ABSTRACT
Tax authorities utilize a wide range of instruments to motivate honest taxpaying ranging from strict audits to fair procedures or personalized support, differing from country to country. However, little is known about how these different instruments and taxpayers' trust influence the generation of interaction climates between tax authorities and taxpayers, motivations to comply, and particularly, tax compliance. The present research examines the extended slippery slope framework (eSSF), which distinguishes tax authorities' instruments into different qualities of power of authority (coercive and legitimate) and trust in authorities (reason-based and implicit), to shed light on the effect of differences between power and trust. We test eSSF assumptions with survey data from taxpayers from three culturally different countries (N = 700) who also vary concerning their perceptions of power, trust, interaction climates, and tax motivations. Results support assumptions of the eSSF. Across all countries, the relation of coercive power and tax compliance was mediated by implicit trust. The connection from legitimate power to tax compliance is partially mediated by reason-based trust. The relationship between implicit trust and tax compliance is mediated by a confidence climate and committed cooperation. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
ABSTRACT
Mate value is a construct that can be measured in various ways, ranging from complex but difficult-to-obtain ratings all the way to single-item self-report measures. Due to low sample sizes in previous studies, little is known about the relationship between mate value and demographic variables. In this article, we tested the Mate Value Scale, a relatively new, short, 4-item self-report measure in two large samples. In the first sample of over 1,000, mostly college-age participants, the scale was found to be reliable and correlated with criterion variables in expected ways. In the second, larger sample, which included over 21,000 participants, we have tested for differences across demographics. Contrary to theoretical expectations and previous findings with smaller samples, the differences were either very small (sexual orientation, age, education) or small (sex, socioeconomic status, relationship status) in terms of their effect size. This suggests that the scale is not measuring "objective" mate value (as understood either in terms of fitness or actual mating decisions by potential partners on the "market"), but a self-perception of it, open to social comparison, relative standards, possibly even biases, raising questions about measuring self-perceived versus objective mate value.
