IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceco/v119y2025ics2214804325001132.html

Active choosing or default rules? A revealed preference approach

Author

Listed:
  • Iwata, Yukinori

Abstract

When should a policymaker require active choosing or use a default rule to get people to make better choices? Are default rules unjustly manipulative, even if their use improves people’s welfare? This study addresses these questions by evaluating choice architecture in the limited attention with status quo bias model (Dean et al., 2017). We first show that an axiom that justifies default rules in terms of non-manipulation is inherently incompatible with another axiom that requires that revealed preferences be respected. Furthermore, we propose that there exists a welfarist justification for the argument that a policymaker should not set a worse alternative for a person as the default option, even if he or she gets better off. Based on these results, we define act-consequentialism and libertarian paternalism as evaluations of choice architecture and discuss their policy implications for policymakers.

Suggested Citation

  • Iwata, Yukinori, 2025. "Active choosing or default rules? A revealed preference approach," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:119:y:2025:i:c:s2214804325001132
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2025.102449
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804325001132
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socec.2025.102449?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard H. Thaler & Shlomo Benartzi, 2004. "Save More Tomorrow (TM): Using Behavioral Economics to Increase Employee Saving," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(S1), pages 164-187, February.
    2. Congiu, Luca & Moscati, Ivan, 2022. "A review of nudges: definitions, justifications, effectiveness," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 115134, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Masatlioglu, Yusufcan & Ok, Efe A., 2005. "Rational choice with status quo bias," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 1-29, March.
    4. 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.
    5. Lleras, Juan Sebastián & Masatlioglu, Yusufcan & Nakajima, Daisuke & Ozbay, Erkut Y., 2017. "When more is less: Limited consideration," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 70-85.
    6. Michaelsen, Patrik & Johansson, Lars-Olof & Hedesström, Martin, 2024. "Experiencing default nudges: autonomy, manipulation, and choice-satisfaction as judged by people themselves," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 85-106, January.
    7. Kalle Grill, 2014. "Expanding the Nudge: Designing Choice Contexts and Choice Contents," Rationality, Markets and Morals, Frankfurt School Verlag, Frankfurt School of Finance & Management, vol. 5(90), December.
    8. Cass R. Sunstein & Richard H. Thaler, 2003. "Libertarian paternalism is not an oxymoron," Conference Series ; [Proceedings], Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, vol. 48(Jun).
    9. Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
    10. de Clippel, Geoffroy & Rozen, Kareen, 2021. "Bounded rationality and limited datasets," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 16(2), May.
    11. Alexander C Cartwright & Marc A Hight, 2020. "‘Better off as judged by themselves’: a critical analysis of the conceptual foundations of nudging," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 44(1), pages 33-54.
    12. T. M. Wilkinson, 2013. "Nudging and Manipulation," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 61(2), pages 341-355, June.
    13. Jean-Michel Benkert & Nick Netzer, 2018. "Informational Requirements of Nudging," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(6), pages 2323-2355.
    14. Jachimowicz, Jon M. & Duncan, Shannon & Weber, Elke U. & Johnson, Eric J., 2019. "When and why defaults influence decisions: a meta-analysis of default effects," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 159-186, November.
    15. Bartosz Maćkowiak & Filip Matějka & Mirko Wiederholt, 2023. "Rational Inattention: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 226-273, March.
    16. Vugts, Anastasia & Van Den Hoven, Mariëtte & De Vet, Emely & Verweij, Marcel, 2020. "How autonomy is understood in discussions on the ethics of nudging," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(1), pages 108-123, March.
    17. Mills, Stuart, 2022. "Personalized nudging," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 150-159, January.
    18. Yukinori Iwata, 2023. "Evaluating opportunities when more is less," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 95(1), pages 109-130, July.
    19. 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.
    20. Yusufcan Masatlioglu & Efe A. Ok, 2014. "A Canonical Model of Choice with Initial Endowments," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 81(2), pages 851-883.
