journeys participants also did not appear to distinguish the differences between mortgage originator and 

mortgage product as specifically as industry analysts. This goes some way toward explaining how 

homebuyers perceive themselves to have shopped around for mortgages (that is, researched lenders and 

products) while industry analysts do not (because they do not apply for more than one mortgage). 

Discussion and Policy Implications

Discussion

The longitudinal and real-time nature of the Mortgage Journeys project enabled several insights 

unavailable through other methods. These findings have implications for housing policymakers, 

regulators, and industry professionals. 

Our data illustrate three key stages in the home purchase process (preparation, decisions, and purchase), 

involving increasing numbers of activities and progressively shorter and deadline driven time-frames. As 

first-time homebuyers encounter each of these phases, their mortgage shopping behavior changes. In the 

preparation phase, homebuyers more often looked at different mortgage products and lenders and 

searched online for lenders and products. In the decisions phase, homebuyers usually picked one lender to 

get a pre-qualification letter from. As they moved into the high stakes and time-pressured closing phase,

they were not likely to shop for mortgage lenders or to get quotes from multiple lenders. Their focus was 

on the home closing and completing all the tasks. The only time they considered an alternative product 

was when the product or lender they had picked was no longer able to offer the product that would allow 

them to purchase the home. The terms the potential homebuyers focused on did not align well with best 

practice for doing mortgage shopping. As noted above, potential buyers focused primarily on the monthly 

payment and the type of lender to choose as opposed to looking at the interest rates, points, fees and other 

product features. 

It is clear that the current structure of the home purchase is not facilitating potential first-time 

homebuyers’ mortgage shopping for either lenders or products. This paper provides insights about the 

process and phases of getting a mortgage the mortgage industry could work to create tools to increase the 

ease of mortgage shopping at each phase. Mortgage shopping tools should take into account both the 

mortgage channel and the product, and should encourage potential homebuyers to shop around for both 

the lender and the product. Second, the mortgage industry, CFPB, and GSEs could give first-time 

homebuyers a sense of the affordable loan products they might be qualified for given their credit profile 

and a particular property that is under consideration. 

The structure (short timeline with deadlines) and emotional characteristics (high stress, excitement, and 

uncertainty) of the purchase phase does not provide optimal conditions for prospective homebuyers to 

shop for a mortgage. Specific structural barriers include the limited information consumers can get about 

a potential mortgage before they have an offer accepted on a house (e.g., pre-qualifications do not take 
35

into account home characteristics that matter to the mortgage), coupled with an intense and pressured time 

table to take out a mortgage (to meet a closing date) once an offer is accepted. Both the time pressures 

and paperwork burden of applying for a mortgage discourage consumers from shopping around. In our 

sample, some participants remained confused about how much and when shopping around for a mortgage 

would affect one’s credit score, creating a chilling effect against getting more mortgage quotes. Industry 

actors such as realtors and lenders, often acting as trusted advisors, are not incentivized to profit when 

consumers shop around: indeed they may lose a client with whom they have a close relationship, or be 

forced to cut their profit.

Understanding homebuyer experiences in this way can help the mortgage industry better reach and serve 

potential low- and moderate-income homebuyers as well as ensure that certain segments of the population 

are not being excluded from the benefits of homeownership. More specifically, consumers’ 

perspectives—especially when they do not match the current industry consensus on best practices—can 

help improve ways the mortgage transaction is structured to allow for easier comparison of mortgage 

products and to help first time homebuyers draw on a wider set of prospective lenders. 

The paper also documents how five key factors create opportunities for or barriers to mortgage shopping. 

Pre-existing factors of homebuyers’ financial self-perception, resources, and personal relationships 

intersect with the professional relationships and product preferences homebuyers develop during their 

home search process. Our study builds on the insights of others about the important role that social 

networks and personal relationships play in where potential homebuyers go to look for mortgage 

products. Insights from our study point to the important role in potential borrowers’ self-perception which 

influences where and how they apply for a mortgage. Notably the industry will not be able to directly 

influence financial self-perception, nor the economic resources a family brings to the table or their social 

relationships.

Policy Implications

This study has the potential to inform both future research as well as offering some seeds of ideas for 

making the homeownership and mortgage process more transparent. Increasing the transparency and ease 

of shopping for both the mortgage originator and the mortgage product is critical. As policy makers and 

mortgage industry professionals consider how to do this, incorporating end-user research is critical. 

