Supplementary Files
Keywords
EVASION
MESSAGE
PERSONALITY
IMPUESTOS
EVASIÓN
MENSAJE
PERSONALIDAD
How to Cite
Abstract
This research shows the main effects of three variables on tax compliance. Specifically, a) the goal framing message (positive or negative message) about tax compliance importance addressed to taxpayers, b) the prevention and promotion orientation of the taxpayers and, c) the audit delayed feedback. We combine these variables at the laboratory experiment because they have been underestimated in the research of tax compliance decisions. In addition, this research analyzes whether the effect of the message framing on tax compliance changes according to the promotion or prevention orientation of the taxpayers, and the delayed feedback. A total of 186 undergraduate students from engineering and business administration programs took part in an experiment to explore those effects. Results show: a) that the negative frame has a positive significant effect on tax compliance; b) a significant effect of the interaction between negative frame and promotion focus. When there is a low promotion focus, the best option is not to apply a negative frame; c) that, as time goes by, the effect of delayed feedback increases.
References
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
Comments
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 Unported License.
Copyright (c) 2022 Ronald Mora-Esquivel, Martín Solís, Paula Arzadun