pump-priming...behavioural economics：提防“水滴定價”：Illuminating advice on the dark art of ‘drip pricing’

 最近讀K. J. Wu 轉來的洪蘭教授的"負面言語讓人「未戰先敗」"
其中引用 Daniel Kahneman的一些想法
不過我認為洪教授太盡信書

 .......諾貝爾經濟獎得主康納曼（D.  Kahneman）在他的新書《Thinking, fast and slow  》中說，香蕉和嘔吐這兩個字本不相干，但是一旦把它們放在一起，會馬上令人感到不愉快。
大腦會自動作時間的序列，把香蕉和嘔吐連成因果，你就對香蕉產生暫時性的反感，連帶對黃色水果也不喜歡了。
這個自動化聯結所產生的作用，並不限於概念和文字，它甚至會改變你的行為。
 紐約大學心理系教授巴夫請學生從五個字中選四個字出來造句，如：find（發現）、he（他）、if（如果）、yellow（黃色）、instantly（立即）。另一組學生看到的字則是與「老」有關，如：forgetful（健忘的）、bald（禿頭的）、gray（灰色的）、wrinkle（皺紋）。
做完之後，學生要到走廊另一端的實驗室去做另一個實驗。他測量學生走過走廊的時間，結果發現，那些看到跟「老」相關字組的大學生，走的時間比看中性字組來得慢。原因在於，「健忘」、「禿頭」、「皺紋」這些字促發了老的意念；這個意念又促發了行為，使學生走路變慢了。

 這個「促發效應」（priming  effect）非常強烈。即使沒有一個學生注意到，這些字有共同的主題「老」。他們也都堅持，老的念頭從未進入他們心中。然而，他們的行動卻變慢了，這就是所謂的「意念動作效應」（ideomotor effect）。
更可怕的是，這個效應也可以倒過來做，動作也會強化意念。德國的研究者請學生在房間中走五分鐘，每一分鐘走三十步，這是一般大學生步伐速度的三分之一，然後請他們在電腦上辨認一閃而過的單字，結果發現這些慢走的學生，對老年有關的字辨識特別快，如forgetful、old。
 假如你動作像老人，它會強化你老年的思想，這效應是雙向的。因為這暗示的作用是不自覺地發生。官員在談論國家前途時，宜從正向著手去尋找解決方式，不可未戰先敗。........

 現在我們可以查到近日心理學中的一熱門話題/爭議:Priming (psychology)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 此文批評欄中有許多異議和建議:

Criticism

Many of the priming effects could not be replicated in further studies, casting doubt on their effectiveness or even existence.^[43] Nobel Laurate and psychologist Daniel Kahneman has called on social psychologists to check the robustness of priming studies in an open letter to the community, claiming that social psychology has become a "poster child for doubts about the integrity of psychological research."^[44].....

 換句話說  "the priming effects"還只是待詳細驗證的假說.
洪蘭教授似乎過於肯定了.


pump-priming
or pump priming (pŭmp'prī'mĭng)
n.
Government action taken to stimulate the economy, as spending money in the commercial sector, cutting taxes, or reducing interest rates.





提防“水滴定價”
Illuminating advice on the dark art of ‘drip pricing’
作者：英國《金融時報》專欄作家 蒂姆•哈福德2010.8.30
“You inched towards the dark side,” joked one behavioural economist after he read a recent column in which I hinted that his field has some merits. It was a quip that got me thinking, because behavioural economics does indeed have a dark side. Behavioural economists study the psychology of economic decision-making, and if they are any good at their task they will discover something the unscrupulous salesman could use to his advantage.


我曾在近期的一篇專欄中暗示，行為經濟學有一定的價值。讀罷此文，一位行為經濟學家開玩笑說：“你在慢慢滑向黑暗面”。這句一語雙關的話讓我深思，因為行為經濟學的確有其黑暗面。行為經濟學家們研究經濟決策的心理；他們只要擅長自己工作，就會發現某些毫無廉恥的推銷員會籍以牟利的伎倆。


A behavioural economist turned rogue would exploit the “endowment effect” – a tendency for people to put a higher value on something that they feel they already own. He or she would also try to create the sense that consumers would lose out if they did not buy, because people seem to hate the idea of​​ losing £5 much more than they like the idea of​​ gaining £5.


一個從行為經濟學家轉行的無賴會利用“禀賦效應”(endowment effect)——這是一種人們將更高價值賦予感覺自己已擁有物品的趨勢。他（或她）同樣會試圖製造出一種感覺：即如果消費者不購買，他們就會吃虧。因為人們對於失去5英鎊的痛恨，似乎要遠甚於獲得5英鎊的欣喜。


Third, our rogue economist would attempt to suggest an “anchor” value that was much higher than the asking price, which would make the product seem cheap. It doesn't seem to be hard to create such anchor values​​: they can be produced by inviting experimental subjects to write down the last two digits of their social security number.