How policymakers respond to the research is important: we can either call for greater consumer 

education, or we can think about restructuring some of the “choice architecture” that influences consumer 

behavior. As a case in point, we draw your attention to a response to a research brief about this project, 

from the Mortgage Bankers’ Association (MBA) (Finkelstein 2018). An MBA blog called, “Some lowincome buyers don’t prepare to get a mortgage” placed the onus of the mortgage shopping process on 

consumers. From this interpretation, the correct type of policy intervention is more consumer education to 

train consumers how to conform to the industry’s standards of best practice. However, such interventions 

would miss the insight that it is the structures in the homebuying process that discouraged Mortgage 

Journeys participants from being able to follow best practices.

Our findings point to two major areas where interventions may smooth the mortgage journey for firsttime homebuyers, following from the homebuying-specific and contextual factors described throughout 
36

the paper. Below we suggest some possible directions for policy makers and industry to consider. Many 

previous studies and interventions have called for increased consumer education to help consumers’ 

behavior approximate industry standards of best practice. While increasing access to non-profit housing 

counseling services and access to down payment assistance programs can help increase access to 

homeownership or to well-grounded decisions that homeownership is inappropriate at the time, it is not 

sufficient. Beyond consumer education, we see a need to adjust the structure of the mortgage journey 

towards getting a mortgage to improve the experience. 

Use human-centered design to improve mortgage shopping at all stages: While it is harder for the 

mortgage industry to address homebuyers’ contextual factors, the mortgage industry and policymakers 

can begin to tailor marketing and product design to accommodate these insights. For example, by 

understanding that some borrowers think of themselves as having bad credit the policymakers such as the 

GSEs or CFPB could target a public service marketing campaign to increase awareness of steps to take to 

improve credit, or of high-quality financial products for those with previous credit issues. 

We urge housing policymakers and industry professionals to follow the turn in other industries toward 

using human-centered design and behavioral insights to adjust the process to work more smoothly in 

response to consumers’ real behavior. (This will address challenges in the homebuying-specific factors.) 

Based on the data collected in the Mortgage Journeys study, we suggest several options that could 

alleviate friction points for prospective homebuyers and enhance the “choice architecture” to enable 

easier and more transparent mortgage shopping.

The primary goal of restructuring the mortgage shopping process should be to ease the process of 

comparison shopping and increase transparency for consumers at the mortgage application stage. We 

found study participants unlikely to shop for mortgages at stages after applying for and receiving a 

mortgage pre-qualification letter. A major step forward—and, we admit—a major shift in the market—

would be to create a mortgage application portal where consumers could submit a single application once 

they had an accepted sale and purchase agreement on a property, and have it sent to multiple institutions 

for a mortgage quote.27 We suggest it be possible for consumers to submit this application either online or 

in person through a participating lender, so that consumers with lower access to or comfort with 

technology would not be excluded from the service.28 Prospective homebuyers could choose to receive 

 

27 Mortgage brokers, whether in person or online, already offer the service of contacting multiple institutions to 

provide clients with mortgage quotes. However, there is not necessarily transparency in the brokerage system 

and mortgage brokers’ incentives may not be aligned with consumers’ when a broker is paid for the loan 

through an origination fee, which may vary and be more beneficial to the broker compared to a loan that may be 

better for a homebuyer over the long term. Some online mortgage calculators also present comparison shopping 

options: they estimate mortgage information based on details a consumer enters on the website, then it links 

below to “offers” from many lenders. Those “offers” show a lender name, APR, and estimated monthly 

payment. Each entry has a link to “learn more,” which takes the user to the lender’s website where they fill in 

again the details of their expected mortgage. This lender-by-lender process is more burdensome for the 

consumer and does not allow for ready comparability of quotes.

28 Recent years have seen an increase in online lenders, such as Rocket Mortgage, SoFi, and Lenda that attempt to 

streamline the mortgage application process. They do so by getting electronic information about applicants’ 
37

multiple quotes from different types of mortgage institution either choosing specific institutions or types 

of institutions (e.g., a credit union within X miles of the home, an online-only lender, a regional or 

national bank, etc.). Such a tool might require comparison of mortgage rates between different types of 

mortgage originators (e.g. broker, lender, and bank). Achieving scale with the new mortgage portal is of 

vital importance to ensure there are a large number of participating lenders and a wide variety of 

products—including first-time homebuyer products—to ensure the system increases choice for consumers 

and improves on today’s low comparison shopping rates. 

