Behavioral economic analysis of demand for fuel in North America.

The authors treated oil like a reinforcer. They built demand curves from public fuel-use data.

They asked: does price change how much a whole continent guzzles?

Even when pump prices jumped, people kept buying almost the same gallons.

The curve stayed flat—classic sign of an inelastic, addictive commodity.

Harrington et al. (2006) first showed that Pmax and Omax track reinforcer strength in the lab. Prigge et al. (2013) lifted those same indices to chart a nation’s “need” for oil.

Hatton et al. (1999) warned that how you raise price—more responses versus more effort—bends the curve. The oil study had to pick one national price proxy, so the lab heads-up mattered.

Foster et al. (2009) compared ways to normalize unlike foods into one demand metric. That choice guided how the team turned cars, trucks, and jets into a single fuel-demand line.

You now have a behavior-analytic lens on big social problems. If fuel acts like an addictive reinforcer, price hikes alone won’t cut use. You can pitch interventions that add effort or substitute reinforcers—tele-work, transit perks, or EV rebates—to bend the curve.