Liu Xin, Zhao Ning, Zheng Rui
Key Laboratory of Behavioral Science, Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), Beijing, Beijing Municipality, China.
Department of Psychology, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.
Front Psychol. 2023 Jan 11;13:1038750. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1038750. eCollection 2022.
The global COVID-19 pandemic has created significant financial and operational challenges for some businesses. As a result, temporary welfare benefit reduction may be a tough but future-oriented choice for both employers and employees. The present study examined whether default nudges can be used to promote employees' approval of welfare-cutting policy while avoiding negative attitudes. Two online surveys were conducted during the first pandemic wave in China (February 2020). In the first study ( = 310), the participants were presented with a hypothetical welfare-cutting policy that used either an opt-in approach or an opt-out approach. We aimed to investigate how their approval and attitudes were different between two conditions. The results showed that the employees in the opt-out condition were more likely to accept the welfare-cutting policy than those in the opt-in condition, while participants' attitudes toward the policy employing opt-out approach were as negative as that employing opt-in approach. Study 2 ( = 1,519) involved a replication of Study 1 with two additional improved opt-out approaches (opt-out education and opt-out transparency). Compared with the opt-in approach and standard opt-out approach, the opt-out education approach both increased policy support and improved attitudes toward the welfare-cutting policy. The theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.
全球新冠疫情给一些企业带来了巨大的财务和运营挑战。因此，临时削减福利可能是雇主和员工都面临的艰难但着眼未来的选择。本研究探讨了默认助推是否可用于促进员工对削减福利政策的认可，同时避免负面态度。在中国疫情第一波期间（2020年2月）进行了两项在线调查。在第一项研究（n = 310）中，向参与者展示了一项使用选择加入或选择退出方法的假设性削减福利政策。我们旨在调查这两种情况下他们的认可和态度有何不同。结果表明，选择退出条件下的员工比选择加入条件下的员工更有可能接受削减福利政策，而参与者对采用选择退出方法的政策的态度与采用选择加入方法的政策一样消极。研究2（n = 1,519）重复了研究1，并增加了两种改进的选择退出方法（选择退出教育和选择退出透明度）。与选择加入方法和标准选择退出方法相比，选择退出教育方法既增加了政策支持，又改善了对削减福利政策的态度。讨论了这些发现的理论和实践意义。
