IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_12279.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Designing Effective Interventions

Author

Listed:
  • Sebastian Riedmiller
  • Matthias Sutter
  • Sebastian Tonke

Abstract

Most interventions fail to change behavior. We argue that the reason for this failure is that the interventions do not adequately address the type of the underlying problem. We develop a systematic, parsimonious, and generalizable framework that uses a simple survey tool (anamnesis) to identify three types of fundamental problems: awareness, intention, and implementation problems. We then test in an online experiment with 7,500 subjects whether our framework can predict the effectiveness of three typical interventions (reminders, incentives, simplifications) that are designed to address a specific fundamental problem. As hypothesized, we find that the interventions’ effectiveness varies substantially between the different settings, but that our framework can predict this heterogeneity remarkably well: On average, a predicted effectiveness of 10% corresponds to an actual effectiveness of 8.92%. Choosing an intervention based on our framework increases an intervention’s effect size by around 58% compared to randomly choosing one of the tested interventions. We also apply our framework to predict the findings of a large-scale megastudy about booster vaccinations, providing evidence for its external validity for designing effective interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • Sebastian Riedmiller & Matthias Sutter & Sebastian Tonke, 2025. "Designing Effective Interventions," CESifo Working Paper Series 12279, CESifo.
  • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_12279
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ifo.de/DocDL/cesifo1_wp12279.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roland G. Fryer, Jr. & Steven D. Levitt & John List & Sally Sadoff, 2022. "Enhancing the Efficacy of Teacher Incentives through Framing: A Field Experiment," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 269-299, November.
    2. Tanjim Hossain & John A. List, 2012. "The Behavioralist Visits the Factory: Increasing Productivity Using Simple Framing Manipulations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(12), pages 2151-2167, December.
    3. Stefano DellaVigna & Elizabeth Linos, 2022. "RCTs to Scale: Comprehensive Evidence From Two Nudge Units," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(1), pages 81-116, January.
    4. Uri Gneezy & Stephan Meier & Pedro Rey-Biel, 2011. "When and Why Incentives (Don't) Work to Modify Behavior," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(4), pages 191-210, Fall.
    5. Toussaert, Séverine, 2018. "Eliciting temptation and self-control through menu choices: a lab experiment," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 88107, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Esther Duflo & Emmanuel Saez, 2003. "The Role of Information and Social Interactions in Retirement Plan Decisions: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(3), pages 815-842.
    7. Saugato Datta & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2014. "Behavioral Design: A New Approach to Development Policy," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 60(1), pages 7-35, March.
    8. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2023. "The Preference Survey Module: A Validated Instrument for Measuring Risk, Time, and Social Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(4), pages 1935-1950, April.
    9. Richard G. Newell & Juha Siikamäki, 2014. "Nudging Energy Efficiency Behavior: The Role of Information Labels," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 1(4), pages 555-598.
    10. Thaler, Richard H & Shefrin, H M, 1981. "An Economic Theory of Self-Control," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(2), pages 392-406, April.
    11. Saurabh Bhargava & Dayanand Manoli, 2015. "Psychological Frictions and the Incomplete Take-Up of Social Benefits: Evidence from an IRS Field Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(11), pages 3489-3529, November.
    12. Löfgren, Åsa & Nordblom, Katarina, 2020. "A theoretical framework of decision making explaining the mechanisms of nudging," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 1-12.
    13. Katherine L. Milkman & Sean F. Ellis & Dena M. Gromet & Youngwoo Jung & Alex S. Luscher & Rayyan S. Mobarak & Madeline K. Paxson & Ramon A. Silvera Zumaran & Robert Kuan & Ron Berman & Neil A. Lewis &, 2024. "Megastudy shows that reminders boost vaccination but adding free rides does not," Nature, Nature, vol. 631(8019), pages 179-188, July.
    14. Maximilian Kasy & Anja Sautmann, 2021. "Adaptive Treatment Assignment in Experiments for Policy Choice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(1), pages 113-132, January.
    15. Saugato Datta & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2014. "Behavioral Design: A New Approach to Development Policy," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 60(1), pages 7-35, March.
    16. Howard White, 2019. "The twenty-first century experimenting society: the four waves of the evidence revolution," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-7, December.
    17. Séverine Toussaert, 2018. "Eliciting Temptation and Self†Control Through Menu Choices: A Lab Experiment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(3), pages 859-889, May.
    18. 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.
