|
on Nudge and Boosting |
|
Issue of 2024–12–02
six papers chosen by Marco Novarese, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale |
| By: | Loukas Balafoutas; Esther Blanco; Raphael Epperson |
| Abstract: | Technological progress offers new and promising ways to provide targeted information to consumers and facilitate behavioral change. We conduct a randomized controlled trial with a global supermarket chain and food producer to evaluate the effectiveness of a targeted information intervention that offers consumers individualized feedback about the sustainability of purchased products and close substitutes. We find that the majority of consumers access the information, independently of whether they have bought sustainable or unsustainable products in the past. Yet, providing the targeted information has no significant impact on consumption choices, which is neither driven by inattention to information nor price differentials. |
| Keywords: | Information provision, pro-environmental behavior, sustainability, label credence goods, randomized controlled trial |
| JEL: | D12 D82 Q53 |
| Date: | 2024–10 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:inn:wpaper:2024-10 |
| By: | Wendt, Charlotte; Kosin, Dominick; Adam, Martin; Benlian, Alexander |
| Abstract: | The growing adoption of smart meters enables the measurement of households' energy consumption, influenced not solely by building characteristics such as thermal insulation but also by residents' behavioural patterns, such as heating and ventilation practices. To motivate residents to adopt more sustainable behaviours, user interfaces on smartphones and laptops are increasingly using consumption data from households' smart meters to enable effective goal‐setting. In contrast to previous research largely focusing on goal‐setting in isolation, this study examines the role of specific social comparison‐related design features that future research and practitioners can consider along with goal‐setting to stimulate sustainable behaviours. Specifically, we look into the influence of residents' perception of their relative performance (i.e., whether their behaviour was better or worse than a reference group) on their ambition to act (i.e., targeted improvement goal) and their actual energy consumption behaviour. Moreover, we investigate the influence of a goal's evaluative standard (i.e., whether the goal refers to one's own or other's performance) on the relationship between relative performance, ambition to act, and energy consumption behaviour. Drawing on social comparison theory, we conducted a framed field experiment with 152 households. We find that a goal's evaluative standard influences residents' awareness of their relative performance, affecting their ambition to act and, ultimately, their energy consumption behaviour. More specifically, we find that whereas other‐ (vs. self‐) referencing goals encourage residents from worse‐than‐average performing households more strongly to improve their energy consumption behaviour, they discourage better‐than‐average ones. Overall, our study provides novel insights into the interplay between relative performance and evaluative standards as a means of fostering social comparison in smart meter‐facilitated goal‐setting, highlighting their crucial role in effectively supporting sustainable behaviours. |
| Date: | 2024–11–04 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:dar:wpaper:150428 |
| By: | Ahomäki, Iiro (University of Jyväskylä); Böckerman, Petri (University of Jyväskylä); Pehkonen, Jaakko (Jyväskylä University School of Business and Economics); Saastamoinen, Leena (Finnish Medicines Agency) |
| Abstract: | We study the impact of an information intervention on opioid prescribing using a preregistered research design and comprehensive nationwide register data. The intervention involved a personal letter sent to all Finnish physicians who had prescribed oxycodone or fentanyl to a patient who had purchased at least three months' supply of these medications in the previous year. These physicians were randomized into the treatment and control groups. The letter was sent to physicians in the treatment group in May 2019, and the control group received the same letter six months later. The intervention letter contained information about opioid use and proper pain treatment using opioids based on national clinical guidelines. While the intervention showed no significant effects in the whole study population, we detected heterogeneity in effect with respect to preregistered physician characteristics. We observed a 22% reduction in fentanyl and oxycodone prescriptions to new patients among physicians receiving their first information letter, a 4.8% reduction in any opioid prescriptions among high-volume prescribers as well as an increase of 7% in nonopioid analgesic prescribing among low-volume prescribers. These results highlight the challenges policymakers encounter when attempting to sustainably reduce opioid prescriptions and mitigate harmful clinical practices through repeated information-based interventions. |
| Keywords: | opioid prescribing, information intervention, randomized experiment |
| JEL: | I10 I12 I19 |
| Date: | 2024–10 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:iza:izadps:dp17416 |
| By: | Max R. P. Grossmann |
| Abstract: | When is autonomy granted to a decision-maker based on their knowledge, and if no autonomy is granted, what form will the intervention take? A parsimonious theory shows how policymakers can exploit decision-maker mistakes and use them as a justification for intervention. In two experiments, policymakers ("Choice Architects") can intervene in a choice faced by a decision-maker. We vary the amount of knowledge decision-makers possess about the choice. Full decision-maker knowledge causes more than a 60% reduction in intervention rates. Beliefs have a small, robust correlation with interventions on the intensive margin. Choice Architects disproportionately prefer to have decision-makers make informed decisions. Interveners are less likely to provide information. As theory predicts, the same applies to Choice Architects who believe that decision-maker mistakes align with their own preference. When Choice Architects are informed about the decision-maker's preference, this information is used to determine the imposed option. However, Choice Architects employ their own preference to a similar extent. A riskless option is causally more likely to be imposed, being correlated with but conceptually distinct from Choice Architects' own preference. This is a qualification to what has been termed "projective paternalism." |
| Date: | 2024–10 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:arx:papers:2410.20970 |
| By: | OYEDELE, Gbeminiyi Joshua; Shanker, Ankit; Tildesley, Michael J.; Vlaev, Ivo |
| Abstract: | This study presents an analysis of the direct and indirect effects of the behavioural determinants of Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation, the necessary and sufficient conditions for any behaviour change, on self-isolation behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. Uniquely, we also explore the causal interactions between these variables, unveiling the most significant contributors to individuals' decisions to self-isolate. Using a retrospective dataset from the UK Office for National Statistics' 2019 Opinion and Lifestyle Survey, we applied a sophisticated structural equation model to dissect the behavioural dynamics. Our findings are striking in that both opportunity and motivation exert a direct and significant impact on self-isolation, while capability influences behaviour indirectly through the mediating power of motivation. This pioneering analysis offers a powerful framework for future public health strategies, providing critical insights into how we can better engage the public in self-isolation behaviours to ensure more effective compliance in the face of future pandemics. |
| Date: | 2024–10–21 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:osf:osfxxx:wgka2 |
| By: | Fasolo, Barbara; Heard, Claire; Scopelliti, Irene |
| Abstract: | The detrimental influence of cognitive biases on decision-making and organizational performance is well established in management research. However, less attention has been given to bias mitigation interventions for improving organizational decisions. Drawing from the judgment and decision-making (JDM) literature, this paper offers a clear conceptualization of two approaches that mitigate bias via distinct cognitive mechanisms—debiasing and choice architecture—and presents a comprehensive integrative review of interventions tested experimentally within each approach. Observing a lack of comparative studies, we propose a novel framework that lays the foundation for future empirical research in bias mitigation. This framework identifies decision, organizational, and individual-level factors that are proposed to moderate the effectiveness of bias mitigation approaches across different contexts and can guide organizations in selecting the most suitable approach. By bridging JDM and management research, we offer a comprehensive research agenda and guidelines to select the most suitable evidence-based approach for improving decision making processes and, ultimately, organizational performance. |
| Keywords: | cognitive biases; bias migration; organizational decision-making; debiasing; choice architecture; dual interventions; training; decision-making process; managerial cognition; judgment and decision-making |
| JEL: | J50 |
| Date: | 2024–10–22 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ehl:lserod:125404 |