While creating a national mortgage portal or an underwriting clearinghouse may sound daunting for the 

mortgage industry, it is not without precedent. For example, the Free Application for Federal Student Aid 

(FAFSA) provides an approximate analogy: prospective college students and their families only have to 

gather financial information for one application, the results of which can be sent to multiple colleges and 

lenders of the student’s choice. Already in the mortgage industry, major players have created the 

Mortgage Electronic Registry System (MERS) to facilitate mortgage sales on the secondary market. 

MERS is a private database that allows secondary mortgage market actors to keep a mortgage registered 

to MERS even as it is bought and sold by different investors, rather than having to update county-level 

public records with each transaction. These examples suggest that when there is sufficient benefit and 

sufficient will, an integrated system such as we suggest can be feasible. 

Pre-purchase mortgage education: The research findings from this study provide a good basis to 

develop a pre-purchase mortgage education or counseling tool, to help make explicit to borrowers the 

kinds of contextual factors that may influence their mortgage journey. By making these explicit, housing

counselors could help them best align the mortgage product (according to a variety of features) for their 

particular situation, or suggest how to identify and navigate sources of information. While the most 

valuable way to use such a tool would be in a mortgage counseling session, it could also potentially be 

used by real estate agents, or other trusted advisors. It could even potentially be created so that it can be a 

self-guided tool or a smartphone app. 

Homebuyers most often use housing counseling services as a loan requirement—when it is too late to 

affect loan choice—or, less often, to address significant barriers such as credit repair. This study and 

others have found that homebuyers respond to professionals that are emotionally available to them. This 

suggests that homebuyers might instead work with a homebuying coach. A coaching model would differ 

from current homebuyer education courses where instructors provide a broad set of content.29 Services 

 

earnings, assets, debts, and credit scores through financial institutions. While this eases the burden on 

consumers to find, copy, and deliver (by hand, email, or fax) copies of financial documents, applicants only 

receive a quote from the lender(s) they use, rather than obtaining multiple quotes they can compare. 

29 A major difference between homebuyer education and coaching is that homebuyer education intentionally 

covers a broad set of topics, including home maintenance and potential delinquency, that prospective buyers 

may not even be aware of. By contrast, financial coaching (on which homebuyer coaching could be based) is 

explicitly driven by a client’s goals. If practitioners were to develop homebuyer coaching services, there would 

need to be development of standards and practices for how to allow client priorities drive the engagement while 

still introducing content beyond their immediate concerns. That development is outside the scope of this paper. 
38

would be provided one-on-one and only deliver content specific to each person’s situation; this is similar 

to how housing counseling services are provided but would not need to emphasize overcoming explicit 

barriers but rather navigating the process and obtaining impartial advice. Both a prospective tool and 

homebuyer coaching would reach their broadest audiences by being available online or, in the case of 

coaching, online (video chats, chat windows) or by phone. HUD’s first-time homebuyer study found that 

study participants assigned to use remote housing counseling services did so at more than twice the rate of 

participants assigned to in-person homebuyer education (63 percent versus 26 percent) (Moulton et al. 

2018). 

Another avenue for broadening take-up of this mortgage education could be to embed the suggested 

educational content into more widespread media, such as through partnerships with HGTV or popular 

financial advisors. The popularity of HGTV’s homebuying shows suggest there could be a very large 

audience for information about preparing for the financial aspects of homeownership if it were embedded 

within existing programs or incorporated into a new show focused on first-time homebuyers. Hosts could 

also increase the amount of financing-related tips they give in segments around commercial breaks. 

These suggestions are only a few of the potential routes policymakers could consider to reduce the stress, 

difficulty, and lack of comparison shopping documented for homebuyers. We are sure that additional 

industry stakeholders and policy makers will see additional ways to make use of the insights we share in 

this paper. With this research as a first step in the process, and drawing on the principles of human 

centered design, the GSEs or CFPB could consider additional proposals to reduce the pain points for lowand moderate-income families in shopping for a mortgage for the first time. This study begins the process 

of painting a detailed portrait of how first-time homebuyers approach the home purchase decision, 

process, and mortgage. By better understanding first-time homebuyers’ attitudes, resources, and 

experiences, industry and policymakers are better equipped to meet their needs.

