IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jconsa/v52y2018i3p655-688.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Which Europeans Like Nudges? Approval and Controversy in Four European Countries

Author

Listed:
  • Cäzilia Loibl
  • Cass R. Sunstein
  • Julius Rauber
  • Lucia A. Reisch

Abstract

Policy makers show an increasing interest in “nudges”—behaviorally motivated interventions that steer people in certain directions but maintain freedom of consumer choice. Despite this interest, little evidence has surfaced about which population groups support nudges and nudging. We report the results of nationally representative surveys in Denmark, Hungary, Italy, and the United Kingdom. Individual, household, and geographic characteristics served as predictors of nudge approval, and the count of significant predictors as measures of controversy. Less high approval rates of nudges in Denmark and Hungary were reflected in higher controversy about “System 1” nudges, whereas the United Kingdom and Italy were marked by higher controversy about “System 2” nudges, despite high approval rates. High‐controversy nudges tended to be associated with current public policy concerns, for example, meat consumption. The results point to means for effective targeting and increase knowledge about the types of nudges likely to obtain public support.

Suggested Citation

  • Cäzilia Loibl & Cass R. Sunstein & Julius Rauber & Lucia A. Reisch, 2018. "Which Europeans Like Nudges? Approval and Controversy in Four European Countries," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(3), pages 655-688, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jconsa:v:52:y:2018:i:3:p:655-688
    DOI: 10.1111/joca.12181
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/joca.12181
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/joca.12181?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Banerjee, Sanchayan & Galizzi, Matteo M. & John, Peter & Mourato, Susana, 2022. "What works best in promoting climate citizenship? A randomised, systematic evaluation of nudge, think, boost and nudge+," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 115032, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Jean-François Gajewski & Marco Heimann & Pierre-Majorique Léger & Prince Teye, 2024. "Enhancing auditors’ professional skepticism through nudges: an eye-tracking experiment," Post-Print hal-04636343, HAL.
    3. Marco Alifano & Giuseppe Attanasi & Fabio Iannelli & Faredj Cherikh & Antonio Iannelli, 2020. "COVID-19 pandemic: a European perspective on health economic policies," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 4(S), pages 35-43, June.
    4. Rafi M. M. I. Chowdhury, 2022. "The ethics of nudging: Using moral foundations theory to understand consumers' approval of nudges," Journal of Consumer Affairs, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(2), pages 703-742, June.
    5. 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.
    6. Tikotsky, Ariel & Pe'er, Eyal & Feldman, Yuval, 2020. "Which nudges do businesses like? Managers’ attitudes towards nudges directed at their business or at their customers," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 43-51.

    More about this item

    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:bla:jconsa:v:52:y:2018:i:3:p:655-688. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0022-0078 .

    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.