1
Q
Nudge Definition
A
Any aspect of the choice architecture that alters people’s behaviour in a predictable way without forbidding any options or significantly changing their economic environment
(choice architecture = aspect of social/physical environment that makes a particular option more attractive, preferred or even the default choice)
- changing the behaviour, NOT attitude without blocking any options or making one option much better than the others (not making them more costly or so), no consequences
- choice preserving approach that steers people in a particular direction, but that allows them to go their own way
- should be easy and cheap to avoid –> no mandates
- umbrella term for deliberate & predictable methods of changing ppl behaviour by modifying the cues in the physical and/or social context in which they act
> uses these cues to activate unconscious thought processes involved in human decision-making
2
Q
Goal of (many) nudges
A
- steer someone towards a specific option & away from alternatives
- make life simpler for people to navigate (road signs, education campaigns)
- still preserve freedom of choice
- to inform ppl & ensure that their choices are informed
3
Q
Principles of nudges
A
- Simplification & framing of information
- changes to the physical environment
- changes to the default option
- use of (descriptive) social norms
4
Q
Prospects of nudges
A
- evidence-based
- testing of interventions in real-life context
- randomised control trials
5
Q
What is NOT a nudge?
A
- prompts
- banning junk food, blocking stairs so that people use elevator
6
Q
Dual Process Theory
theory behind nudging
A
slow, conscious process
vs
quick, effortless, non conscious process
7
Q
Nudge Theory
A
Nudge Theory Toolkit:
- Understand & validate the required change
- Check for obstacles
- Check for unhelpful existing nudges
- Remove obstacles & establish support
- explore which environmental/circumstantial factors can be altered/introduced (=the nudge)
8
Q
Dual systems theory in real life
A
- Behaviours are guided by processes that operate outside of conscious awareness
- many decisions not made based on lengthy deliberate thinking but quick & automatic heuristic processing
- ppl often do not have time/motivation/cognitive resources to carefully & consciously think through all decisions they make throughout they
9
Q
System 1 nudge
explanation
A
- nudges take advantage of unconscious interaction between person & environment
- -> System 1 way of thinking
- making use of flaws that affect automatic unconscious processes & passive decision-making (like ppl don’t give full attention to their options) then to follow path of “least resistance”, they lack clear preferences & complete information and choices will inevitably be influenced by default rules, frames & starting points
10
Q
Benefits of nudges
A
- low or no costs
- sometimes deliver prompt results
- maintain freedom
- can be highly effective
- sometimes more impact than more expensive & coercive tools
11
Q
When are nudges appropriate?
A
- when choices have delayed effects
- perhaps no benefit in moment but later (stairs & health) - when they are complex or infrequent & thus learning is not possible
- When feedback is not available
- When the relation between choice & outcome is unclear
12
Q
Thaler & Sunstein
Types of nudges
A
- changing standard options
- changing physical environment
- providing the possibility of correct impulsive choices
- providing feedback on choices
13
Q
Hansen & Jesperson
Types of nudges
A
4 categories:
- unconscious vs conscious
transparent vs non-transparent
14
Q
System 1 Nudge
A
- e.g defaults and sequential orderings
- uses automatic cognitive processing
- viewed less favourably than System 2 nudges
- perceived as more autonomy threatening
- System 1 nudges more likely to operate without awareness of decision maker by relying on implicit defaults and status quo options
- can be more automatic
- operate less directly on cognition and more directly on behaviour
–> perceived as more autonomy threatening
15
Q
System 2 Nudge
A
- e.g. educational opportunities or reminders
- uses more deliberative processing
- more effortful and more transparent
- viewed as more effective for better decision making and more necessary for changing behaviour
- nudges provide information (& possibly education) that may make people more aware & presumably more thoughtful about their decisions
–> perceived as more effective for making good decisions and more necessary for behaviour change
16
Q
Type 1 Nudge (Hansen & Jesperson)
A
aimed at influencing behaviour maintained by automatic thinking or consequences therefore without involving reflective thinking
- those influencing behaviour that so not involve deliberation, judgement and choice
(e. g. size of plates, narrowing side-lines on roads)
17
Q
Type 2 Nudge (Hansen & Jesperson)
A