Acknowledgements

This research was completed by Abt Associates as market research under contract to Fannie Mae. The 

Abt team thanks Li-Ning Huang and Steve Deggendorf at Fannie Mae for their enthusiastic support and 

comments. We thank Abt colleagues Herrissa Lamothe, Karen Cuenca, Benjamin Sadkowski, and 

Elizabeth Giardino for research support, and study participants for sharing their journeys with our team. 

References

Acolin, Arthur, Paul Calem, Julapa Jagtiani, Susan Wachter, 2017 “First-Time Homebuyers: Toward a 

New Measure” Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Working Paper No. 17-36 examine different data 

sources and attempt to identify a new measure of first time homebuyers’ share of home purchases.

Apgar, William & Bendimerad, Amal & S. Essene, Ren. 2007. Mortgage Market Channels and Fair 

Lending: An Analysis of HMDA Data. Joint Center for Housing Studies: Cambridge, MA. 

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.190.8054&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Accessed 

January 13, 2019.
39

ATTOM Data Solutions. 2018. U.S. Home Affordability Drops to Lowest Level in 10 Years. 

https://www.attomdata.com/news/market-trends/home-sales-prices/q3-2018-home-affordability-report/. 

Accessed February 15, 2019.

Bai, Bing, Jun Zhu, and Laurie Goodman. 2015. A Closer Look at the Data on First-Time Homebuyers. 

Urban Institute: Washington, DC. https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/49876/2000210-

A-Closer-Look-at-the-Data-on-First-Time-Homebuyers.pdf. Accessed January 13, 2019.

Baumeister, Roy F.; Finkenauer, Catrin; Vohs, Kathleen D. 2001. "Bad is stronger than good". Review of 

General Psychology. 5(4): 323-70. http://assets.csom.umn.edu/assets/71516.pdf. Accessed January 14, 

2019.

Bocian, Debbie Gruenstein. 2012. Mortgages: The State of Lending in America & Its Impact on 

American Households. Center for Responsible Lending: Durham, NC. 

https://www.responsiblelending.org/sites/default/files/uploads/3-mortgages.pdf. Accessed January 13, 

2019.

Boehm, Thomas P. and Alan Schlottmann. 2008. Wealth Accumulation and Homeownership: Evidence 

for Low-Income Households. Cityscape 10(2):225-256.

Cherian, Madhavi. 2014. Race in the Mortgage Market: An Empirical Investigation Using HMDA Data. 

Race, Gender & Class: 21(1-2), 48-63. 

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). 2015. Consumers’ mortgage shopping experience: A first 

look at results from the National Survey of Mortgage Borrowers. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: 

Washington, DC. https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/201501_cfpb_consumers-mortgage-shoppingexperience.pdf. Accessed January 14, 2019. 

CFPB. n.d.a Your home loan toolkit: A step-by-step guide. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: 

Washington, DC. https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/201503_cfpb_your-home-loan-toolkit-web.pdf. 

Accessed January 14, 2019. 

CFPB. n.d.b Buying a House: Tools and resources for homebuyers. Consumer Financial Protection 

Bureau: Washington, DC. https://www.consumerfinance.gov/owning-a-home/. Accessed January 14, 

2019. 

Danzinger, Shai, Jonathan Levav, and Liora Avnaim-Pesso. 2011. Extraneous factors in judicial 

decisions. PNAS April 26, 2011 108 (17) 6889-6892; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1018033108. 

Druta, Oana, and Richard Ronald. 2016. “Young Adults’ Pathways into Homeownership and the 

Negotiation of Intra-Family Support: A Home, the Ideal Gift.” Sociology, Volume: 51 issue: 4, page(s): 

783-799.

Fannie Mae. 2014. Fannie Mae National Housing Survey Topic Analysis: Technology Use in Mortgage 

Shopping. January 2014. http://www.fanniemae.com/resources/file/research/housingsurvey/pdf/010214-

topicanalysis.pdf
40

Fannie Mae. 2015. Fannie Mae National Housing SurveyTM Topic Analysis: What is the Mortgage 

Shopping Experience of Today’s Homebuyer? Lessons from recent Fannie Mae acquisitions. April 2015. 

http://www.fanniemae.com/resources/file/research/housingsurvey/pdf/apr2015-topicanalysispresentation.pdf

Finkelstein, Brad. 2018. Some low-income borrowers don’t prepare to get a mortgage: Fannie. National 

Mortgage News. May 24, 2018. https://www.nationalmortgagenews.com/news/some-low-income-buyersdont-prepare-to-get-a-mortgage-fannie. Accessed November 14, 2018.

