IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/trn/utwpce/1902.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On the Transparency of Nudges: An Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Sandro Casal
  • Francesco Guala
  • Luigi Mittone

Abstract

We investigate the effects that transparency may have on people’s reactions to a simple nudge. Using an incentivized task and eliminating possible confounds due to strategic reasoning, we test two behavioral predictions: (a) that increasing the quantity and quality of information affects significantly the efficacy of nudges; and (b) that people mind about being nudged and reverse their decisions when the behavioral policy is transparent. Our results indicate that transparency does not necessarily trigger reactance (people in general do not mind being nudged), but the quality and quantity of information can have a significant effect on the efficacy of a behavioral policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Sandro Casal & Francesco Guala & Luigi Mittone, 2019. "On the Transparency of Nudges: An Experiment," CEEL Working Papers 1902, Cognitive and Experimental Economics Laboratory, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
    • Handle: RePEc:trn:utwpce:1902
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-ceel.economia.unitn.it/papers/papero19_02.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paolo Crosetto & Antonio Filippin, 2013. "The “bomb” risk elicitation task," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 31-65, August.
    2. Richard H. Thaler & Cass R. Sunstein, 2023. "Libertarian paternalism," Chapters, in: Cass R. Sunstein & Lucia A. Reisch (ed.), Research Handbook on Nudges and Society, chapter 1, pages 10-16, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Bruns, Hendrik & Kantorowicz-Reznichenko, Elena & Klement, Katharina & Luistro Jonsson, Marijane & Rahali, Bilel, 2018. "Can nudges be transparent and yet effective?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 41-59.
    4. 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.
    5. Chen, Daniel L. & Schonger, Martin & Wickens, Chris, 2016. "oTree—An open-source platform for laboratory, online, and field experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 88-97.
    6. Hendrik Bruns & Elena Kantorowicz-Reznichenko & Katharina Klement & Marijane Luistro Jonsson & Bilel Rahali, 2018. "Can nudges be transparent and yet effective?," Post-Print hal-01824076, HAL.
    7. 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.
    8. Ananish Chaudhuri, 2011. "Sustaining cooperation in laboratory public goods experiments: a selective survey of the literature," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 14(1), pages 47-83, March.
    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. Barron, Kai & Nurminen, Tuomas, 2020. "Nudging cooperation in public goods provision," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 88, pages 1-1.
    2. Helena Fornwagner & Oliver P. Hauser, 2022. "Climate Action for (My) Children," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 81(1), pages 95-130, January.
    3. 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).
    4. Daniel Weimar & Christoph Breuer, 2022. "Against the mainstream: Field evidence on a positive link between media consumption and the demand for sports among children," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 75(2), pages 317-336, May.
    5. Elena Kantorowicz‐Reznichenko & Jaroslaw Kantorowicz, 2021. "To follow or not to follow the herd? Transparency and social norm nudges," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(3), pages 362-377, August.
    6. 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.
    7. Sætra, Henrik Skaug & Mills, Stuart, 2022. "Psychological interference, liberty and technology," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    8. Tobias Schütze & Carsten Spitzer & Philipp C. Wichardt & Philipp Christoph Wichardt, 2023. "Nudging: An Experiment on Transparency, Controlling for Reactance and Decision Time," CESifo Working Paper Series 10599, CESifo.
    9. Alt, Marius, 2024. "Better us later than me now —," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    10. Christian König-Kersting & Johannes Lohse & Anna Louisa Merkel, 2020. "Active and Passive Risk-Taking," Working Papers 2020-04, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    11. Marco Faillo & Luigi Mittone & Costanza Piovanelli, 2018. "Cash posters in the lab," CEEL Working Papers 1801, Cognitive and Experimental Economics Laboratory, Department of Economics, University of Trento, Italia.
    12. Elisa Gambetti & Micaela Maria Zucchelli & Raffaella Nori & Fiorella Giusberti, 2022. "Default rules in investment decision-making: trait anxiety and decision-making styles," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 8(1), pages 1-26, December.
    13. 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.
    14. Leonhard Lades & Federica Nova, 2022. "Ethical Considerations when using Behavioural Insights to Reduce Peoples Meat Consumption," Working Papers 202209, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    15. L. Lades & F. Nova, 2024. "Ethical Considerations When Using Nudges to Reduce Meat Consumption: an Analysis Through the FORGOOD Ethics Framework," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 1-19, March.
    16. Alberti, Federica & Mantilla, César, 2020. "Provision of noxious facilities using a market-like mechanism: A simple implementation in the lab," Working papers 35, Red Investigadores de Economía.
    17. 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.
    18. Drouvelis, Michalis & Marx, Benjamin M., 2022. "Can charitable appeals identify and exploit belief heterogeneity?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 631-649.
    19. Marco Catola & Simone D'Alessandro & Pietro Guarnieri & Veronica Pizziol, 2020. "Multilevel Public Goods Game: an Online Experiment," Discussion Papers 2020/263, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    20. Karola Bastini & Rudolf Kerschreiter & Maik Lachmann & Matthias Ziegler & Tim Sawert, 2024. "Encouraging Individual Contributions to Net-Zero Organizations: Effects of Behavioral Policy Interventions and Social Norms," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 192(3), pages 543-560, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Nudge; Overconfidence; Transparency; Reactance;
    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:trn:utwpce:1902. 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: Marco Tecilla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/detreit.html .

    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.