IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/inrvec/v65y2018i1d10.1007_s12232-017-0281-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

‘Better off, as judged by themselves’: a reply to Cass Sunstein

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Sugden

    (University of East Anglia)

Abstract

This paper is a reply to Sunstein’s comment on my paper ‘Do people really want to be nudged towards healthy lifestyles?’ The central claim of that paper was that, in their book Nudge, Thaler and Sunstein switch between two different interpretations of the ‘better off, as judged by themselves’ criterion, and that consistent use of one or other interpretation would have blunted the persuasive power of the book. In this reply, I defend that claim against Sunstein’s counter-arguments.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Sugden, 2018. "‘Better off, as judged by themselves’: a reply to Cass Sunstein," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 65(1), pages 9-13, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:inrvec:v:65:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s12232-017-0281-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s12232-017-0281-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s12232-017-0281-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s12232-017-0281-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gerardo Infante & Guilhem Lecouteux & Robert Sugden, 2016. "Preference purification and the inner rational agent: a critique of the conventional wisdom of behavioural welfare economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(1), pages 1-25, March.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:9:y:2014:i:5:p:433-444 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:1:p:62-74 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Romain Cadario & Pierre Chandon, 2019. "Viewpoint: Effectiveness or consumer acceptance? Tradeoffs in selecting healthy eating nudges," Post-Print hal-02508983, HAL.
    2. Cadario, Romain & Chandon, Pierre, 2019. "Viewpoint: Effectiveness or consumer acceptance? Tradeoffs in selecting healthy eating nudges," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 1-6.
    3. Steven J. Humphrey & Nadia-Yasmine Kruse, 2024. "Who accepts Savage’s axiom now?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 96(1), pages 1-17, February.
    4. D. Wade Hands, 2020. "Libertarian paternalism: taking Econs seriously," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 67(4), pages 419-441, December.
    5. Diane Coyle & Mark Fabian & Eric Beinhocker & Tim Besley & Margaret Stevens, 2023. "Is it time to reboot welfare economics? Overview," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(2), pages 109-121, June.
    6. Anne Corcos, 2023. "How nudges and marketing, frame time preference “for your own good”: a behavioral model," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-9, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Guilhem Lecouteux, 2018. "What does “we” want? Team Reasoning, Game Theory, and Unselfish Behaviours," Revue d'économie politique, Dalloz, vol. 128(3), pages 311-332.
    2. Franz Dietrich & Antonios Staras & Robert Sugden, 2021. "Savage’s response to Allais as Broomean reasoning," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(2), pages 143-164, April.
    3. Roberto Fumagalli, 2016. "Decision sciences and the new case for paternalism: three welfare-related justificatory challenges," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(2), pages 459-480, August.
    4. Bogliacino, Francesco & Codagnone, Cristiano, 2021. "Microfoundations, behaviour, and evolution: Evidence from experiments," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 372-385.
    5. John Davis & Theodore Koutsobinas, 2021. "Attribute substitution, counterfactual thinking, and heterodox economics," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 5(S3), pages 45-54, October.
    6. Guilhem Lecouteux, 2023. "The Homer economicus narrative: from cognitive psychology to individual public policies," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(2), pages 176-187, April.
    7. Antoinette Baujard, 2022. "Ethics and Technique in Welfare Economics: How Welfarism Evolves in the Making," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 73(6), pages 1039-1053.
    8. Sergio Beraldo, 2017. "An Impossibility Result on Nudging Grounded in the Theory of Intentional Action," CSEF Working Papers 485, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy, revised 30 Sep 2017.
    9. Guilhem Lecouteux, 2022. "The Homer economicus narrative: from cognitive psychology to individual public policies," Working Papers hal-03791951, HAL.
    10. Guilhem Lecouteux & Ivan Mitrouchev, 2022. "Preference Purification in Behavioural Welfare Economics: an Impossibility Result," GREDEG Working Papers 2022-31, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    11. Eduard Marinov, 2017. "The 2017 Nobel Prize in Economics," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 117-159.
    12. Nathan Berg & Yuki Watanabe, 2020. "Conservation of behavioral diversity: on nudging, paternalism-induced monoculture, and the social value of heterogeneous beliefs and behavior," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 19(1), pages 103-120, June.
    13. Alexandre Chirat, 2022. "Consumer sovereignty in the digital society," EconomiX Working Papers 2022-25, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    14. Benno Torgler, 2022. "The power of public choice in law and economics," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(5), pages 1410-1453, December.
    15. Guilhem Lecouteux, 2021. "Reconciling normative and behavioural economics: the problem that cannot be solved," Post-Print halshs-03418228, HAL.
    16. Guilhem Lecouteux & Ivan Mitrouchev, 2021. "The "View from Manywhere": Normative Economics with Context-Dependent Preferences," GREDEG Working Papers 2021-19, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    17. Cathleen Johnson & Aurélien Baillon & Han Bleichrodt & Zhihua Li & Dennie Dolder & Peter P. Wakker, 2021. "Prince: An improved method for measuring incentivized preferences," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 62(1), pages 1-28, February.
    18. Luca Congiu & Ivan Moscati, 2022. "A review of nudges: Definitions, justifications, effectiveness," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 188-213, February.
    19. D. Wade Hands, 2020. "Libertarian paternalism: taking Econs seriously," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 67(4), pages 419-441, December.
    20. Robert Sugden, 2017. "Characterising competitive equilibrium in terms of opportunity," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 48(3), pages 487-503, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Sunstein; Nudges; Health; Paternalism; Self-control;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D6 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics
    • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:inrvec:v:65:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s12232-017-0281-8. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.