to the Prophet. The first message tests, whether a moral message without explicit religious content is enough to induce customers to repay, while the second message tests whether adding a credible source increases the effectiveness of a religious message to shed more light on the mechanisms through which references to a moral norm affect behavior.

We find that all variations of the moral appeal had _exactly the same effect_ . That is, a nonreligious moral statement was just as powerful as the same moral statement identified as a quote from the Prophet, attributed to a well-known religious text. There are two possible interpretations of this result. The first possibility is that the key component of the treatment is indeed the moral appeal, rather than its religious connotation. An alternative possibility is that customers associated the bank with religion, and therefore interpreted a purely moral message as related to religion. In order to disentangle these explanations we conducted an end-line survey in which the bank read the non-religious version of the moral message to control group customers and asked if they associated the message with religion in any way. The vast majority of respondents reported not to be aware of the religious origin of the quote. This finding, coupled with the fact that our experiment is set in a relatively secular environment, suggests that our results are indeed driven primarily by the moral appeal, rather than the religious nature of the message.<sup>13</sup> Our findings suggest that emphasizing different aspects of a product can substantially alter consumer choices. In particular, our results suggest that reminders that render different product attributes salient can have important effects on consumers’ decisions, in line with the framework in Bordalo et al. (2015), which introduces a role of reminders in salience theory. In our experiment, reminders that make moral considerations salient increase repayment, while simply reminding customers to repay does not. Using the framework by Bordalo et al. (2015) to interpret our findings, our results indicate that, when deciding whether to repay, customers in our sample focus on legal penalties, while a potential moral penalty does not come to mind. Reminding customers to repay does not affect their decision much, because they are already aware that they are late. However, reminding customers that _“non-repayment of debts_ [...] _is an injustice”_ has two consequences. First, it brings morality, which was previously a “shrouded” attribute, to mind. Second, it establishes that there is a high moral cost of not repaying one’s debts. These two elements combined make moral considerations salient and increase the repayment rate.<sup>14</sup> This paper contributes to several strands of the literature. First, our work relates to a large literature on non-monetary incentives (Frey, 1997; Akerlof and Kranton, 2000; Gneezy, 2005; B ́enabou and Tirole, 2003, 2006). In particular, we shed light on how moral appeals affect meaningful economic decisions. Moral appeals, directed to the audience’s sense of what is right and proper, are

> 13In fact, if we restrict the analysis to customers located in greater Jakarta, a more secular and urban area, the effects of the moral incentive are similar to the rest of the sample. The finding that most clients did not know the Islamic doctrine on debt non-repayment corroborates the view that our sample is relatively secular.

> 14More broadly, our findings therefore relate to a recent line of research that models what individuals pay attention to, and how this influences their decisions (Bordalo et al., 2012, 2013, 2015; K ̋oszegi and Szeidl, 2013; Gabaix, 2014).

4