Department of Marketing and Logistics, Fisher College of Business, The Ohio State University.
Department of Psychology, San Francisco State University.
Psychol Sci. 2021 Nov;32(11):1830-1841. doi: 10.1177/09567976211017022. Epub 2021 Oct 29.
Many governments have introduced sugary-drink excise taxes to reduce purchasing and consumption of such drinks; however, they do not typically stipulate how such taxes should be communicated at the point of purchase. Historical, field, and experimental data consisting of more than 225,000 purchase decisions indicated that introducing a $0.01-per-ounce sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) tax-without making it salient on price tags-had no significant effect on purchasing (-1.26%, = .28). However, when the phrase "includes sugary drink tax" was added to tax-inclusive price tags, SSB purchasing was lower than (a) in the pretax period (-9.78%, < .001), (b) in a posttax period when drinks did not bear price tags (-5.04%, < .001), and (c) in a posttax period when drinks bore tax-inclusive price tags that did not mention the tax (-3.83%, = .002). Making the tax's beneficiary (student programs) salient on price tags had no added effect. Two follow-up studies suggested that tax salience was effective partly because consumers overestimated the tax amount, leading to reduced purchase intentions.
许多政府都征收含糖饮料消费税，以减少此类饮料的购买和消费；然而，他们通常没有规定在购买点应如何传达这些税收。历史、实地和实验数据包含超过 225000 次购买决策，表明征收每盎司 0.01 美元的含糖饮料（SSB）税——而不在价格标签上突出显示——对购买行为没有显著影响（-1.26%，<.28）。然而，当在含税价格标签上添加“包括含糖饮料税”的字样时，SSB 的购买量低于（a）在征税前时期（-9.78%，<.001），（b）在征税后时期，当饮料没有价格标签时（-5.04%，<.001），以及（c）在征税后时期，当饮料带有不提及税收的含税价格标签时（-3.83%，=.002）。在价格标签上突出显示税收的受益方（学生计划）并没有增加效果。两项后续研究表明，税收的突出性之所以有效，部分原因是消费者高估了税收金额，导致购买意愿降低。
