IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bpubpo/v9y2025i1p4-15_2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Banishing the inner Econ and justifying paternalistic nudges

Author

Listed:
  • Hausman, Daniel M.

Abstract

Paternalistic nudging and framing aim to correct flaws in deliberation by relying on the same cognitive mechanisms that create those flaws. Regarding some choices as flawed and in need of correction requires some standard of correctness. In their well-known book, Nudge, Thaler and Sunstein take the individual's own “purified” preferences to be that standard, which is inconsistent with the finding of behavioral economics that individuals do not have a stable preference ranking of alternatives, but instead construct their preferences when faced with a choice. This essay defends an alternative, readily usable standard to judge whether individuals are choosing badly and whether nudges can help them to choose better.

Suggested Citation

  • Hausman, Daniel M., 2025. "Banishing the inner Econ and justifying paternalistic nudges," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 4-15, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:bpubpo:v:9:y:2025:i:1:p:4-15_2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2398063X22000197/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:cup:bpubpo:v:9:y:2025:i:1:p:4-15_2. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/bpp .

    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.