- aimed at influencing attention and premises of - and hence the behaviour anchored in reflective thinking/choices/inflencing automatic system
- those influencing behaviours best characterised as actions, results of deliberation, judgement and choice
(e. g. fly in urinal)
18
Q
Transparent nudge
A
individuals understand expected behavioural change & means by which it likely to occur
19
Q
Transparent Type 1 Nudge
A
reflective thinking is not engaged in what causes the behaviour change in question
–> reflective thinking is by-product
e.g. playing relaxing music while passengers board plane to calm them down
20
Q
Transparent Type 2 Nudge
A
engages in reflective system in a away that mens it easy for citizen to reconstruct intentions and means by which behaviour change is pursued
e.f. fly in urinal, prompted choice for organ-donation
21
Q
Non-Transparent Nudge
A
Individuals less likely to recognise the possibility of behaviour change, and they cannot reconstruct the means by which changes could occur
22
Q
Non-Transparent Type 1 Nudge
A
causes behaviour change without reflective system and in a way that doesn’t make it likely to be recognised and transparent
- -> e.g. mindless eating, smaller dinner plates
e. g. changing of background defaults (organ donation)
23
Q
Non-Transparent Type 2 Nudge
A
reflective system has to be engaged but doesn’t happen in a way that by itself gives people epistemic accede to intentions and means by which influence is pursued
e. g.
- clever framing of risks aimed to influence one’s decision-making
- aimed at affecting decision-making by clever framing, compliance, anchoring
24
Q
10 important nudges according to Sunstein
A
- default nudge
- Simplification of current requirements
- reminders
- eliciting implementation intentions
- use of social norms
- increases in ease & convenience
- disclosure
- warnings (graphics or other)
- recommitment strategies
- informing people of nature & consequences of their own past choices
25
MINDSPACE (checklist for creating policy & nudges)
list of 9 most robust influences on our behaviour, which can be used as a quick checklist when making policy
- mindpace explores how behaviour change theory can help meet current policy challenges
- policy makers need to understand the effects their policies may be having --> mindspace helps with this
(explore, enable, encourage, engage, exemplary, evaluate)
1. messenger
2. incentive
3. norms
4. defaults
5. salience
6. priming
7. affect
8. commitment
9. ego
26
Libertarianism
standard assumption of rational choice on economics has lead to a deep-rooted view that governments should take hands-off attitude towards private enterprise & private choice
- free choice
27
Paternalism
- implementation
- guiding behaviour
- standard tool or paternalistic control in economics have been: taxes & subsidies, simple legal prohibitions
- tools to use if the goal is to influence the choice of rational people
28
Libertarian Paternalism
compromise between libertarianism & paternalism
- the government nudges private citizen towards rational choices without any way restricting their freedom to do as they wish
29
Pro arguments nudging
- say that interventions are not paternalistic when they do not limit a person's choices & liberties to behave in any way
(esp. when there is an option to "opt out")
- cheap & easy to implement
30
Con arguments nudging
- say that although nudges may not restrict available choices, they limit possibility to rationally deliberate on the decision-making process of choosing
- questions whether they lead to LT changes in people's behaviour & value structures
- no clear definition of nudges
- fear for loss of autonomy (esp with advertising) --> may feel manipulated --> perhaps reactance & resistance
- nudge only changes behaviour in certain moments but not underlying beliefs
- not enough on its own
- unaware, not an autonomous choice
31
Nudging & Ethics
| 2 criteria to make nudge ethically acceptable
1, choice architects should tell people about the intervention directly
2. ensure that a perceptive person can discern that an intervention had been implemented
32
Behaviour Change
is complex & depends on
- the target : type of behaviour, type of change
- the population: individual, group, community, population
- the setting: home, work, leisure, hospital
- incentives: of the old behaviour & of new one
- Type oof interventions: content, mode of delivery, frequency
33
Behaviour Change Interventions vary in
- content or elements of interventions
- delivery of intervention
- mode of delivery (e.g. afce-to-face)
- intensity
- duration
- characteristics of those delivering the intervention
- characteristics of recipient
characteristics of setting
adherence to delivery protocol
--> this can impact success of intervention
34
Aspects to keep in mind for Behaviour Change Interventions
- privilege (SES, age, race)
- differences between you & target pop, culture
- target population: specific aspects to TP (age, ses, race, body shape etc.)
