Can nudging only get you so far? Testing for nudge combination effects

Howley, Peter; Ocean, Neel

doi:10.1093/erae/jbab041

Cited by 15 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One can only speculate that the high levels of trust towards research institutions and the familiarity with being contacted and dealing with errands online in Sweden may have led to this greater success rate. For future recruitment, one may also consider sending paper mail invitations, which in the United Kingdom has led to a response rate of more than 7% (Howley & Ocean, 2021).…”

Section: Challenges In Multi-country Replications Of Experiments With...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Farmers' risk preferences in 11 European farming systems: A multi‐country replication of Bocquého et al. (2014)

Rommel

Sagebiel

Baaken

et al. 2022

Applied Eco Perspectives Pol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We replicate Bocquého et al. (2014), who used multiple price lists to investigate the risk preferences of 107 French farmers. We collected new data from 1430 participants in 11 European farming systems. In agreement with the original study, farmers' risk preferences are best described by Cumulative Prospect Theory.The views expressed are purely those of the authors and may not, in any circumstances, be regarded as stating an official position of the European Commission.

show abstract

Section: Challenges In Multi-country Replications Of Experiments With...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Farmers' risk preferences in 11 European farming systems: A multi‐country replication of Bocquého et al. (2014)

Rommel

Sagebiel

Baaken

et al. 2022

Applied Eco Perspectives Pol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, this is a cross-sectional survey with a modest response rate, which may reflect selection bias, for example, respondents’ responses may differ from nonrespondents. Indeed, we know that burnout is high in hospital-based physicians in the aftermath of COVID, 22,23 and those who did respond may have overweighed responses to factors such as bed and staffing capacity that are currently impacting them 20,24,25 . Nevertheless, respondents had heterogeneity in their experience and training level arguing for adequate sampling.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multi-Institution Survey of Accepting Physicians’ Perception of Appropriate Reasons for Interhospital Transfer: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation

Nguyen,

Lee,

Mueller

2024

J Patient Saf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives There is a lack of evidence-based guidelines to direct best practices in interhospital transfers (IHTs). We aimed to identify frontline physicians’ current and ideal reasons for accepting IHT patients to inform future IHT research and guidelines. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional survey of hospitalist physicians across 11 geographically diverse hospitals. The survey asked respondents how frequently they currently consider and should consider various factors when triaging IHT requests. Responses were dichotomized into “highly considered” and “less considered” factors. Frequencies of the “highly considered” factors (current and ideal) were analyzed. Write-in responses were coded into themes within a priori domains in a qualitative analysis. Results Of the 666 hospitalists surveyed, 238 (36%) responded. Respondents most frequently identified the need for specialty procedural and nonprocedural care and bed capacity as factors that should be considered when triaging IHT patients in current and ideal practice, whereas the least frequently considered factors were COVID-related care, insurance/financial considerations, and patient/family preference. More experienced respondents considered patient/family preference more frequently in current and ideal practice compared with less experienced respondents (33% versus 11% [P = 0.0001] and 26% versus 9% [P = 0.01], respectively). Qualitative analysis identified several themes in the domains of Criteria for Acceptance, Threshold for Acceptance, and Indications for Physician-to-Physician Communication. Conclusions This geographically diverse sample of hospitalist physicians responsible for accepting IHT patients showed general agreement between primary factors that are currently and that should be considered for IHT acceptance, with greatest weight placed on patients’ need for specialty care.

show abstract

“…Combining various nudges is often considered a strategy to enhance the likelihood of success, as different individuals may respond diversely to different nudge effects. 37 38 This approach seeks to cast a broader net to appeal to a more extensive spectrum of people and behaviours, leveraging the effects encapsulated in the MINDSPACE. Significantly, there is a considerable overlap among these effects, and the most effective interventions will invariably integrate various elements.…”

Section: Methods and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Nudging towards COVID-19 and influenza vaccination uptake in medically at-risk children: EPIC study protocol of randomised controlled trials in Australian paediatric outpatient clinics

Wang,

Andraweera,

Danchin

et al. 2024

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionChildren with chronic medical diseases are at an unacceptable risk of hospitalisation and death from influenza and SARS-CoV-2 infections. Over the past two decades, behavioural scientists have learnt how to design non-coercive ‘nudge’ interventions to encourage positive health behaviours. Our study aims to evaluate the impact of multicomponent nudge interventions on the uptake of COVID-19 and influenza vaccines in medically at-risk children.Methods and analysesTwo separate randomised controlled trials (RCTs), each with 1038 children, will enrol a total of approximately 2076 children with chronic medical conditions who are attending tertiary hospitals in South Australia, Western Australia and Victoria. Participants will be randomly assigned (1:1) to the standard care or intervention group. The nudge intervention in each RCT will consist of three text message reminders with four behavioural nudges including (1) social norm messages, (2) different messengers through links to short educational videos from a paediatrician, medically at-risk child and parent and nurse, (3) a pledge to have their child or themselves vaccinated and (4) information salience through links to the current guidelines and vaccine safety information. The primary outcome is the proportion of medically at-risk children who receive at least one dose of vaccine within 3 months of randomisation. Logistic regression analysis will be performed to determine the effect of the intervention on the probability of vaccination uptake.Ethics and disseminationThe protocol and study documents have been reviewed and approved by the Women’s and Children’s Health Network Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC/22/WCHN/2022/00082). The results will be published via peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific meetings and public forums.Trial registration numberNCT05613751.

show abstract

Can nudging only get you so far? Testing for nudge combination effects

Cited by 15 publications

References 42 publications

Farmers' risk preferences in 11 European farming systems: A multi‐country replication of Bocquého et al. (2014)

Farmers' risk preferences in 11 European farming systems: A multi‐country replication of Bocquého et al. (2014)

Multi-Institution Survey of Accepting Physicians’ Perception of Appropriate Reasons for Interhospital Transfer: A Mixed-Methods Evaluation

Nudging towards COVID-19 and influenza vaccination uptake in medically at-risk children: EPIC study protocol of randomised controlled trials in Australian paediatric outpatient clinics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About