Abstract Many opponents of BIG programs believe that receiving guaranteed subsistence income would act as a strong disincentive to work. In contrast, various areas of empirical research in psychology (studies of intrinsic motivation; non-pecuniary benefits of work on social identity and purpose; and reactions to financial windfalls such as lottery winnings) suggest that a BIG would not lead to meaningful reductions in work. To test these competing predictions, a comprehensive review of BIG outcome studies reporting data on adult labor responses was conducted. The results indicate that 93 % of reported outcomes support the prediction of no meaningful work reductions when the criterion for support is set at less than a 5 % decrease in either average hours worked per week or the rate of labor participation. Overall, these results indicate that adult labor responses would show no substantial impact following a BIG intervention.

中文翻译：

---

基本收入保证会降低工作积极性吗？对 16 项试验计划中的劳工反应的分析

摘要 许多 BIG 计划的反对者认为，获得有保障的生活收入会严重抑制工作。相比之下，心理学的各个实证研究领域（内在动机研究；社会认同和目的工作的非金钱利益；以及对诸如彩票奖金之类的经济意外的反应）表明，BIG 不会导致有意义的工作减少. 为了测试这些相互竞争的预测，对报告成人分娩反应数据的 BIG 结果研究进行了全面审查。结果表明，当支持标准设定为每周平均工作时间或劳动参与率的减少少于 5% 时，93% 的报告结果支持没有有意义的工作减少的预测。全面的，