IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceco/v106y2023ics2214804323000733.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The role of autonomy and reactance for nudging — Experimentally comparing defaults to recommendations and mandates

Author

Listed:
  • Bruns, Hendrik
  • Perino, Grischa

Abstract

Scholars, policymakers and decisionmakers sometimes criticize behavioral public policies, such as nudges, for undermining behavioral autonomy. We provide evidence from an experiment where participants encountered a recommendation, default value, or mandatory minimum contribution accompanied by varying information on the source, before contributing to climate protection and answering an autonomy-related questionnaire. We find that decisionmakers perceive defaults as more freedom threatening than recommendations and less threatening and angering than mandatory minimum contributions. Intrinsic motivation to protect the climate moderates these differences. An expert, but not the political source reduces threat to freedom and anger. Findings improve our understanding of decisionmakers’ perceptions of nudges relative to other interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • 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).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:106:y:2023:i:c:s2214804323000733
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2023.102047
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804323000733
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socec.2023.102047?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Clee, Mona A & Wicklund, Robert A, 1980. "Consumer Behavior and Psychological Reactance," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 6(4), pages 389-405, March.
    2. Indranil Goswami & Oleg Urminsky, 2016. "When should the ask be a nudge? The Effect of Default Amounts on Charitable Donations," Natural Field Experiments 00659, The Field Experiments Website.
    3. David Hagmann & Emily H Ho & George Loewenstein, 2019. "Nudging out support for a carbon tax," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 9(6), pages 484-489, June.
    4. Diederich, Johannes & Goeschl, Timo, 2017. "To mitigate or not to mitigate: The price elasticity of pro-environmental behavior," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 209-222.
    5. 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.
    6. Carlsson, Fredrik & Johansson-Stenman, Olof, 2019. "Optimal Prosocial Nudging," Working Papers in Economics 757, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    7. Felix Ebeling & Sebastian Lotz, 2015. "Domestic uptake of green energy promoted by opt-out tariffs," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(9), pages 868-871, September.
    8. Dora L. Costa & Matthew E. Kahn, 2013. "Energy Conservation “Nudges” And Environmentalist Ideology: Evidence From A Randomized Residential Electricity Field Experiment," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 680-702, June.
    9. Fredrik Carlsson & Christina Gravert & Olof Johansson-Stenman & Verena Kurz, 2021. "The Use of Green Nudges as an Environmental Policy Instrument," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(2), pages 216-237.
    10. 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.
    11. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:4:p:310-325 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Grischa Perino & Luca A. Panzone & Timothy Swanson, 2014. "Motivation Crowding In Real Consumption Decisions: Who Is Messing With My Groceries?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 52(2), pages 592-607, April.
    13. Riccardo Rebonato, 2014. "A Critical Assessment of Libertarian Paternalism," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 357-396, September.
    14. Cappelletti, Dominique & Mittone, Luigi & Ploner, Matteo, 2014. "Are default contributions sticky? An experimental analysis of defaults in public goods provision," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 331-342.
    15. Cass R. Sunstein, 2018. "Misconceptions about nudges," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 2(1), pages 61-67, March.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. repec:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:1:p:26-39 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Karen Yeung, 2018. "Algorithmic regulation: A critical interrogation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(4), pages 505-523, December.
    22. Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
    23. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:1:p:62-74 is not listed on IDEAS
    24. 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.
    25. repec:cup:judgdm:v:7:y:2012:i:1:p:69-76 is not listed on IDEAS
    26. 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.
    27. Roland Bénabou & Jean Tirole, 2003. "Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 70(3), pages 489-520.
    28. Michael Kosfeld & Armin Falk, 2006. "The Hidden Costs of Control," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1611-1630, December.
    29. repec:cup:judgdm:v:8:y:2013:i:3:p:202-213 is not listed on IDEAS
    30. Cass R. Sunstein & Lucia A. Reisch, 2021. "Climate-Friendly Default Rules," Springer Books, in: Ranjula Bali Swain & Susanne Sweet (ed.), Sustainable Consumption and Production, Volume I, chapter 0, pages 141-164, Springer.
    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. 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.
    2. Liu, Xin & Zhao, Ning & Li, Shu & Zheng, Rui, 2022. "Opt-out policy and its improvements promote COVID-19 vaccinations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).
    3. Rehse, Dominik & Tremöhlen, Felix, 2020. "Fostering participation in digital public health interventions: The case of digital contact tracing," ZEW Discussion Papers 20-076, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    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. 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.
    6. Diederich, Johannes & Goeschl, Timo & Waichman, Israel, 2023. "Self-nudging is more ethical, but less efficient than social nudging," VfS Annual Conference 2023 (Regensburg): Growth and the "sociale Frage" 277679, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    7. 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.
    8. Lemken, Dominic, 2020. "When do defaults stick and when are they ethical? Taxonomy, sytematic review and design recommendations," DARE Discussion Papers 2005, Georg-August University of Göttingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development (DARE).
    9. Mills, Stuart, 2022. "Finding the ‘nudge’ in hypernudge," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Lemken, Dominic, 2020. "When do defaults stick and when are they ethical? - taxonomy, systematic review and design recommendations," Key Food Choices and Climate Change Project 307568, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    13. Leonhard Lades & Federica Nova, 2022. "Ethical Considerations when using Behavioural Insights to Reduce Peoples Meat Consumption," Working Papers 202209, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    14. 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.
    15. L. Mundaca & H. Moncreiff, 2021. "New Perspectives on Green Energy Defaults," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 44(3), pages 357-383, September.
    16. Denis Hilton & Nicolas Treich & Gaetan Lazzara & Philippe Tendil, 2018. "Designing effective nudges that satisfy ethical constraints: the case of environmentally responsible behaviour," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 17(1), pages 27-38, November.
    17. Ghesla, Claus & Grieder, Manuel & Schubert, Renate, 2020. "Nudging the poor and the rich – A field study on the distributional effects of green electricity defaults," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    18. 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.
    19. Ismaël Rafaï & Arthur Ribaillier & Dorian Jullien, 2021. "The impact on nudge acceptability judgments of framing and consultation of the targeted population," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-03228638, HAL.
    20. Ropret Homar, Aja & Knežević Cvelbar, Ljubica, 2021. "The effects of framing on environmental decisions: A systematic literature review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).

    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:106:y:2023:i:c:s2214804323000733. 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.