    19. David Laibson, 1997. "Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 443-478.
    20. Daniel L. Chen & Martin Schonger & Chris Wickens, 2016. "oTree - An open-source platform for laboratory, online, and field experiments," Post-Print hal-04315125, HAL.
    21. Brülisauer, Marcel & Goette, Lorenz & Jiang, Zhengyi & Schmitz, Jan & Schubert, Renate, 2020. "Appliance-specific feedback and social comparisons: Evidence from a field experiment on energy conservation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    22. Dani Rodrik, 2010. "Diagnostics before Prescription," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 24(3), pages 33-44, Summer.
    23. 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.
    24. Hunt Allcott, 2015. "Site Selection Bias in Program Evaluation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 130(3), pages 1117-1165.
    25. Christopher J. Bryan & Elizabeth Tipton & David S. Yeager, 2021. "Behavioural science is unlikely to change the world without a heterogeneity revolution," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 5(8), pages 980-989, August.
    26. Eva Vivalt, 2020. "How Much Can We Generalize From Impact Evaluations?," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(6), pages 3045-3089.
    27. Robert Jensen, 2010. "The (Perceived) Returns to Education and the Demand for Schooling," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 125(2), pages 515-548.
    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. Löschel, Andreas & Rodemeier, Matthias & Werthschulte, Madeline, 2023. "Can self-set goals encourage resource conservation? Field experimental evidence from a smartphone app," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    2. Stefano DellaVigna & Elizabeth Linos, 2022. "RCTs to Scale: Comprehensive Evidence From Two Nudge Units," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 90(1), pages 81-116, January.
    3. Kenneth T. Gillingham & Sébastien Houde & Arthur A. van Benthem, 2021. "Consumer Myopia in Vehicle Purchases: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 13(3), pages 207-238, August.
    4. Iain P. Embrey, 2020. "States of nature and states of mind: a generalized theory of decision-making," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 88(1), pages 5-35, February.
    5. Emma Boswell Dean & Frank Schilbach & Heather Schofield, 2017. "Poverty and Cognitive Function," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Poverty Traps, pages 57-118, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Adam M. Lavecchia & Heidi Liu & Philip Oreopoulos, 2014. "Behavioral Economics of Education: Progress and Possibilities," NBER Working Papers 20609, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Paul Adams & Benedict Guttman‐Kenney & Lucy Hayes & Stefan Hunt & David Laibson & Neil Stewart, 2022. "Do Nudges Reduce Borrowing and Consumer Confusion in the Credit Card Market?," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 89(S1), pages 178-199, June.
    8. Wilfred Amaldoss & Mushegh Harutyunyan, 2023. "Pricing of Vice Goods for Goal-Driven Consumers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(8), pages 4541-4557, August.
    9. Andor, Mark A. & Gerster, Andreas & Peters, Jörg, 2022. "Information campaigns for residential energy conservation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    10. 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).
    11. Houser, Daniel & Liu, Jia & Reiley, David H. & Urbancic, Michael B., 2021. "Checking out temptation: A natural experiment with purchases at the grocery register," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 39-50.
    12. 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.
    13. He, Shutong & Blasch, Julia & Robinson, Peter John & van Beukering, Pieter, 2024. "Social comparison feedback in decision-making context: Environmental externality levels and psychological traits matter," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    14. Christina Gravert, 2024. "From Intent to Inertia: Experimental Evidence from the Retail Electricity Market," CESifo Working Paper Series 11139, CESifo.
    15. Anett John, 2020. "When Commitment Fails: Evidence from a Field Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(2), pages 503-529, February.
    16. Bonan, Jacopo & Battiston, Pietro & Bleck, Jaimie & LeMay-Boucher, Philippe & Pareglio, Stefano & Sarr, Bassirou & Tavoni, Massimo, 2021. "Social interaction and technology adoption: Experimental evidence from improved cookstoves in Mali," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    17. Werthschulte, Madeline, 2023. "Present focus and billing systems: Testing ‘pay-as-you-go’ vs. ‘pay-later’," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 108-121.
    18. Lars Behlen & Oliver Himmler & Robert Jäckle, 2023. "Defaults and effortful tasks," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(5), pages 1022-1059, November.
    19. Zachary Breig & Matthew Gibson & Jeffrey Shrader, 2019. "Why Do We Procrastinate? Present Bias and Optimism," Department of Economics Working Papers 2019-15, Department of Economics, Williams College.
    20. Houdek, Petr, 2024. "Nudging in organizations: How to avoid behavioral interventions being just a façade," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles
    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • D90 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - General

    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:ces:ceswps:_12279. 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.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.