Abstinence and price effects on demand for cigarettes: a behavioral-economic analysis
Abstinence and price effects on demand for cigarettes: a behavioral-economic analysis
复制标题
DOI：
10.1046/j.1360-0443.1999.94457712.x
复制
发表时间：
1999-04-01
期刊：
影响因子：
6
通讯作者：
Bickel, WK
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Madden, GJ;Bickel, WK
目标。考察香烟定价和戒烟对吸烟的单独和联合影响。设计。在受试者内设计中，参与者经历了所有水平的价格和禁欲条件。设置。实验室条件。参与者。9个人类吸烟者。干预。在不同的戒烟（5小时以上不吸烟）和非戒烟条件下，香烟价格被操纵在60倍的范围内（0.02- 1.20美元）。参与者通过拉动响应柱塞（每拉动100次0.1美元）来赚钱，他们可以自己留着钱，也可以把钱花在香烟上。测量。总响应产出，卷烟消费，需求的价格弹性和消费模式。发现。实验前，参与者在戒烟时比在自由吸烟时更快地把钱花在了香烟上，而在香烟上花钱的延迟是价格线性增长的函数。戒烟对吸烟率的影响是香烟可购买价格的函数。在价格较低的情况下，戒烟者每次抽更多的烟，但在价格较高的情况下，这种差异可以忽略不计。禁欲和不禁欲的效果是暂时的，并且在疗程的后90分钟趋于减弱。在实验的前半段，戒烟组对香烟的需求比不戒烟组更缺乏弹性，这表明戒烟组对价格上涨相对不敏感。结论。行为经济学程序和措施对戒烟操纵很敏感，本文采用的实验室方法可能有助于评估旨在减少吸烟的公共政策举措的可能效果。
Aims. To examine the separate and combined effects of cigarette pricing and cigarette abstinence on smoking. Design. Within-subject design in which participants experienced all levels of price and abstinence conditions. Setting. Laboratory conditions. Participants. Nine human cigarette smokers. Intervention. Cigarette prices were manipulated across a 60-fold range (US$0.02-$1.20) in separate abstinent (5 + hours of non-smoking) and non-abstinent conditions. Participants earned money by pulling a response plunger (US$0.10 per 100 pulls) and could either keep the money or spend it on cigarette puffs. Measurements. Total response output, cigarette consumption, price elasticity of demand and spending patterns. Findings. Participants spent their earnings on cigarette puffs more quickly when abstinent than when they had smoked ad libitum before the session, and latency to spend money on puffs was a linear increasing function of price. Effects of abstinence on rates of smoking were a function of the price at which cigarette puffs could be purchased. At low prices participants smoked more puffs per session when abstinent, but this difference was negligible at high puff prices. Abstinence and non-abstinence effects were temporary, and tended to wane in the second 90 minutes of the sessions. During the first half of the sessions, demand for cigarettes war more inelastic during the abstinent condition than the non-abstinent condition, indicating relative insensitivity to price increases when abstinent. Conclusions. Behavioral-economic procedures and measures are sensitive to cigarette-abstinence manipulations and the laboratory methods employed here may prove beneficial in evaluating the probable effects of public-policy initiatives designed to reduce cigarette use.