35
Design Thinking
```
original use in product development
5 step process
- emphasise
- define
- ideate (creativity)
- prototype
- test
```
- lacks level of detail
- but more freedom
36
Theory of Change
- focuses on policy change & sustainable implementation
| - distinct between desired & actual outcomes
37
Attitudes
| Definition
a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favour or disfavour
a relatively enduring organisation of beliefs, feelings & behavioural tendencies towards socially significant objectives, groups, events, symbols
- they differ between people, cultures & over time
38
Attitudes
| attributes
- has cognitive, behavioural, affective elements
| - often not happening directly nor observable
39
Attitudes
| Elements
made up of 3 parts that together form our evaluation of "attitude object"
1. affective component (emotional reaction towards attitude object)
2. cognitive component
(thoughts and beliefs about the attitude object)
3. behavioural component (actions or observable behaviour toward attitude object)
40
Behaviour Based Attitude
- attitude is based on observations of how one behaves toward an attitude object
Self-Perception Theory: under certain circumstances, ppl don't know how they feel until they see how they behave
- can base attitudes on our observations of our own behaviour
41
How do Attitudes Change?
- social influence: influenced of what other ppl do/say
- cognitive dissonance
- persuasive communication (explicit, implicit/unobstrusive)
42
Principle of Consistency
we expect that peoples behaviour is in line with their attitudes (not always the case)
43
Cognitive Dissonance Theory
Changing attitudes by changing behaviour
- when ppl do sth. that threatens their image of themselves as decent to honest & there is no way they can explain away this behaviour as due to external circumstances
- -> they engage in a process of internal justification by bringing two components (attitudes & behaviour) close together
44
Attitudes & Dual Process
compared to ppl who base their attitudes on peripheral cues, ppl who base attitudes on careful analysis arguments will be
1. more likely to maintain this attitude over time
2. more likely behave consistently with this attitude
3. more resistant to outer-persuasion
achieving the careful analysis = crucial part
45
Source-Message Audience Channel
need to consider elements when choosing communication channel for intervention:
Source (Who send message): credibility, attractiveness
Message (What message is sent?): quality, sincerity
--> How to evaluate message? Do we have time to evaluate it?
Audience (Whom, who is the target?): Attention, ability
--> Can they attend to it? Do they want to?
46
Reflective Impulsive Model (RIM)
Based on dual-systems theory
- impulsive system (1)
- Reflective System (2)
47
RIM Impulsive Sytem
- quick reactivation
- impulsive, effortless, associative
- no need for attentional resources
- independent of conscious processes
impulses emerge from repetitive temporal & spatial co-activation of certain associative cluster in LT memory
- once established, quick reactivation by perceptual input + internal triggers
measured with: IAT. affective priming paradigm
48
RIM Reflective System
- serves regulatory goals
- responsible for higher order mental operations
- slower, controlled processes
- more flexible
- dependent on control resources
- effortful
if control resources are low, reflective operations may break down due to lack of self-monitoring
measured with: self-report
49
Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM)
proposes an explanation of the two ways in which persuasive communication can cause attitude change
- central route: attention to arguments
- peripheral: swayed by surface characteristics
50
ELM Central route
- message elaboration, attention to arguments
- ideas are scrutinised carefully
goes beyond simple understanding want to built into attitude or behavioural repertoire
receiver generates attitude-relevant thoughts about persuasive message
Objective Processing: objective evaluation of argument
Biased processing: vested interest or using unbalanced info
51
Peripheral Route
NO elaboration
so no active thinking about attributes of the issue or the object of consideration
- autopilot, quick
- no extensive cognitive work
- rely on variety of cues/surface characteristics to make quick decisions
- need it cause cannot always process everything centrally
52
Factors determining processing route
1. motivation
- personal relevance (the more relevant, the more willing to pay attention; not relevant: heuristics)
- Need for cognition: personality variable reflecting extent to which ppl engage in & enjoy effortful cognitive activities
2. ability
- peripheral cues: when ppl unable to pay close attention to arguments, they are swayed by peripheral cues (e.g. status of communicator, liking trusting of communicator)
- weak arguments: are sometimes paired with distractions to make ppl more susceptible to peripheral influence
53
Heuristics
