A Dirty Word Or A Dirty World?

1
A Dirty Word Or A Dirty World?

• Attribute Framing, Politics, and Query Theory

David Hardisty, Eric Johnson Elke
Weber Columbia University NSF SES-03455840
SES-0352062 NIA 5R01AG027934-02
2
TAX
3
The Quayle Conjecture

• Our party has been accused of fooling the
  public by calling tax increases revenue
  enhancement. Not so. No one was fooled.-- J.
  Danforth Quayle, V.P., 1989-1993

4
A Paradox?

• Leading economists and climate scientists
  advocate a CO2 tax
• Few US politicians mention a CO2 tax
• Meanwhile, the carbon offset (and credit)
  industry allows people to voluntarily pay more

5
Attribute Framing

• Labels make a big difference
• People pay more for 75 lean than 25 fat (Levin
  Gaeth, 1988)
• Doctors patients prefer survival rate to
  mortality rate (Marteau, 1980 McNeil, Pauker,
  Sox Tversky, 1982)
• Women, but not men, prefer an 80 fat-free
  chocolate bar (Braun, Gaeth Levin, 1997)

6
Political Ideology

• Strong, reliable individual differences based on
  political conservatism (Jost, 2006)
• Conservatives sensitive to the labeling of
  financial options (Morris, Carranza Fox, in
  press)
• Perhaps conservatives are uniquely sensitive to
  the tax label

7
Predictions

1. More support for the offset label than the tax
   label
2. More support among Democrats than Republicans
   across conditions
3. Republicans more strongly affected by the
   labeling

8
Study 1 Participants

• 275 US Residents
• Mean age 41 (SD 13)
• Recruited and run online
• 38 Democrats, 25 Republicans, 37 none of the
  above
• No significant demographic differences among
  parties

9
Study 1 Methods

• Proposal to increase cost of certain products
  believed to contribute to global warming through
  energy use and resulting CO2 emissions
• Price increases would fund programs to decrease
  CO2 levels by funding alternative energies or
  carbon sequestration
• Proposal described as carbon tax or carbon offset
  (between subjects manipulation)

10
Study 1 Methods

• Suppose you are purchasing a round trip flight
  from Los Angeles to New York city, and you are
  debating between two tickets, one of which
  includes a carbon tax offset. You are debating
  between the following two tickets, which are
  otherwise identical. Which would you choose?

Ticket A Ticket B
392.70 round trip ticketincludes a carbon tax offset 385.00 round trip ticket
11
Study 1 Methods

• How strongly would you prefer Ticket A or Ticket
  B? (-2 Strongly Prefer B to 2 Strongly
  Prefer A)
• Do you think the carbon tax offset included in
  Ticket A should be made mandatory for all airline
  tickets sold in the US? (-3 Definitely Not to 3
  Definitely)

12
Study 1 Methods

• Environmental attitudes questionnaire (NEPr,
  Dunlap et al., 2000)
• Demographic questions, including political
  affiliation

13
Study 1 Flight Choices
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
Offset
Proportion Choosing the Costlier Ticket
0.5
Tax
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Democrat
Independent
Republican
14
Study 1 Flight Choices
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
Offset
Proportion Choosing the Costlier Ticket
0.5
Tax
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Democrat
Independent
Republican
15
Study 1 Flight Choices
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
Offset
Proportion Choosing the Costlier Ticket
0.5
Tax
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Democrat
Independent
Republican
16
Study 1 Flight Choices
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
Offset
Proportion Choosing the Costlier Ticket
0.5
Tax
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Democrat
Independent
Republican
17
Study 1 Gas Choices
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
Offset
Proportion Choosing the Costlier Brand
0.5
Tax
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Democrat
Independent
Republican
18
Study 1 Electricity Choices
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
Offset
Proportion Choosing the Costlier Option
0.5
Tax
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Democrat
Independent
Republican
19
Study 1 Computer Choices
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
Offset
Proportion Choosing the Costlier Computer
0.5
Tax
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Democrat
Independent
Republican
20
Study 1 Preferences
2
1.5
1
0.5
Offset
Mean Preference for the More Costly Product
0
Tax
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2
Democrat
Independent
Republican
21
Study 1 Support for Regulation
3
2
1
Offset
Mean Support for Regulation
0
Tax
-1
-2
-3
Democrat
Independent
Republican
22
What About Environmental Attitudes?
16
14
12
10
Mean NEPr
8
6
4
2
0
Democrat
Independent
Republican
23
Study 1 Environmental Attitudes
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
Tax
Proportion Choosing the Costlier Option
0.5
Offset
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
25
50
75
100
Environmental Attitudes (NEPr) Quartile
24
Study 1 Education
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
Tax
Proportion Choosing the Costlier Option
0.5
Offset
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
2-Year Degree or Less
Bachelor's Degree
Graduate Degree
25
Study 1 Discussion

