IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/cesptp/hal-03747844.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The impact on nudge acceptability judgements of framing and consultation of the targeted population

Author

Listed:
  • Ismaël Rafaï

    (GREDEG - Groupe de Recherche en Droit, Economie et Gestion - UNS - Université Nice Sophia Antipolis (1965 - 2019) - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UniCA - Université Côte d'Azur)

  • Arthur Ribaillier

    (GREDEG - Groupe de Recherche en Droit, Economie et Gestion - UNS - Université Nice Sophia Antipolis (1965 - 2019) - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UniCA - Université Côte d'Azur)

  • Dorian Jullien

    (GREDEG - Groupe de Recherche en Droit, Economie et Gestion - UNS - Université Nice Sophia Antipolis (1965 - 2019) - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique - UniCA - Université Côte d'Azur, CES - Centre d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

The aim of this article is to better understand how judgements about nudge acceptability are formed and whether they can be manipulated. We conducted a randomized experiment with N = 171 participants to test whether acceptability judgements could be (1) more favourable when the decision to implement the nudges was made following a consultation with the targeted population and (2) influenced by the joint framing of the nudge's purpose and effectiveness (in terms of an increase in desirable behaviour versus decrease in undesirable behaviour). We tested these hypotheses on various nudge scenarios and obtained mixed results that do not clearly support our hypotheses for all nudge scenarios. A surprising result that calls for further work is that by mentioning that a nudge had been implemented through a consultation with the targeted population its acceptability could be lowered.

