A Practitioner’s Guide to Nudging

More documents

Recommendations

Info

choosing, requiring individuals to make a mindful choice. One of the benefits of active choosing is that it promotes learning. However, it can lead to errors if the individual lacks the knowledge to make a good decision or feels that choosing is too burdensome. An alternative to both nudges is to implement personalized default rules that are customized to an individual’s needs and preferences. To help the choice architect decide which of these three nudges to implement, Sunstein makes the following recommendations. Default rules are preferred when: → → → Individuals prefer not to choose. The context is confusing and unfamiliar to the individual. Needs and preferences do not differ across the population. Active choosing is preferred when: → → → → → Individuals prefer to choose. The context is familiar to the individual. Needs and preferences vary across the population. Choice architects are not well informed. Learning is promoted, feasible, and beneficial. Personalized default rules are preferred over general default rules when heterogeneity exists and the needs and preferences of the population vary. It is preferred over active choosing when choice architects are well informed of the population’s needs and preferences and a suitable default rule can be chosen. Compared to active choosing, personalized default rules require less effort and time from the individual yet still preserve freedom of choice. Applying Behavioural Economics to Public Policy Using MINDSPACE A summary of MINDSPACE: Influencing Behaviour Through Public Policy (P. Dolan, M. Hallsworth, D. Halpern, D. King, and I. Vlaev, Institute for Government, March 2, 2010, www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publications/mindspace) Traditional interventions in public policy are based on what people consciously think about and on the premise that behaviour can be shaped by providing information or altering incentives. It is assumed that individuals will analyze the information and incentives PAGE 26 SUMMARIES OF RELATED DOCUMENTS FILENE RESEARCH INSTITUTE
FIGURE 14 MINDSPACE FRAMEWORK Messenger Incentives Norms Defaults Salience Priming Affect Commitments Ego We are heavily influenced by who communicates information Our responses to incentives are shaped by predictable mental shortcuts such as strongly avoiding losses We are strongly influenced by what others do We “go with the flow” of pre-set options Our attention is drawn to what is novel and seems relevant to us Our acts are often influenced by subconscious cues Our emotional associations can powerfully shape our actions We seek to be consistent with our public promises, and reciprocate acts We act in ways that make us feel better about ourselves Source: P. Dolan, M. Hallsworth, D. Halpern, D. King, and I. Vlaev, MINDSPACE: Influencing Behaviour Through Public Policy, Institute for Government, March 2, 2010, 8. presented to them and act in their best interest. Behavioural science suggests that policymakers can shape behaviour by focusing on the individual’s automatic processes of judgment and influence. A behavioural approach recognizes that people can behave irrationally, are inconsistent in their choices, and are affected by their environment. Information and incentives can be effective instruments for shaping behaviour. However, behavioural science offers tools that can enhance these instruments and offer alternative options when information and incentives are not appropriate. The Behavioural Insights Team has developed the MINDSPACE framework, which summarizes nine of the most robust behavioural influences (see Figure 14). These nine influences should be understood by policymakers and, if appropriate, used for policy. Validating Behavioural Interventions Using Randomized Control Trials A summary of Test, Learn, Adapt: Developing Public Policy with Randomised Controlled Trials (L. Haynes, O. Service, B. Goldacre, and D. Torgerson, UK Cabinet Office Behavioural Insights Team, June 2012, www.gov. uk/government/publications/test-learn-adapt-developing-public-policy-with-randomised-controlled-trials) Randomized control trials use control and test groups to evaluate interventions. Alternatively, one can implement an intervention and measure the results, but it is difficult to evaluate whether it was the intervention that made the difference or another factor in the PAGE 27 SUMMARIES OF RELATED DOCUMENTS FILENE RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Page 1 and 2: REPORT A Practitioner’s Guide to
Page 3 and 4: Table of Contents 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMA
Page 5 and 6: practitioners can use to reevaluate
Page 7 and 8: A Practitioner’s Guide to Nudging
Page 9 and 10: In this report, we use the term “
Page 11 and 12: These four dimensions combined resu
Page 13 and 14: The results showed that the high-tu
Page 15 and 16: A Planning Aid to Increase Savings
Page 17 and 18: successful; in its first five month
Page 19 and 20: used, the Waterpebble automatically
Page 21 and 22: Select the Nudge Bottlenecks in the
Page 23 and 24: Identify the Levers for Nudging Ide
Page 25: possible, we recommend that it be a
Page 29 and 30: APPENDIX 2 Decision Map Checklist P
Page 31 and 32: Block FAFSA Experiment, National Bu
Page 33 and 34: 22 FIGURE 13 BEHAVIOURAL INFLUENCES
Page 35 and 36: Dilip Soman Rotman School of Busine

A Practitioner’s Guide to Nudging

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?