Freddie Mac. 2018. Why Are Consumers Leaving Money On The Table? Economic & Housing Research 

Insight. http://www.freddiemac.com/research/insight/20180417_consumers_leaving_money.html. 

Accessed February 18, 2019.

Goodman, Laurie, Jun Zhu, and Bing Bai. 2016. Overly tight credit killed 1.1 million mortgages in 2015. 

Urban Wire: Housing and Housing Finance. https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/overly-tight-credit-killed11-million-mortgages-2015. Accessed January 13, 2019.

Goodman, Laurie, Alanna McCargo, Edward Golding, Bing Bai, and Sarah Strochak. 2018. Barriers to 

Accessing Homeownership: Down Payment, Credit, and Affordability. Urban Institute: Washington, DC. 

https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/99028/barriers_to_accessing_homeownership_2018

_4.pdf. Accessed January 13, 2019. 

Gopal, Prashant. First-Time U.S. Homebuyers Account for Almost Half of Mortgages. June 4, 2018. 

Bloomberg. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-04/first-time-u-s-homebuyers-accountfor-almost-half-of-mortgages. Accessed December 31, 2018.

Haurin, Donald R., Christopher E. Herbert, and Stuart S. Rosenthal. 2007. Homeownership Gaps Among 

Low-Income and Minority Households. Cityscape 9(2): 5-52.

Herbert, Christopher, Daniel T. McCue, and Rocio Sanchez-Moyano. 2013. Is Homeownership Still an 

Effective Means of Building Wealth for Low-Income and Minority Households? Was It Ever? Joint 

Center for Housing Studies: Cambridge, MA. http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/hbtl-06.pdf. 

Accessed January 13, 2019.

Hirasuna, Donald P. and Ryan Allen. 2012. The resurgence of denial rates for home loans: an 

examination of disparate effects on groups of applicants in the upper Midwest. Housing Policy Debate 

22(4): 573-603. 

Hizmo, Aurel and Shane Sherlund. 2018. The Effects of the Ability-to-Repay / Qualified Mortgage Rule 

on Mortgage Lending. FEDS Notes. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve: Washington, DC. 

https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/effects-of-the-ability-to-repay-qualifiedmortgage-rule-on-mortgage-lending-20181116.htm. Accessed January 14, 2019. 

Jiang, Wei, Ashlyn Aiko Nelson, and Edward J. Vyclacil. 2014. Liar’s Loan? Effects of Origination 

Channel and Information Falsification on Mortgage Deliquency. Research Paper 2009-06-02. Indiana 

University—Bloomington, School of Public & Environmental Affairs. 

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1421462. Accessed January 14, 2019.
41

Joint Center for Housing Studies (JCHS). 2017. The State of the Nation’s Housing 2017. Joint Center for 

Housing Studies: Cambridge, MA. 

http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/harvard_jchs_state_of_the_nations_housing_2017_chap4.

pdf. Accessed December 13, 2018.

Kuhn, Moritz and Moritz Schularick. 2018. Income and Wealth Inequality in America, 1949-2016.

Opportunity and Inclusive Growth Institute Working Paper 9 June 2018. Federal Reserve Bank of 

Minneapolis. https://doi.org/10.21034/iwp.9. Accessed February 18, 2019. 

Levav, Jonathan, Nicholas Reinholtz, and Claire Lin. The Effect of Ordering Decisions by Choice-Set 

Size on Consumer Search. Journal of Consumer Research, Volume 39, Issue 3, 1 October 2012, Pages 

585–599, https://doi.org/10.1086/664498. Accessed December 13, 2018.

Manturuk, Kim R. 2012. Urban Homeownership and Mental Health: Mediating Effect of Perceived Sense 

of ControlCity & Community 11(4): 409-430.

Manturuk, K., Lindblad, M., & Quercia, R. (2012). Homeownership and Civic Engagement in LowIncome Urban Neighborhoods: A Longitudinal Analysis. Urban Affairs Review, 48(5), 731–

760. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087412441772.

