{"title":"The rhetoric of reaction, extended","authors":"N. Chater, G. Loewenstein","doi":"10.1017/bpp.2022.35","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2022.35","url":null,"abstract":"Sunstein (2022) reconsiders Hirschman’s influential discussion of three types of “rhetoric of reaction,” by which reform is opposed by suggesting that it will have the opposite effect to that intended (Perversity), won’t work (Futility), or will have negative unintended consequences (Jeopardy). Sunstein suggests that just such rhetoric is at work in critiques (including our own, Chater & Loewenstein, in press) of “nudges” as a public policy tool. We argue, by contrast, that reactionary forces, especially including powerful commercial interests, have developed a fourth rhetorical strategy, more indirect, but just as powerful as Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy: the strategy of blaming the individual for societal problems. Blaming the individual for their carbon footprint, obesity, or failure to prepare adequately for retirement promotes the view that solutions to societal problems should primarily aim to help individuals make better choices (e.g., through better education, providing information, or judicious nudging). Thus, individual-level interventions are touted as an alternative to more fundamental, systemic reform.","PeriodicalId":29777,"journal":{"name":"Behavioural Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2022-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46220667","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The elements of choice: why the way we decide matters Eric J. Johnson, Oneworld Publications (10 Feb. 2022)","authors":"K. Ruggeri","doi":"10.1017/bpp.2022.37","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2022.37","url":null,"abstract":"While creating unprecedented challenges for societies writ large, the past few years have also been a remarkable era for landmark boost in the writing of value to behavioral scientists. This has occurred through broad media coverage of behavioral policies, new textbooks proliferating along with a growing number of higher education courses on the subject, and increased recognition in government and science. Without a doubt, it is clearly a period of visibility in the field. The Elements of Choice: Why the Way We Decide Matters, Eric Johnson’s long-awaited magnum opus from 2021, is perfectly suited for its time, giving us two missing aspects from that growing literature base: the “elements” and the “why”. Elements gives readers not only the major ideas of decision science from the past few centuries but breaks down our understanding of the reasons behind choices in a way few books have – methodically, emotionally, and comprehensively.","PeriodicalId":29777,"journal":{"name":"Behavioural Public Policy","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2022-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41314068","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Review of Nudge: The Final Edition Paperback – 19 Aug 2021 Richard H. Thaler, Cass R. Sunstein. Allen Lane, Penguin Books Random House, (2021)","authors":"K. Ruggeri","doi":"10.1017/bpp.2022.38","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2022.38","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":29777,"journal":{"name":"Behavioural Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2022-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48568431","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"But does the nudge fit? Institutional structure and behavioural insights","authors":"Weston Merrick","doi":"10.1017/bpp.2022.36","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2022.36","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Behavioural science has found growing application in applied public policy settings, offering a vast literature to bring to bear on apparent cognitive errors. The potential, however, is not without peril. Policymakers and scholars may draw unwarranted confidence that successful behavioural interventions from elsewhere will replicate in their institutional settings. In this research, I partner with Minneapolis Public Housing and use a design-based approach to identify interventions that can reduce eviction actions. This study presents three vignettes that demonstrate and categorize the mistakes behavioural science can make when it fails to understand how formal and informal institutional features influence decision-making. But, in integrating methods and theories from the design sciences, public policy and public administration, we have the potential to create behavioural interventions that fit the social context.","PeriodicalId":29777,"journal":{"name":"Behavioural Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2022-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45206229","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ruth Persian, Gitarani Prastuti, Adityawarman, Daniel Bogiatzis-Gibbons, Muhammad Hakim Kurniawan, Gatot Subroto, Muhammad Mustakim, Laurenz Scheunemann, K. Gandy, A. Sutherland
{"title":"Behavioural prompts to increase early filing of tax returns: a population-level randomised controlled trial of 11.2 million taxpayers in Indonesia","authors":"Ruth Persian, Gitarani Prastuti, Adityawarman, Daniel Bogiatzis-Gibbons, Muhammad Hakim Kurniawan, Gatot Subroto, Muhammad Mustakim, Laurenz Scheunemann, K. Gandy, A. Sutherland","doi":"10.1017/bpp.2022.25","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2022.25","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In Indonesia, as in other countries, a large proportion of tax returns are filed at the last minute. In a population-wide randomised controlled trial (n = 11,157,069), we evaluated the impact of behavioural email prompts on the proportion of annual tax returns filed at least two weeks before the deadline; and overall filing rate. In two control conditions, taxpayers either received no email or an email used in prior years, emphasising regulatory information. The five treatments informed by behavioural science were (1) a simplified version of the existing email, emphasising early filing; (2) the simplified version with additional guidance on filing taxes; (3) the simplified version with a planning prompt and option to sign up for email reminders; (4) a version combining treatments 1, 2 and 3; and (5) an email appealing to national pride. Compared to the no-email control, all emails led to a statistically significant increase in early and overall filing rates. The planning email (3) was the most effective, increasing early filling from 34.9% to 37% (b 2.07 percentage points (pp), p < 0.001, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.97–2.17pp), and overall filing from 65.6% to 66.7% (b 1.10pp, p < 0.001, 95% CI 0.99–1.19pp).","PeriodicalId":29777,"journal":{"name":"Behavioural Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43264280","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Carrots, sticks, sermons or nudges? Survey evidence of the