算法何以成“算计”?——“大数据杀熟”的生成机理、多维影响与治理之道
How Do Algorithms Turn into “Schemes”?—The Generation Mechanism, Multi-Dimensional Impacts and Governance Strategies of “Big Data Price Discrimination”
摘要: “大数据杀熟”作为算法时代价格歧视的典型表现,已成为平台经济治理的焦点与难点。本文系统梳理了学术界相关研究,界定了其内涵与特征;基于经济动因、技术条件和市场环境等视角,揭示其生成机理;从消费者权益、市场竞争秩序及社会信任基础三个维度评估其复合影响;审视现有法律规制在认定、归责上的适用困境及消费者维权的高成本障碍。为此,提出“技术向善–法律约束–多元共治”的协同治理框架:算法层面倡导透明度与可问责性;法律层面推进类型化认定与精细责任;治理层面构建政府监管、平台自律、消费者赋权和社会监督的联动机制,以期实现算法向上向善和平台经济健康有序发展。
Abstract: “Big data price discrimination”, as a typical manifestation of price discrimination in the era of algorithms, has become a focal and challenging point in the governance of the platform economy. This paper systematically reviews relevant academic research, defining its connotations and characteristics. It reveals its generative mechanism from perspectives such as economic motivations, technological conditions, and market environments. The paper evaluates its compound impacts across three dimensions: consumer rights, market competition order, and the foundation of social trust. It also examines the applicability dilemmas of existing legal regulations in terms of identification and liability attribution, as well as the high-cost barriers for consumers seeking redress. To address these issues, this paper proposes a collaborative governance framework of “technology for good - legal constraints - multi-stakeholder co-governance”: advocating for transparency and accountability at the algorithmic level; promoting typified identification and refined liability at the legal level; and constructing a linkage mechanism involving government supervision, platform self-regulation, consumer empowerment, and social oversight at the governance level, with the aim of achieving upward and positive development of algorithms and the healthy and orderly growth of the platform economy.
文章引用:王秋梅. 算法何以成“算计”?——“大数据杀熟”的生成机理、多维影响与治理之道[J]. 电子商务评论, 2026, 15(3): 434-440. https://doi.org/10.12677/ecl.2026.153292

参考文献

[1] 新浪财经. “大数据杀熟”愈演愈烈 去哪儿、携程等OTA平台成被投诉“重灾区”|315消费调查[EB/OL].
https://finance.sina.com.cn/roll/2025-03-15/doc-inepsvux6079050.shtml, 2025-03-18.
[2] 陈兵. 规制“大数据杀熟”: 算法向上向善的治理进路[J]. 人民论坛, 2025(17): 56-60.
[3] 赵传羽, 丁预立, 刘中全. 网络外部性与基于购买行为的价格歧视: “杀熟”的经济学分析[J]. 世界经济, 2023, 46(6): 210-236.
[4] 熊浩, 赵晓岚, 鄢慧丽, 等. 垄断势力视角下平台大数据杀熟的价格歧视机理[J]. 海南大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2025, 43(1): 227-235.
[5] 王美云, 苏永华. 大数据杀熟对顾客忠诚度影响研究[J]. 价格理论与实践, 2023(6): 114-118+211.
[6] 王宇航. 青年群体对“大数据杀熟”的逆向适应[J]. 人民论坛, 2025(10): 69-71.
[7] 许光耀. 大数据杀熟行为的反垄断法调整方法[J]. 政治与法律, 2024(4): 17-29.
[8] 熊浩, 张晨, 鄢慧丽, 等. 维权成本分担下大数据杀熟治理的演化博弈分析[J]. 湖南大学学报(自然科学版), 2025, 52(4): 159-169.
[9] 观察者网. 结果出来了! “大数据杀熟”重灾区在这里[EB/OL].
https://www.guancha.cn/qiche/2024_12_04_757642.shtml, 2024-12-30.
[10] 何昊洋. 大数据杀熟背后的平台私权力及其法律矫正[J]. 重庆大学学报(社会科学版), 2023, 29(6): 220-232.
[11] 胡元聪, 冯一帆. 大数据杀熟中消费者公平交易权保护探究[J]. 陕西师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2022, 51(1): 161-176.
[12] 王苑. 智能时代个性化定价算法的法律规制[J]. 国家检察官学院学报, 2025, 33(3): 73-86.
[13] 李剑. 消费者反对消费者: 分配效应下的消费者权益保护[J]. 社会科学辑刊, 2024(6): 123-135.
[14] 郑鹏程, 龙森. 公共性视角下平台“大数据杀熟”的规制逻辑与路径[J]. 吉首大学学报(社会科学版), 2022, 43(6): 29-40.
[15] 王慧群. 反垄断法上平台差异化定价的类型化认定: 定价权配置的视角[J]. 暨南学报(哲学社会科学版), 2024, 46(12): 17-28.
[16] 朱晓峰, 林睿尧. 论自动化决策中交易条件合理差别待遇的认定[J]. 郑州大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2024, 57(3): 58-67+143.
[17] 朱坤帝. “算法”变“算计”?——大数据时代算法杀熟的法律规制[J]. 东南大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2025, 27(S1): 27-30.
[18] 国家市场监督管理总局. 网络交易平台规则监督管理办法[EB/OL].
https://www.samr.gov.cn/zw/zfxxgk/fdzdgknr/fgs/art/2026/art_85b474fc5a08494bb60ca6a280b98d7d.html, 2026-01-07.