第三，我們那些無賴經濟學家會嘗試提出一種比索價高出許多“錨定”價值，這使得產品看上去十分廉價。創造這樣的錨定價值看上去並不難：可以邀請體驗者寫下他們社會保險號碼的最後兩位數字。


Fourth, he or she would make the pricing as complex as possible so that people struggled to compare one offer with a rival offer. Fifth, he or she would try to create a sense of social approval – everyone is buying this. Finally, a rogue economist would throw in something free.


第四，他（或她）會盡可能讓定價複雜化，使得人們難以將其與競爭對手的價格進行比較。第五，他（或她）將努力創造一種社會認同感——所有人都在買這種產品。最後，無賴經濟學家會拋出一些贈品。


Many unscrupulous salesmen have figured this advice out for themselves already. Think of infomercials. “The TimCo smokemaster doesn't retail for £200; it doesn't retail for £100; it doesn't retail for £50 … ” (anchoring to a price of £200) … “if our lines are busy, please try later” (social approval) … “the smokemaster is not available in regular stores” (loss aversion) … “but wait! When you buy the TimCo smokemaster you get the TimCo soup knife absolutely free” (complex pricing and use of “free”).


許多寡廉鮮恥的推銷員自己自己想出了這種辦法。不妨想想那些電視購物節目。 “TimCo抽油煙機的售價不是200英鎊，不是100英鎊，也不是50英鎊……”（將價格錨定在200英鎊）……“如果我們線路繁忙，請稍候再撥”(社會認同) ……“本產品不在常規商店出售”(損失厭惡感)……“但請等等！當你購買TimCo抽油煙機時，會免費獲得TimCo湯匙”（複雜的定價方式以及“免費”贈品）。


The UK's Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has been turning to behavioural economists for advice on such tactics, and has found that there is no pricing scheme more pernicious than “drip pricing”. Under the scheme, customers agree to pay a price only to discover that there is a charge for delivery; another charge for paying by credit card, and another for insurance. Drip pricing taps into the endowment effect, because customers feel that they have already made the decision to purchase; it creates loss aversion because customers commit time and effort to the search before being hit with extra charges; and it is a form of complex pricing which makes it hard to compare offers.


英國公平交易辦公室(Office of Fair Trading)一直在向行為經濟學家求助，尋求應對此類伎倆的建議。他們發現，最缺德的花招要算是“水滴定價”。在這種招數中，消費者同意支付一個價格，但不成想隨後送貨要收費；使用信用卡支付也要收費，另外還有保險費。水滴定價利用了禀賦效應，因為客戶覺得自己已做出了購買決定；它形成了損失厭惡感，因為在遭遇額外收費前，消費者已經在求購上投入了時間和精力；同時這也是一種複雜的定價方式，使消費者難以對價格進行比較。


The OFT research, conducted by consultants and academics at University College London, was based on a laboratory experiment in which students sat at a computer and were presented with hypothetical deals from two fictional retailers. The students were beguiled with various marketing tricks and had to decide from whom to purchase, in what quantity, and after how costly a search. There was no trick quite so guaranteed to confound them as drip pricing, in which they were hit first with an extra charge for handling and then with a charge for shipping. (A two-part drip is modest: according to the OFT, one package holiday provider used four unavoidable “drips”, and two computer retailers tacked on seven optional ones.)


由倫敦大學學院(University College London)的顧問和學者進行的OFT研究基於實驗室試驗，在實驗中，一些學生坐在一台電腦前，面對2家虛擬的零售商提供的假想交易。學生們要面對各式各樣的營銷花招，必須決定在付出多大代價的搜索後，從哪家購買，以及購買多大的數量。在讓學生們上當方面，沒有哪種花招像水滴定價那樣十拿九穩。在實驗中，他們先是遇到了處理費用，然後是運費。 （由兩部分組成的水滴定價招數還算是普通的：OFT表示，一家旅行社提供的方案包括4顆無法避免的“水滴”；而2家電腦零售商則附加了7個可選項）。


The OFT has been firing warning shots about drip pricing, but it will have its work cut out to regulate it – there is usually some loophole through which price drippers can slip. Buyers should remember that if they walk away when the drips start to fall, they won't get soaked.


OFT一直在警告人們提防水滴定價。但要對其加以監管，OFT需要下一番力氣——水滴定價者通常都有一些空子可鑽。買家應該記住，如果他們在“水滴”開始下落時離開，就不會被淋濕。


譯者/楊卓