All projects: Gel, Jobs, Gootodo, Games, Uncle Mark, Goovite, Blog, Bit Literacy
Behavior based on words "bonus" and "rebate"
UChicago prof: "If Congress and President Bush want to increase consumer spending, they should have pitched these $600 and $1,200 checks as 'tax bonuses' instead." His behavioral experiments suggest that giving people money and calling it a "bonus" causes them to spend it more freely than if it's called a "rebate."
(I know there are lots of political opinions on whether we should even have tax rebates/bonuses at all... here I'm just pointing out the power of framing an issue in different ways...)
Paging Frank Luntz! The researchers make an interesting distinction that has been true in ecnomoic theory for years: how you present an economic benefit (or disincentive) matters almost as much as the actual "value" of that benefit. I'm wondering how quickly the Republicans (or Democrats) will pick up on it. You may recall Luntz as the guy who coached Republicans to say "death tax" instead of "inheritance tax" in order to get a bill passed favoring the elimination of said tax on the wealthiest individuals. Words can be used for good and ill; maybe this is an opportunity to better stimulate the economy via selective phrasing, maybe not. If two words repeated enough, like "swift boat" and "flip flopper," can sink a candidate, who knows? It'll be interesting to see if the word "bonus" becomes a talking point - for either party -- as they try to pass this most recent stimulus package.