Manturuk, Kim, Sarah Riley, and Janneke Ratcliffe. "Perception Vs. Reality: The Relationship between 

Low-Income Homeownership, Perceived Financial Stress, and Financial Hardship." Social Science 

Research 41, no. 2 (2012): 276-286.

Moulton, Shawn, Laura Peck, Nichole, Debbie Gruenstein Bocian, and Donna DeMarco. 2018. Who 

Participates in Homebuyer Education and Counseling Services and Why? Insights From HUD’s FirstTime Homebuyer Education and Counseling Demonstration. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban 

Development: Washington, DC. https://www.huduser.gov/portal/publications/First-Time-HomebuyerEducation-and-Counseling-Services.html. Accessed February 18, 2019. 

National Association of Realtors. 2018. Share of First-time Buyers Held Steady at 32% in 2017 as Home 

Prices Continue to Incresae under Tight Supply. Economist’s Outlook Blog, National Association of 

Realtors. http://economistsoutlook.blogs.realtor.org/2018/01/31/share-of-first-time-buyers-held-steady-at32-in-2017-as-home-prices-continue-to-increase-under-tight-supply/. Accessed January 14, 2019.

Palim, Mark. 2018. Lack of Mortgage Focus Complicates Home Purchase: An Ethnographic Study 

Among Low- and Moderate-Income Households. Fannie Mae. May 24, 2018. 

http://www.fanniemae.com/portal/research-insights/perspectives/mortgage-focus-home-purchase-palim052418.html

Pittman, Cassi L. 2008. The Use of Social Capital in Borrower Decision‐Making. Cambridge, MA: Joint 

Center For Housing Studies of Harvard University. http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/w08-

4_pittman.pdf. Accessed January 14, 2019.

Reid, Carolina. 2010. Sought or Sold? Social Embeddedness and Consumer Decisions in the Mortgage 

Market. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco Working Paper 2010 – 09. 

http://www.frbsf.org/community-development/publications/working-papers/2010/december/mortgagemarket-social-networks-consumer-decision/. Accessed January 14, 2019. 
42

Rohe, William and Hye-Sung Han. “Housing and Health: Time for Renewed Collaboration.” North 

Carolina Medical Journal 73, no. 5 (2012): 374-380.

William M. Rohe and Mark Lindblad. 2013. Reexamining the Social Benefits of Homeownership after 

the Housing Crisis. HBTL-04. Joint Center for Housing Studies: Cambridge, MA. 

http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/hbtl-04.pdf. Accessed February 17, 2019.

Shapiro, Thomas. 2004. The Hidden Cost of Being African American. Oxford University Press: New 

York.

Spears, Dan. 2010. Economic Decision-making in Poverty Depletes Behavioral Control. Princeton 

University CEPS Working Paper No. 213 December 2010. 

https://www.princeton.edu/ceps/workingpapers/213spears.pdf. Accessed January 14, 2019.

United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) 2012. "Exhibit 16. FHA Market 

Share of 1- to 4-Family Mortgages: 2001–Present," U.S. Housing Market Conditions Report, 1st Quarter

2012, 76; 

Urban Institute. 2018. Access and Affordability: Interactive map and research on 3 barriers to 

homeownership. https://www.urban.org/policy-centers/housing-finance-policy-center/projects/accessand-affordability-interactive-map-and-research-3-barriers-homeownership. Accessed November 16, 2018. 

Wei, Li and Laurie Goodman. 2014. A Better Measure of Mortgage Application Denial Rates. Urban 

Institute: Washington, DC. https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/33501/2000031-ABetter-Measure-of-Mortgage-Application-Denial-Rates.pdf. Accessed January 14, 2019. 

Williams, Robert B. 2017. The Privileges of Wealth: Rising inequality and the growing racial divide 

(Economics in the Real World) Routledge: New York. 

Woodward, Susan E., and Robert E. Hall. 2012. "Diagnosing Consumer Confusion and Sub-optimal 

Shopping Effort." American Economic Review, 102 (7): 3249-76. 

Zhu, Meng, Yang Yang, Christopher K Hsee; The Mere Urgency Effect, Journal of Consumer Research, 

Volume 45(3): 673–690, https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucy008.