• Effect of labeling depended on political
  affiliation
• Little is known about the cognitive or affective
  processes driving attribute framing effects
• In Study 2, we explored the cognitive mechanisms
  underlying preference construction

26
Query Theory (Johnson et al., 2007)

• Preferences constructed from memory
• Series of mental queries for and against each
  option
• The resulting balance of evidence determines your
  preference
• Order matters due to output interference, the
  second query generates less support

27
Query Theory Empirical Support

• Endowment effect ownership changes the order of
  queries (Johnson et al., 2007)
• Intertemporal choice accelerate-delay effect
  (Weber et al., 2007)
• Reversing the natural order of queries eliminates
  these effects

28
Query Theory Hypotheses

• Label will affect ordering of thoughts supporting
  or opposed to carbon fee
• Republicans will have immediate, negative
  thoughts in response to the tax label
• The ordering will affect the balance of support,
  in turn predicting choices

29
Study 2 Participants

• 373 US Residents
• 39 Democrats, 21 Republicans, 24 Independents,
  16 none of the above

30
Study 2 Methods

• Participants practiced listing their thoughts
• Read description of tax/offset program
• Listed thoughts about the two airline tickets
• Indicated their choice, preference strength, and
  support for regulation
• Self-coded their thoughts
• Reported demographics

31
Study 2 Choices
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
Offset
Proportion Choosing the Costlier Ticket
0.5
Tax
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Democrat
Independent
Republican
32
Study 2 Choices
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
Offset
Proportion Choosing the Costlier Ticket
0.5
Tax
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Democrat
Independent
Republican
33
Study 2 Number of Thoughts

• Participants listed 2.7 thoughts (SD 1.4)
• No effect of party or frame

34
Thought Examples

• good for the environment
• carbon offset is not that much more than regular
  ticket
• what does the extra money do to offset the carbon

35
Thought Examples

• we are taxed too much
• I don't want to pay additional tax

36
Thought Examples

• Why would I ever pay extra for this?
• I really don't care about a 'carbon tax'
• If it's the same thing, get rid of the tax
• The government needs to stop taxing us randomly
• I will be old or dead by the time this world has
  an energy crisis
• And by that i mean a huge one where we are all
  fed
• This is a ridiculous thought to have

37
Thought Examples

• tree huggers
• how do I really know which one has carbon
  emissions?
• save the world

38
Order of Thoughts

• Order calculated as the Standardized Median Rank
  Difference (SMRD)
• SMRD scores vary from 1 (supportive thoughts
  first) to -1 (opposed thoughts first)

39
Study 2 Order of Thoughts
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
Offset
Mean SMRD Score
0
Tax
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
-0.5
Democrat
Independent
Republican
40
Study 2 Content of Thoughts
2
1.5
1
0.5
Offset
Mean Supporting Minus Opposed Thoughts
0
Tax
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2
Democrat
Independent
Republican
41
Study 2 Thought Order and Content

• Order content highly correlated, r .68, p lt
  .001.

42
Study 2 Mediation
Frame x Party
ß 0.82, p lt .0001
Choice
43
Study 2 Mediation
Order Balance of Thoughts
ß 0.23, p lt .05 ß 0.87, p lt .0001
ß 0.84, p lt .0001 ß 1.43, p lt .0001
Frame x Party
Choice
44
Study 2 Mediation
Order Balance of Thoughts
ß 0.23, p lt .05 ß 0.87, p lt .0001
ß 1.43, p lt .0001 ß 0.84, p lt .0001
Frame x Party
ß 0.82, p lt .0001
Choice
(ß 0.59, p .054)
Sobel Test, Order z 2.3, p lt .05 Sobel Test,
Content z 3.0, p lt .001
45
Study 2 Education
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
Tax
Proportion Choosing the Costlier Product
0.5
Offset
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
2-Year Degree or Less
Bachelor's Degree
Graduate Degree
46
Study 2 Discussion

• Replicates Study 1
• As predicted by Query Theory, differential
  framing effect driven by a cognitive difference
  in the order balance of thoughts supporting
  each option

47
Future Directions

• Consequential choices
• Hot-button word for Democrats?

