The COVID-19 outbreak has become one of the largest public health crises of our time. Governments have responded by implementing self-isolation and physical distancing measures that have profoundly impacted daily life throughout the world. In this study, we aimed to investigate how people experience the activities, interactions, and settings of their lives during the pandemic. The sample (N = 604) was assessed in Ireland on the 25 March 2020, following the closure of schools and non-essential businesses. We examined within-person variance in emotional well-being and how people spend their time. We found that while most time was spent in the home (74%), time spent outdoors (8%) was associated with markedly raised positive affect and reduced negative emotions. Exercising, going for walks, gardening, pursuing hobbies, and taking care of children were the activities associated with the greatest affective benefits. Home-schooling children and obtaining information about COVID-19 were ranked lowest of all activities in terms of emotional experience. These findings highlight activities that may play a protective role in relation to well-being during the pandemic, the importance of setting limits for exposure to COVID-19-related media coverage, and the need for greater educational supports to facilitate home-schooling during this challenging period.
The paper deals with impulsive consumption and highlights the roles that cognitive and motivational aspects of reflexive thought (namely self-control and self-image motives, respectively) play in intertemporal decisions. While self-control inhibits individuals from consuming impulsively, self-image motives can induce impulsive consumption. Based on recent neuroscientific findings about 'wanting'-'liking' dissociations, the paper presents a potential motivational mechanism underlying such impulsive consumption decisions. Utilizing the knowledge of this mechanism and acknowledging both cognitive and motivational aspects of reflexive thought, the paper expands on three libertarian paternalistic means to foster an ethical way of impulsive consumption: strengthening willpower, reducing impulsive desires to consume, and guiding impulsive behavior in ethical directions by making salient certain self-images that favor ethical consumption.
Insights from the behavioural sciences are increasingly used by governments and other organizations worldwide to ‘nudge’ people to make better decisions. Furthermore, a large philosophical literature has emerged on the ethical considerations on nudging human behaviour that has presented key challenges for the area, but is regularly omitted from discussion of policy design and administration. We present and discuss FORGOOD, an ethics framework that synthesizes the debate on the ethics of nudging in a memorable mnemonic. It suggests that nudgers should consider seven core ethical dimensions: Fairness, Openness, Respect, Goals, Opinions, Options and Delegation. The framework is designed to capture the key considerations in the philosophical debate about nudging human behaviour, while also being accessible for use in a range of public policy settings, as well as training.
The COVID-19 outbreak has become one of the largest public health crises of our time. Governments have responded by implementing self-isolation and physical distancing measures that have profoundly impacted daily life throughout the world. In this study, we aimed to investigate how people experience the activities, interactions, and settings of their lives during the pandemic. The sample (N = 604) were assessed in Ireland on the 25th March, 2020, following the closure of schools and non-essential businesses. We examined within-person variance in emotional well-being and how people spend their time. We found that while most time was spent in the home (74%), time spent outdoors (8%) was associated with markedly raised positive affect and reduced negative emotions. Exercising, going for walks, gardening, pursuing hobbies and taking care of children were the activities associated with the greatest affective benefits. Home schooling children and obtaining information about COVID-19 were ranked lowest of all activities in terms of emotional experience. These findings highlight activities that may play a protective role in relation to well-being during the pandemic, the importance of setting limits for exposure to COVID-19 related media coverage, and the need for greater educational supports to facilitate home schooling during this challenging period.
Everyday life is full of self-control problems. The economist's favorite explanation for self-control problems is present bias. This paper tests whether experimentally elicited present bias predicts self-control problems in everyday life. We measure present bias by using a standard incentivized delay discounting task and everyday self-control by using the day reconstruction method (DRM). Because this is the first study to measure everyday self-control by using the DRM, we also validate the method by showing that its data replicate key results from the seminal Everyday Temptation Study. We find that present bias does not predict everyday self-control. This points to a distinction between decreasing impatience (as measured in delay discounting tasks) and visceral influences (as occurring in everyday life) as determinants of self-control problems. We argue that decision making research can benefit from the DRM as a cost-effective tool that complements lab and field experiments to better understand economic preference measures and their correlates in everyday life decision making.
Behavioral scientists have begun to research ‘sludge,’ excessive frictions that make it harder for people to do what they want to do. Friction is also an important concept in transaction-cost economics. Nevertheless, sludge has been discussed without explicit referral to transaction costs. Several questions arise from this observation. Is the analogy to friction used differently in both literatures? If so, what are the key differences? If not, should we develop the concept of sludge when the well-established literature on transaction costs already exists? This conceptual article shows that sludge and transaction costs are related, but distinct, concepts, and that the literature on sludge can benefit from incorporating elements from transaction-cost research. For example, we suggest defining sludge as aspects of the choice architecture that lead to the experience of costs, organize sludges using a typology inspired by the transaction-cost literature, highlight specificity, uncertainty, and frequency as important determinants of the ‘sludginess’ of choice architecture, and show that sludge audits can be conducted using methods developed in the transaction-cost literature.
This theoretical paper presents an incentive salience model of intertemporal choice. The model is a variation of the quasi-hyperbolic discounting model. Based on the distinction between ‘wanting' and ‘liking', the paper presents one possible explanation of impulsive choices of smaller sooner rewards instead of larger later ones. These impulsive choices are induced by cues that trigger strong motivational ‘wanting' to obtain smaller sooner rewards, but do not necessarily influence the degree to which the rewards are ‘liked'. Cue-triggered ‘wanting' can occur when an individual is in a specific need deprivation state, perceives a cue previously associated with an immediately obtainable reward, knows that the cued reward can reduce the current deprivation state, and lacks self-control. Attributable to the integration of cue-triggered ‘wanting' into an intertemporal choice model, the incentive salience can account for anomalies in intertemporal choice such as present-biased preferences and the domain effect
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.