Goal message framing and tax compliance
Creators: name: Baldin, Clara
name: Filippi, Silvia
Publisher: name: Open Science Framework
Year: 2022
Subjects: subject: Social and Behavioral Sciences
subject: Psychology
subject: FOS: Psychology

description: Economic inequality has increased in recent decades and exacerbated by the Covid-19 Pandemic (Blundell et al., 2020; Oxfam Report, 2021). Economic inequality negatively impacts individual and collective well-being (Wilkinson &amp; Pickett, 2009). People are generally unaware of the real gap between poor and rich, yet they desire a more equal society (Norton &amp; Ariely, 2011; Galdi, 2016). However, this desire rarely translates into real redistributive behaviours (McCaffery &amp; Baron, 2005), such as support for progressive taxation. Progressive taxation not only enables the provision of essential services such as healthcare, education, and security but also reduces inequality (Kaplow &amp; Shavell, 2002; Pressman, 2014; Piketty, 2015; Stiglitz, 2017). Therefore, promoting tax compliance through information campaigns is crucial. Nonetheless, generating effective change requires the right message (Randolph &amp; Viswanath, 2004). Literature in the psychological field suggests that a message is more effective and motivating if it is consistent with recipients’ goals (Reber et al., 1998; Spiegel et al., 2004). Thus, understanding people’s goals when paying taxes is essential. A qualitative study by Castiglioni and colleagues (2018) suggested that, when paying taxes, individuals are generally concerned about the effectiveness of this action and usually assume a material gain in return. Applying Lindenberg and Steg’s (2007) goal-framing theory, Castiglioni and colleagues (2019) tested this suggestion and revealed that a gain goal frame (implying the material gains attained by paying taxes) was more effective than an hedonic goal frame (portraying the positive emotions experienced by paying taxes). Hence, a message describing the material gains attained by paying taxes is needed. Furthermore, Holler and colleagues (2008) revealed an interaction between individuals’ regulatory focus (i.e., self-regulation strategies; Higgins, 1997; 1998) and message framing. Promotion-focused participants (both dispositional and situational) were more persuaded by a message describing the positive consequences attained by paying taxes (gain frame), whereas prevention-focused participants were more persuaded by a message highlighting the negative consequences suffered by not paying taxes (loss frame) (Holler et al., 2008). Thus, the message used by Castiglioni and colleagues (2019) might be more effective within promotion-focused individuals. However, taxation could elicit a situational prevention focus (Castiglioni et al., 2018), making another frame more effective. To test the relative effectiveness of message framing in promoting tax compliance, we will jointly study regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1997; 1998) and goal framing (Levin et al., 1998). Specifically, we will compare the effects of positive (i.e., gain and non-loss) and negative (i.e., loss and non-gain) goal frames among promotion-focused and prevention-focused individuals. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of five conditions: (1) gain frame, (2) non-loss frame, (3) loss frame, (4) non-gain frame, and (5) control group. In the first condition (1), participants will be shown the manipulation used by Castiglioni and colleagues (2019), emphasising the material gains attained by paying taxes. In the other frame conditions, participants will be shown the same message reformulated to highlight (2) material losses avoided paying taxes, (3) material losses suffered not paying taxes, and (4) material gains foregone not paying taxes. In the control condition (5), participants will be shown no messages or questions. Then, participants’ tax compliance, perceptions regarding government spending and taxpayers’ tax compliance, dispositional regulatory focus, and demographics will be assessed. Results in line with Castiglioni and colleagues (2019) and Holler and colleagues (2008) are expected.