    21. Paul Kuyer & Bert Gordijn, 2023. "Nudge in perspective: A systematic literature review on the ethical issues with nudging," Rationality and Society, , vol. 35(2), pages 191-230, May.
    22. 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.
    23. George A. Akerlof & Robert J. Shiller, 2015. "Phishing for Phools: The Economics of Manipulation and Deception," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 10534, December.
    24. Ivanković, Viktor & Engelen, Bart, 2024. "Market nudges and autonomy," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(1), pages 138-165, March.
    25. Brigitte C. Madrian & Dennis F. Shea, 2001. "The Power of Suggestion: Inertia in 401(k) Participation and Savings Behavior," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(4), pages 1149-1187.
    26. Dean, Mark & Kıbrıs, Özgür & Masatlioglu, Yusufcan, 2017. "Limited attention and status quo bias," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 93-127.
    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. Yang, Jiaqi, 2025. "Status quo bias with choice overload," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 170-186.
    2. Maniquet, François & Nosratabadi, Hassan, 2022. "Welfare analysis when choice is status-quo biased," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    3. Beshears, John & Kosowsky, Harry, 2020. "Nudging: Progress to date and future directions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 161(S), pages 3-19.
    4. Kirchgässner, Gebhard, 2012. "Sanfter Paternalismus, meritorische Güter, und der normative Individualismus," Economics Working Paper Series 1217, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
    5. Katharina Momsen & Sebastian O. Schneider, 2022. "Motivated Reasoning, Information Avoidance, and Default Bias," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Behavioral Economics 2022_03, Max Planck Institute for Behavioral Economics.
    6. Cox, James C. & Kreisman, Daniel & Dynarski, Susan, 2020. "Designed to fail: Effects of the default option and information complexity on student loan repayment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    7. Comisión Nacional de los Mercados y la Competencia (CNMC), 2025. "Study on behavioural economics for efficient regulation and supervision," Colección Estudios de Mercado E/CNMC/002/23_ENG, Comisión Nacional de los Mercados y la Competencia (CNMC).
    8. David J. Freeman & Hanh T. Tong & Lanny Zrill, 2021. "Default-Setting and Default Bias: Does the Choice Architect Matter?," Discussion Papers dp21-08, Department of Economics, Simon Fraser University.
    9. Nobel Prize Committee, 2017. "Richard H. Thaler: Integrating Economics with Psychology," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2017-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
    10. Wang, Wenjie & Ida, Takanori & Shimada, Hideki, 2020. "Default effect versus active decision: Evidence from a field experiment in Los Alamos," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    11. 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.
    12. Dean, Mark & Kıbrıs, Özgür & Masatlioglu, Yusufcan, 2017. "Limited attention and status quo bias," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 93-127.
    13. 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.
    14. Gebhard Kirchgässner, 2017. "Soft paternalism, merit goods, and normative individualism," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 125-152, February.
    15. Yury Shevchenko & Bettina von Helversen & Benjamin Scheibehenne, 2014. "Change and status quo in decisions with defaults: The effect of incidental emotions depends on the type of default," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 9(3), pages 287-296, May.
    16. Ross Guest, 2010. "Policy Forum: Saving for Retirement: Policy Options to Increase Retirement Saving in Australia," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 43(3), pages 293-301, September.
    17. Ajla Cosic & Hana Cosic & Sebastian Ille, 2018. "Can nudges affect students' green behaviour? A field experiment," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 2(1), pages 107-111, March.
    18. Guy Barokas, 2021. "Dynamic choice under familiarity-based attention," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 57(4), pages 703-720, November.
    19. Kovach, Matthew & Suleymanov, Elchin, 2023. "Reference dependence and random attention," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 215(C), pages 421-441.
    20. Nicolas Aubert & Thomas Rapp, 2010. "Employee's investment behaviors in a company based savings plan," Finance, Presses universitaires de Grenoble, vol. 31(1), pages 5-32.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D04 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Policy: Formulation; Implementation; Evaluation
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making

    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:eee:soceco:v:119:y:2025:i:c:s2214804325001132. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/620175 .

    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.