Swedish general public's attitude towards different public policy tools","authors":"Patric Andersson, Gustav Almqvist","doi":"10.1017/bpp.2022.31","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2022.31","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article reports on a survey study comparing the general public's attitude towards nudging to its attitude towards the traditional tools of government: information, subsidies, taxes and mandates. The study was based on responses from a representative sample of the adult Swedish population. In separate evaluations, the respondents rated how positively or negatively they perceived a set of specific policy tools, traditional and behavioral, across different policy goals. Overall, information and subsidies were more positively perceived than the other types of policy tools, nudging included. Respondents’ attitudes towards the policy tools were partly explained by individualistic ideological views, whether they agreed with the intended policy goals, and certain socio-demographic variables. Implications for future research and public policy are discussed.","PeriodicalId":29777,"journal":{"name":"Behavioural Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48744046","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
F. Bogliacino, R. Charris, Cristiano Codagnone, F. Folkvord, Felipe Montealegre, F. Lupiáñez-Villanueva
{"title":"Unfair commercial practices in a pit market: evidence from an artefactual field experiment","authors":"F. Bogliacino, R. Charris, Cristiano Codagnone, F. Folkvord, Felipe Montealegre, F. Lupiáñez-Villanueva","doi":"10.1017/bpp.2022.33","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2022.33","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Commercial practices such as drip pricing, reference pricing and best-price guarantee can be used to set higher prices and mislead consumers, but protective measures can restore efficiency. In a placebo-controlled market experiment, we examined a treatment allowing for the use and misuse of commercial practices. Three additional treatments tested the effects of formal sanctions, informal sanctions and a regret nudge. We found that commercial practices led to higher prices, cheating was systematic and regret nudging was ineffective. Furthermore, formal and informal sanctions reduced both the likelihood of using commercial practices and the likelihood of cheating, leading to welfare increases.","PeriodicalId":29777,"journal":{"name":"Behavioural Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49088451","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"BPP volume 6 issue 4 Cover and Front matter","authors":"R. Hanania, S. C. Andersen","doi":"10.1017/bpp.2022.29","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2022.29","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":29777,"journal":{"name":"Behavioural Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":"f1 - f4"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2022-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47287134","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
K. De-loyde, M. Pilling, Amelia Thornton, G. Spencer, O. Maynard
{"title":"Promoting sustainable diets using eco-labelling and social nudges: a randomised online experiment","authors":"K. De-loyde, M. Pilling, Amelia Thornton, G. Spencer, O. Maynard","doi":"10.1017/bpp.2022.27","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2022.27","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This randomised online experiment aimed to investigate how eco-labelling and social nudging influenced sustainable food choice, as well as consider the effect of motivation to act sustainably. Participants were UK adults ≥18 years (n = 1399). Participants were asked to choose a hypothetical meal (beef, chicken or vegetarian burrito) and were randomly allocated to one of three conditions varying in labelling: eco-labelling; social nudge or control (no label). Co-primary outcomes were the frequency that the vegetarian and chicken burritos were chosen (i.e., the more sustainable food choices). There was evidence that more vegetarian (OR = 3.3 [95% CI 2.0, 5.3]) and chicken (OR = 2.5 [95% CI 1.8, 3.4]) burrito choices were made in the eco-label condition, over the beef burrito, compared to the control condition. In the social nudge condition, there was evidence that participants chose a vegetarian burrito over a beef burrito (OR = 1.7 [95% CI 1.1, 2.7]), but not a vegetarian burrito over a chicken burrito (OR = 1.4 [95% CI 0.9, 2.2]). Although both labels were effective at promoting participants to make more sustainable food choices, the eco-label was the most effective. Choice of burrito was modified by motivation to act sustainably across all conditions. This study suggests that future policy could include eco-labelling and/or a social nudge to reduce meat consumption and meet global climate change targets.","PeriodicalId":29777,"journal":{"name":"Behavioural Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2022-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47694318","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Do nudges increase consumer search and switching? Evidence from financial markets","authors":"Zita Vasas","doi":"10.1017/bpp.2022.23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2022.23","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 As nudge interventions have become more popular, academic research is developing that assesses to what extent these interventions are effective. My paper contributes to this stream of research: collating and synthesising evidence on the effectiveness of nudge interventions that aim to increase consumer search and switching in retail financial markets. Following a systematic search strategy, I identify 35 relevant papers, including qualitative studies, laboratory experiments, field experiments and ex post analyses, covering a range of retail financial products and different types of nudges. The review results in two main contributions. First, it demonstrates that different study designs serve different purposes in evidence accumulation. Second, based on over 400 estimates extracted from these papers, it establishes that the currently available evidence shows that nudges increase consumer search and switching in retail financial markets by 2–3 percentage points on average. Structural nudges that change the choice architecture more profoundly have a higher impact on search and switching than nudges that provide, simplify or highlight information. While nudge interventions may be efficient on a cost–benefit basis and can lead to a large increase in relative terms (e.g. doubling switching rates from 1% to 2%), regulators cannot expect them to significantly alter consumer behaviour.","PeriodicalId":29777,"journal":{"name":"Behavioural Public Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1,"publicationDate":"2022-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45920699","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}