48
Thanks to...

• My co-authors, Elke Eric
• The National Science Foundation, SES-03455840 and
  SES-0352062
• The National Institute on Aging, 5R01AG027934-02
• The CRED and PAM labs

49
Thank You!!!
50
A Dirty Word Or A Dirty World?

• Attribute Framing, Politics, and Query Theory

David Hardisty, Eric Johnson Elke
Weber Columbia University NSF SES-03455840
SES-0352062 NIA 5R01AG027934-02
51
(No Transcript)
52
References

• Braun, K. A., Gaeth, G. J. Levin, I. P. (1997).
  Framing effects with differential impact The
  role of attribute salience. Advances in Consumer
  Research, 24, 405-411.
• Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G.
  Jones, R. E. (2000). Measuring endorsement of the
  new ecological paradigm A revised nep scale.
  Journal of Social Issues, 56, 425-442.
• Levin, I. P. Gaeth, G. J. (1988). Framing of
  attribute information before and after consuming
  the product. . Journal of Consumer Research, 15,
  374-378.
• Marteau, T. M. (1980). Framing of information
  Its influence upon decisions of doctors and
  patients. British Journal of Social Psychology,
  28, 89-94.
• McNeil, B. J., Pauker, S. G., Sox, H. C.
  Tversky, A. (1982). On the elicitation of
  preferences for alternative therapies. New
  England Journal of Medicine, 306, 1259-1262.
• Morris, M. W., Carranza, E. Fox, C. R. (In
  Press). Activating conservative political
  identities induces "Conservative" Financial
  decisions. Psychological Science.
• Johnson, E. J., Haubl, G. Keinan, A. (2007).
  Aspects of endowment A query theory of value.
  Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning,
  Memory, and Cognition, 33, 461-474.
• Jost, J. T. (2006). The end of ideology. American
  Psychologist, 61, 651-670.
• Watson, D., Clark, A. L. Tellegen, A. (1988).
  Development and validation of brief measures of
  positive and negative affect The PANAS scales.
  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54,
  1063-1070.
• Weber, E. U., Johnson, E. J., Milch, K. F.,
  Chang, H., Brodscholl, J. C. Goldstein, D. G.
  (2007). Asymmetric discounting in intertemporal
  choice. Psychological Science, 18, 516-523.

53
Study 2 Positive Affect
4
3.5
3
Offset
Mean Positive Affect
2.5
Tax
2
1.5
1
Democrat
Independent
Republican
54
Study 2 Negative Affect
4
3.5
3
Offset
Mean Negative Affect
2.5
Tax
2
1.5
1
Democrat
Independent
Republican
55
Study 1 Fee Description
The following questions will ask you to choose
between two products, one of which includes
paying for carbon emissions. As you may know,
carbon dioxide emissions are produced by many
human activities, such as driving, flying, or
using electricity. According to the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC),
an international panel of credible scientists who
study the issue, these carbon emissions
contribute to global warming. The carbon you
produce can be balanced out through measures such
as planting trees, which absorb carbon, or
funding alternative energy sources, which reduces
reliance on polluting energy sources such as
coal. The goal of a carbon tax, which may or may
not be mandatory, is therefore to fund these
efforts and ensure that the price of an activity
reflects the true cost to society. The goal of a
carbon offset, which may or may not be mandatory,
is therefore to make an activity carbon neutral
-- meaning that there is no net contribution to
global warming.We would like you to tell us
your preference for products in which one may
address the issue, removing the amount of carbon
that you would contribute by using the product.
We are interested in your opinions, that is your
best guess of what you would do if you really
faced these choices. Note that all prices and
costs in the following questions are actual, real
world prices and costs.
56
Study 2 Fee Description
The following questions will ask you to choose
between two products, both of which cause some
carbon emissions, but only one of which includes
payment for compensating those emissions. As
you may know, carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are
produced by many human activities, such as
driving, flying, or using electricity. According
to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC), an international panel of credible
scientists who study the issue, these carbon
emissions contribute to global warming. The
carbon you produce can be balanced out through
measures such as funding alternative energy
sources (which reduces reliance on polluting
energy sources such as coal), or carbon
sequestration (which traps greenhouse gases so
they do not enter the atmosphere). The goal of a
carbon tax offset is therefore to fund these
activities and ensure that the cost of an
activity reflects its true cost to society.
Policymakers are considering a mandatory carbon
tax offset program which would raise the cost
of certain products and services but make these
activities carbon neutral through reputable
measures such as those described above. We
would like you to tell us your preferences for
products which do or do not include a carbon tax
offset. We are interested in your opinions,
that is your best guess of what you would do if
you really faced these choices. Note that all
prices and costs in the following questions are
actual, real world prices and costs.
57
Computing Order of Thoughts

• Order calculated as the Standardized Median Rank
  Difference (SMRD)
• SMRD 2(MRoMRs)/n
• MRo median rank of aspects opposed to the more
  expensive option in the list of aspects
• MRs median rank of aspects supporting the less
  expensive option in the list of aspects
• n total number of aspects listed
• SMRD scores vary from 1 (supportive thoughts
  first) to -1 (opposed thoughts first)

58
(No Transcript)