IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/122714.html

Deceptive choice architecture and behavioral audits: a principles‐based approach

Author

Listed:
  • Mills, Stuart

Abstract

Regulators are increasingly concerned about deceptive, online choice architecture, including dark patterns and behavioral sludge. From a behavioral science perspective, fostering a regulatory environment which reduces the economic harm caused by deceptive designs, while safeguarding the benefits of well-meaning behavioral insights, is essential. This article argues for a principles-based approach and proposes behavioral audits as a tool to support this approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Mills, Stuart, 2024. "Deceptive choice architecture and behavioral audits: a principles‐based approach," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 122714, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:122714
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://researchonline.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/122714/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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. Cass R. Sunstein, 2022. "The distributional effects of nudges," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(1), pages 9-10, January.
    3. Susan E. Dudley & Zhoudan Xie, 2022. "Nudging the nudger: Toward a choice architecture for regulators," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(1), pages 261-273, January.
    4. 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.
    5. Mills, Stuart, 2022. "Personalized nudging," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 150-159, January.
    6. Sunstein, Cass R., 2021. "Viewpoint: Are food labels good?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    7. Michael Hallsworth, 2023. "A manifesto for applying behavioural science," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(3), pages 310-322, March.
    8. Lucia A. Reisch & Cass R. Sunstein, 2016. "Do Europeans like nudges?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11(4), pages 310-325, July.
    9. Riccardo Rebonato, 2014. "A Critical Assessment of Libertarian Paternalism," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 357-396, September.
    10. 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.
    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. S. Mills & S. Costa & C. R. Sunstein, 2023. "AI, Behavioural Science, and Consumer Welfare," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 387-400, September.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. 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).
    5. Romain Cadario & Pierre Chandon, 2019. "Viewpoint: Effectiveness or consumer acceptance? Tradeoffs in selecting healthy eating nudges," Post-Print hal-02508983, HAL.
    6. Rafaï, Ismaël & Ribaillier, Arthur & Jullien, Dorian, 2025. "The impact on nudge acceptability judgements of framing and consultation of the targeted population," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 176-191, January.
    7. 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.
    8. Haoyang Yan & J. Frank Yates, 2019. "Improving acceptability of nudges: Learning from attitudes towards opt-in and opt-out policies," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 14(1), pages 26-39, January.
    9. Fasolo, Barbara & Heard, Claire & Scopelliti, Irene, 2024. "Mitigating cognitive bias to improve organizational decisions: an integrative review, framework, and research agenda," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 125404, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Danuta Miłaszewicz, 2022. "Survey Results on Using Nudges for Choice of Green-Energy Supplier," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-19, April.
    11. Eyal Pe’er & Yuval Feldman & Eyal Gamliel & Limor Sahar & Ariel Tikotsky & Nurit Hod & Hilla Schupak, 2019. "Do minorities like nudges? The role of group norms in attitudes towards behavioral policy," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 14(1), pages 40-50, January.
    12. 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.
    13. Mark Harcourt & Gregor Gall & Margaret Wilson, 2023. "The effects of public goods framing for a union default policy," Economic and Industrial Democracy, Department of Economic History, Uppsala University, Sweden, vol. 44(4), pages 1197-1221, November.
    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, revised May 2025.
    15. Paul M. Lohmann & Elisabeth Gsottbauer & Christina Gravert & Lucia A. Reisch, 2025. "Nudging, Fast and Slow: Experimental Evidence from Food Choices under Time Pressure," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 88(10), pages 2595-2627, October.
    16. Lohmann, Paul M & Gsottbauer, Elisabeth & Farrington, James & Human, Steve & Reisch, Lucia A, 2024. "Choice architecture promotes sustainable choices in online food-delivery apps," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 125835, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. 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.
    18. Benno Torgler, 2022. "The power of public choice in law and economics," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(5), pages 1410-1453, December.
    19. Fels, Katja M., 2021. "Who nudges whom? Field experiments with public partners," Ruhr Economic Papers 906, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    20. Bruns, Hendrik & Kantorowicz-Reznichenko, Elena & Klement, Katharina & Luistro Jonsson, Marijane & Rahali, Bilel, 2016. "Can Nudges Be Transparent and Yet Effective?," WiSo-HH Working Paper Series 33, University of Hamburg, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences, WISO Research Laboratory.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • R14 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Land Use Patterns
    • J01 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - General - - - Labor 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:ehl:lserod:122714. 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: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.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.