Archivos suplementarios
Palabras clave
EVASION
MESSAGE
PERSONALITY
IMPUESTOS
EVASIÓN
MENSAJE
PERSONALIDAD
Cómo citar
Resumen
Esta investigación muestra los principales efectos de tres variables sobre el cumplimiento tributario. Específicamente: a) la orientación del mensaje (mensaje positivo o negativo) dirigido a los contribuyentes sobre la importancia del cumplimiento tributario: b) la orientación a la prevención y promoción de los contribuyentes y finalmente c) la retroalimentación rezagada de la auditoría. Estas variables se plasmaron en un experimento de laboratorio porque han sido subestimadas en las investigaciones sobre las decisiones de cumplimiento tributario. Aunado a lo anterior, esta investigación analiza si el efecto de la orientación del mensaje sobre el cumplimiento tributario cambia según la orientación de promoción o prevención de los contribuyentes, y la retroalimentación retardada. Un total de 186 estudiantes de pregrado de carreras de ingeniería y administración de empresas participaron en un experimento para explorar esos efectos. Los resultados muestran que: a) el mensaje con orientación negativa tiene un efecto estadísticamente significativo y positivo sobre el cumplimiento tributario; b) un efecto significativo de la interacción entre la orientación negativa del mensaje y el enfoque de promoción. Cuando hay un enfoque de promoción bajo, la mejor opción es no aplicar un mensaje negativo; c) a medida que pasa el tiempo, aumenta el efecto de la retroalimentación rezagada.
Citas
Alm, J., Bloomquist, K. M., & McKee, M. (2015). On the external validity of laboratory tax compliance experiments. Economic Inquiry, 53(2), 1170-1186. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecin.12196
Barron, G., & Erev, I. (2003). Small feedback‐based decisions and their limited correspondence to description‐based decisions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 16(3), 215-233. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.443
Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5(4), 323-370. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.5.4.323
Charness, G., & Villeval, M. C. (2009). Cooperation and competition in intergenerational experiments in the field and the laboratory. American Economic Review, 99(3), 956-78. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1553733
Chia-Lin, H., Li-Chen, Y. & Kuo-Chien, C. (2017). Exploring the effects of online customer reviews, regulatory focus, and product type on purchase intention: Perceived justice as a moderator. Computers in Human Behavior, 69, 335-346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.056
Druckman, J. N. (2001). The implications of framing effects for citizen incompetence. Political Behavior, 23(3), 225–256, https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015006907312
Fréchette, G. R. (2015). Laboratory Experiments: Professionals versus Students. In G. R. Fréchette & Andrew Schotter (Eds.), Handbook of Experimental Economic Methodology. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195328325.003.0019
Fochmann, M. & Kroll, E. B. (2016). The effects of rewards on tax compliance decisions. Journal of Economic Psychology, 52, 38-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2015.09.009
Fellner, B., Holler, M., Kirchler, E., & Schabmann, A. (2007). Regulatory focus scale (RFS): Development of a scale to record dispositional regulatory focus. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 66(2), 109-116. https://doi.org/10.1024/1421-0185.66.2.109
Gangl, K., Torgler, B. & Kirchler, E. (2016). Patriotism's Impact on Cooperation with the State: An Experimental Study on Tax Compliance. Political Psychology, 37(6), 867-882. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12294
Güth, W., & Kirchkamp, O. (2012). Will you accept without knowing what? The Yes-No game in the newspaper and in the lab. Experimental Economics, 15(4), 656-666. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-012-9319-7
Güth, W., Schmidt, C., & Sutter, M. (2007). Bargaining outside the lab–a newspaper experiment of a three‐person ultimatum game. The Economic Journal, 117(518), 449-469. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2007.02025.x
Hasseldine, J. & Hite, P. (2003). Framing, gender and tax compliance, Journal of Economic Psychology, 24(4), 517–533, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-4870(02)00209-X
Hertwig, R., Barron, G., Weber, E. U., & Erev, I. (2004). Decisions from experience and the effect of rare events in risky choice. Psychological Science, 15(8), 534-539. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00715.x
Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280-1300. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.52.12.1280
Higgins, E. T. (2000). Making a good decision: value from fit. American Psychologist, 55(11), 1217-1230. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.55.11.1217
Hofmann, E., Hoelzl, E. & Kirchler, E. (2008). Preconditions of voluntary tax compliance: Knowledge and evaluation of taxation, norms, fairness, and motivation to cooperate. Zeitschrift für Psychologie/Journal of Psychology, 216(4), 209-217. https://doi.org/10.1027/0044-3409.216.4.209
Holler, M., Hoelzl, E., Kirchler, E., Leder, S. & Mannetti, L. (2008). Framing of information on the use of public finances, regulatory fit of recipients and tax compliance. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29(4), 597–611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2008.01.001
Hovland, C., Janis, I., & Kelley, H. (1953). Communication and persuasion: Psychological studies of opinion change. Yale University Press.
Kahneman, A. & Tversy, D. (1979) Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263-291. https://doi.org/10.2307/1914185
Kogler, C., Mittone, L., & Kirchler, E. (2016). Delayed feedback on tax audits affects compliance and fairness perceptions. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 124, 81-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2015.10.014
Kwang Seok, H. (2018). The Effect of the Message Framing Direction and Temporal Distance in Preannouncing Strategy [Special issue]. International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics, 118(19b), 2201-2216. https://acadpubl.eu/jsi/2018-118-19/issue19b.html
Levin, I. P., Schneider, S. L., & Gaeth, G. J. (1998). All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76(2), 149-188. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1998.2804
Muehlbacher, S., Mittone, L., Kastlunger, B., & Kirchler, E. (2012). Uncertainty resolution in tax experiments: Why waiting for an audit increases compliance. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 41(3), 289-291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2012.01.006
Rothman, A. J., & Salovey, P. (1997). Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: the role of message framing. Psychological Bulletin, 121(1), 3-19. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.3
Schindler, S. & Pfattheicher, S. (2017) The frame of the game: Loss-framing increases dishonest behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 69, 172-177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.09.009
Sussman, A. B., & Olivola, C. Y. (2011). Axe the Tax: Taxes are Disliked More than Equivalent Costs. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(SPL), S91–S101. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.48.SPL.S91
Comentarios
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Reconocimiento-NoComercial-SinObraDerivada 3.0.
Derechos de autor 2022 Ronald Mora-Esquivel, Martín Solís, Paula Arzadun