Nudge FORGOOD

Lades, Leonhard K.; Delaney, Liam

doi:10.1017/bpp.2019.53

Cited by 45 publications

(41 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nudge is often thought to 'work better in the dark', undermining its legitimacy (Bovens, 2009). Thaler and Sunstein have justified nudge from type transparency in line with Rawls' publicity principle: a watchful agent may identify the underlying choice architectural change and opt out, making nudge 'in principle token transparent' (Sunstein, 2015;Lades & Delaney, 2019). Yet, this leaves the problem of a lack of autonomy at the point when nudge is being delivered.…”

Section: From Nudge To Nudge Plusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nudge plus: incorporating reflection into behavioral public policy

Banerjee

John

2021

Behav. Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nudge plus is a modification of the toolkit of behavioral public policy. It incorporates an element of reflection – the plus – into the delivery of a nudge, either blended in or made proximate. Nudge plus builds on recent work combining heuristics and deliberation. It may be used to design prosocial interventions that help preserve the autonomy of the agent. The argument turns on seminal work on dual systems, which presents a subtler relationship between fast and slow thinking than commonly assumed in the classic literature in behavioral public policy. We review classic and recent work on dual processes to show that a hybrid is more plausible than the default-interventionist or parallel-competitive framework. We define nudge plus, set out what reflection could entail, provide examples, outline causal mechanisms, and draw testable implications.

show abstract

Section: From Nudge To Nudge Plusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nudge plus: incorporating reflection into behavioral public policy

Banerjee

John

2021

Behav. Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These arguments, and more, have been scrutinized at length in the theoretically driven ethics debate that has flourished in the last decade (for recent overviews, see Lades & Delaney, 2020;Schmidt & Engelen, 2020). However, it can be questioned whether a nudge's level of respect for autonomy should always be assessed solely on theoretical grounds.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experiencing default nudges: autonomy, manipulation, and choice-satisfaction as judged by people themselves

Michaelsen

Johansson

Hedesström

2021

Behav. Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Criticisms of nudging suggest that nudges infringe on decision makers’ autonomy. Yet, little empirical research has explored whether people who are subjected to nudges agree. In three between-group experiments (N = 2083), we subject participants to contrasting choice architectures and measure experiences of autonomy, choice-satisfaction, perceived threat to freedom of choice, and objection to the choice architecture. Participants who received a prosocial opt-out default nudge made more prosocial choices but did not report lower autonomy or choice satisfaction than participants in opt-in default or active-choice conditions. This was the case even when the presence of the nudge was disclosed, and when monetary choice stakes were introduced. With monetary choice stakes, participants perceived the threat to freedom of choice as slightly higher in the nudge condition than in the other conditions, but objection to the choice architecture did not differ between the conditions. Taken together, our results suggest that default nudges are less manipulative and autonomy-infringing than sometimes feared. We recommend that policymakers include measures of choice experiences when testing out new interventions.

show abstract

“…Related to this, a substantial body of public opinion expressed concerns that behavioural science could be used in ways that are manipulative and/or bypassing citizen autonomy. On a longer term, we recommend that further efforts are made by leaders in the field to clarify the ethical features of different behavioural policy tools (e.g., Lades and Delaney, 2020), to embed such tools in day to day practice and to justify policy choices where suitable.…”

Section: Make Behavioural Policy Ethical and Transparentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lessons From the UK's Lockdown: Discourse on Behavioural Science in Times of COVID-19

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years behavioural science has quickly become embedded in national level governance. As the contributions of behavioural science to the UK's COVID-19 response policies in early 2020 became apparent, a debate emerged in the British media about its involvement. This served as a unique opportunity to capture public discourse and representation of behavioural science in a fast-track, high-stake context. We aimed at identifying elements which foster and detract from trust and credibility in emergent scientific contributions to policy making. With this in mind, in Study 1 we use corpus linguistics and network analysis to map the narrative around the key behavioural science actors and concepts which were discussed in the 647 news articles extracted from the 15 most read British newspapers over the 12-week period surrounding the first hard UK lockdown of 2020. We report and discuss (1) the salience of key concepts and actors as the debate unfolded, (2) quantified changes in the polarity of the sentiment expressed toward them and their policy application contexts, and (3) patterns of co-occurrence via network analyses. To establish public discourse surrounding identified themes, in Study 2 we investigate how salience and sentiment of key themes and relations to policy were discussed in original Twitter chatter (N = 2,187). In Study 3, we complement these findings with a qualitative analysis of the subset of news articles which contained the most extreme sentiments (N = 111), providing an in-depth perspective of sentiments and discourse developed around keywords, as either promoting or undermining their credibility in, and trust toward behaviourally informed policy. We discuss our findings in light of the integration of behavioural science in national policy making under emergency constraints.

show abstract

Nudge FORGOOD

Cited by 45 publications

References 66 publications

Nudge plus: incorporating reflection into behavioral public policy

Nudge plus: incorporating reflection into behavioral public policy

Experiencing default nudges: autonomy, manipulation, and choice-satisfaction as judged by people themselves

Lessons From the UK's Lockdown: Discourse on Behavioural Science in Times of COVID-19

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About