Suggested Citation

  • Ismaël Rafaï & Arthur Ribaillier & Dorian Jullien, 2022. "The impact on nudge acceptability judgements of framing and consultation of the targeted population," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-03747844, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:cesptp:hal-03747844
    DOI: 10.1017/bpp.2022.13
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-03747844
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-03747844/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1017/bpp.2022.13?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Tannenbaum & Craig R. Fox & Todd Rogers, 2017. "On the misplaced politics of behavioural policy interventions," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 1(7), pages 1-7, July.
    2. Romain Cadario & Pierre Chandon, 2018. "Which Healthy Eating Nudges Work Best? A Meta-Analysis of Field Experiments," Post-Print hal-01914908, HAL.
    3. Romain Cadario & Pierre Chandon, 2019. "Viewpoint: Effectiveness or consumer acceptance? Tradeoffs in selecting healthy eating nudges," Post-Print hal-02508983, HAL.
    4. Hagman, William & Erlandsson, Arvid & Dickert, Stephan & Tinghög, Gustav & Västfjäll, Daniel, 2022. "The effect of paternalistic alternatives on attitudes toward default nudges," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 95-118, January.
    5. Pechey, Rachel & Burge, Peter & Mentzakis, Emmanouil & Suhrcke, Marc & Marteau, Theresa M., 2014. "Public acceptability of population-level interventions to reduce alcohol consumption: A discrete choice experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 104-109.
    6. 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.
    7. Reynolds, J.P. & Archer, S. & Pilling, M. & Kenny, M. & Hollands, G.J. & Marteau, T.M., 2019. "Public acceptability of nudging and taxing to reduce consumption of alcohol, tobacco, and food: A population-based survey experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 236(C), pages 1-1.
    8. McKenzie, Craig R. M. & Sher, Shlomi & Leong, Lim M. & Müller-Trede, Johannes, 2018. "Constructed Preferences, Rationality, and Choice Architecture," Review of Behavioral Economics, now publishers, vol. 5(3-4), pages 337-360, December.
    9. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:1:p:62-74 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. De Jonge, Patricia & Zeelenberg, Marcel & Verlegh, Peeter W.J., 2018. "Putting the public back in behavioral public policy," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 218-226, November.
    11. Romain Cadario & Pierre Chandon, 2020. "Which Healthy Eating Nudges Work Best? A Meta-Analysis of Field Experiments," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(3), pages 465-486, May.
    12. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:3:p:202-213 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Davidai, Shai & Shafir, Eldar, 2020. "Are ‘nudges’ getting a fair shot? Joint versus separate evaluation," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(3), pages 273-291, November.
    14. Ayala Arad & Ariel Rubinstein, 2018. "The People's Perspective on Libertarian-Paternalistic Policies," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 61(2), pages 311-333.
    15. Sanders, Michael & Snijders, Veerle & Hallsworth, Michael, 2018. "Behavioural science and policy: where are we now and where are we going?," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 144-167, November.
    16. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:4:p:310-325 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. repec:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:1:p:26-39 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Dragos C Petrescu & Gareth J Hollands & Dominique-Laurent Couturier & Yin-Lam Ng & Theresa M Marteau, 2016. "Public Acceptability in the UK and USA of Nudging to Reduce Obesity: The Example of Reducing Sugar-Sweetened Beverages Consumption," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-18, June.
    19. Rafiq, Sana, 2021. "How much is a calorie worth? A study of willingness to pay for calorie labels in restaurant menus," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(3), pages 354-377, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Arthur Ribaillier & Ismaël Rafaï & Dorian Jullien, 2021. "The Impact on Acceptability Judgments about Nudges of Framing and Consultation with the Targeted Population," GREDEG Working Papers 2021-12, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    2. Christine Kawa & Wim H. Gijselaers & Jan F. H. Nijhuis & Patrizia M. Ianiro-Dahm, 2022. "Are You “Nudgeable”? Factors Affecting the Acceptance of Healthy Eating Nudges in a Cafeteria Setting," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-20, March.
    3. Alempaki, Despoina & Isoni, Andrea & Read, Daniel, 2023. "Tainted nudge," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    4. Peter John & Aaron Martin & Gosia Mikołajczak, 2023. "Support for behavioral nudges versus alternative policy instruments and their perceived fairness and efficacy," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), pages 363-371, April.
    5. Lan Nguyen & Hans De Steur, 2021. "Public Acceptability of Policy Interventions to Reduce Sugary Drink Consumption in Urban Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-18, December.
    6. Pierre Dubois & Paulo Albuquerque & Olivier Allais & Céline Bonnet & Patrice Bertail & Pierre Combris & Saadi Lahlou & Natalie Rigal & Bernard Ruffieux & Pierre Chandon, 2021. "Effects of front-of-pack labels on the nutritional quality of supermarket food purchases: evidence from a large-scale randomized controlled trial," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 119-138, January.
    7. Bruns, Hendrik & Perino, Grischa, 2023. "The role of autonomy and reactance for nudging — Experimentally comparing defaults to recommendations and mandates," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    8. Vugts, Anastasia & van den Heuvel, Emmy & Havermans, Remco C., 2024. "Factors affecting public acceptance of healthy lifestyle nudges," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 350(C).
    9. Zhou, Li & Zhu, Guowei, 2022. "Mind the gap: How the numerical precision of exercise-data-based food labels can nudge healthier food choices," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 354-367.
    10. Hendrik Bruns & Grischa Perino, 2021. "Point at, nudge, or push private provision of a public good?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(3), pages 996-1007, July.
    11. Mira Fischer & Philipp Lergetporer & Katharina Werner, 2024. "Do Narratives about Psychological Mechanisms Affect Public Support for Behavioral Policies?," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 505, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    12. Reynolds, J.P. & Pilling, M. & Marteau, T.M., 2018. "Communicating quantitative evidence of policy effectiveness and support for the policy: Three experimental studies," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 218(C), pages 1-12.
    13. Mantzari, Eleni & Reynolds, James P. & Jebb, Susan A. & Hollands, Gareth J. & Pilling, Mark A. & Marteau, Theresa M., 2022. "Public support for policies to improve population and planetary health: A population-based online experiment assessing impact of communicating evidence of multiple versus single benefits," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 296(C).
    14. Björn Bartling & Alexander W. Cappelen & Henning Hermes & Marit Skivenes & Bertil Tungodden, 2023. "Free to fail? Paternalistic preferences in the United States," ECON - Working Papers 436, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    15. Diederich, Johannes & Goeschl, Timo & Waichman, Israel, 2023. "Self-nudging is more ethical, but less efficient than social nudging," Working Papers 0726, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    16. Clareta Treger, 2023. "When do people accept government paternalism? Theory and experimental evidence," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(1), pages 195-214, January.
    17. James P. Reynolds & Milica Vasiljevic & Mark Pilling & Marissa G. Hall & Kurt M. Ribisl & Theresa M. Marteau, 2020. "Communicating Evidence about the Causes of Obesity and Support for Obesity Policies: Two Population-Based Survey Experiments," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-19, September.
    18. Diederich, Johannes & Goeschl, Timo & Waichman, Israel, 2022. "Self-Nudging vs. Social Nudging in Social Dilemmas: An Experiment," Working Papers 0710, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    19. Schütze, Tobias & Carlhoff, Henrik & Witschel, Helena, 2024. "Eliciting Paternalistic Preferences: An Incentivised Experiment," Thuenen-Series of Applied Economic Theory 169, University of Rostock, Institute of Economics.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    behavioural public policies; nudges; acceptability; framing; consultation;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hal:cesptp:hal-03747844. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.