a simple rule ppl use to decide what their attitude is without having to spend a lot of time analysing every little detail about the matter
54
Heuristic-Systematic Model of Persuasion
an explanation of the two ways in which persuasive communications can cause attitude change
- takes emotions into account (ELM did not)
1. either systematically processing the merits of the arguments
2. or using mental shortcuts (heuristics)
55
Role of Emotion
before ppl will consider your carefully constructed arguments, you have to get their attention
can be done by
- playing to their emotions
e. g. fear appeal
56
Emotions as Heuristics
- emotions & moods can act as heuristics to determine attitudes
- when trying to decide our attitude about sth. we often rely on "How do I feel about it" heuristic
57
Culture & Advertisement
Western Culture:
- base attitudes on concerns about individuality & self-improvement
- advertisements that stress individuality & self-improvement might work better here
Asian Culture:
- base attitudes more on concerns about their standing in their social group (e.g. family)
- advertisements stressing social group may be better
58
Social Influence
complex
- somites health changes are fashionable (being vegan)
- sometimes they are more complex (e.g. HIV prevention drug)
Aims at changing:
- beliefs & attitudes
- behaviour
- bidirectional influence between beliefs & attitudes and behaviour
- moderators (risk perception, majority vs minority status, type of behaviour change)
Types:
1. informal
2. normative
59
Informal Social Influence
e.g. provide consumers with numerical info about product's carbon footprint
60
Normative Social Influence
Descriptive norm
- refers to the perception of prevalence of a behaviour
- -> what most others do
(e. g. decisional short-cuts)
Injunctive norm:
- designate what constitutes commonly approved & disapproved conduct in a certain culture
- -> what ought to be done
(e. g. social rewards & sanctions)
61
Focus Theory of Normative Conduct
proposes that norms do not influence behaviours on the same way at all times & situations
- predicts that if only one of the two types of norms (descriptive or injunctive) is predominant in an individual's mind, it will exert the stronger influence on behaviour
62
Normalisation effect
observers when descriptive norm was presented alone
it is when consumers moved closer to the norm
- high consumers reduced their consumption, but low consumers increased theirs
63
How to avoid normalisation effect
when injunctive norm message is also provided with the descriptive norm, the households consuming less energy continued to consume at lower rates
1. focus people's attention on injunctive norms that counteract the unwelcome effect of descriptive norms
2. present relevant descriptive norm information only to those one wants to influence, such as consumers whose energy use is higher than average
3. present descriptive norms that are framed positively in order to create effective message
64
Examples of Social Influence/Persuasive Attempts
Explicit persuasive attempts:
- mask up, SALE, reasons not to vote for trump
(somewhat) explicit persuasive message: influencers
Implicit social influence: goals in urinals (nudge), any kind of (social) media
(more) direct social influence: social mimicry
more automatic social influence: prompts, nudging, heuristics
65
Social Mimicry
mimic behaviour, gestures, words, facial expressions
- creates social bonding & good will by activating empathy-related brain areas
- can reduce prejudice (creates inter individual bond)
- influences consumer behaviour (e.g. sports drink tasting test where interviewer influenced pp.)
- often non conscious process & learned early in life
66
Stimulus signals/cues
elicit behaviours:
- aware of cause, unaware of effect
- find "right spot" --> compliance
Mindlessness:
- cues work best during mindlessness
- mindless cue reaction
> request functions as cues for compliance
> only when the request is abnormal do people stop & think about the content of request
67
Prospect Theory
loss aversion: gains are weighted higher than losses
68
Scaring people into compliance
- doesn't work to change behaviour unless they feel they are in control & have high self-efficacy related to context
- -> cognitive dissonance
fear appraisal:
- leads to resistance
Cognitive dissonance:
- when people do something that threatens their self-image of themselves as decent, kind honest
- when people perform a behaviour that is in contrast with their attitudes or beliefs
> they engage in internal justification (denial or reactance)
69
Implicit Cognition
knowledge or cognitive processes that stay outside persons awareness
70
Implicit affect
is assumed to reflect the strength of association between the target & feelings that presumably were learned through experience
71
Implicit Motivation
there is an alternative route to human goal pursuit, one that doesn't require instigation & guidance by an agent self & operates outside of conscious intention & awareness
