The current study explored (1) the immediate and prolonged effects of self-nudges promoting fruit intake in the home environment, (2) whether the effect of self-nudges on fruit intake persists... Show moreThe current study explored (1) the immediate and prolonged effects of self-nudges promoting fruit intake in the home environment, (2) whether the effect of self-nudges on fruit intake persists after self-nudges are no longer used (i.e. a temporal spillover effect) and (3) whether self-nudges can install healthy eating habits that, in turn, explain the temporal spillover effect. Participants (N = 331) were randomly assigned to either a control or self-nudge condition in which they had to choose a self-nudge promoting fruit consumption for 8 weeks. Thereafter, participants were asked to remove the self-nudge for 1 week to assess a possible temporal spillover effect. Results showed a positive effect of the self-nudges on fruit consumption right after implementation that continued during the 8 weeks in which the self-nudge was implemented, which was accompanied by an increase in fruit intake habit strength. However, a mixed picture emerged regarding the temporal spillover effect and no support was found for a mediation effect of habit strength. Although this study is only a first exploration of self-nudging to increase healthy food consumption, results indicate that self-nudging may be a promising extension of traditional nudging that can influence behaviour beyond out-of-home settings. Show less
Rookhuijzen, M. van; Vet, E. de; Adriaanse, M.A. 2023
Previous studies show that the effects of (non-transparent) nudges can spill over to later similar decisions without nudges. In the current study, we aimed to determine whether such nudge temporal... Show morePrevious studies show that the effects of (non-transparent) nudges can spill over to later similar decisions without nudges. In the current study, we aimed to determine whether such nudge temporal spillover effects are affected by making nudges transparent. The latter is recommended to (partly) mitigate ethical concerns surrounding the use of nudges. In two experiments, we nudged participants to complete a longer version of a survey. Participants were randomly assigned to either a control, a non-disclosed nudge (using a default to promote taking the longer survey) condition or a disclosed nudge (in which the use of the default nudge was explained) condition. In both Study 1 (N = 1270) and Study 2 (N = 1258) we observed a temporal spillover effect of the disclosed nudge, suggesting that transparency does not negatively affect the temporal spillover effect. Show less
Rookhuijzen, M. van; Vet, E. de; Adriaanse, M.A. 2021
Nudges, such as defaults, are generally found to be effective in guiding immediate behavioural decisions. However, little is known about whether the effect of a nudge can be lasting, meaning that... Show moreNudges, such as defaults, are generally found to be effective in guiding immediate behavioural decisions. However, little is known about whether the effect of a nudge can be lasting, meaning that it spills over to subsequent similar choices without the presence of a nudge. In three experiments, we explored the temporal spillover effects of a default nudge. The results of Experiments 1 (N = 1,077) and 2 (N = 1,036) suggest that nudging participants into completing a longer questionnaire affected their decision for the same behaviour a day later without the presence of a nudge. However, nudging participants into a healthier food choice in Experiment 3 (N = 969) did not result in such a temporal spillover effect. The results indicated that participants' change in attitude towards the nudged behaviour may partly explain the temporal spillover effects. These findings suggest that for some, but not all behaviours, default nudges may have the potential to yield temporal spillover effects and warrant a further investigation of boundary conditions and facilitators of the spillover effects of nudges. Show less
This report is the second output from the Joint Research Centre’s (JRC) Enlightenment 2.0 multi-annual research programme. The work started with the classical Enlightenment premise that reason is... Show moreThis report is the second output from the Joint Research Centre’s (JRC) Enlightenment 2.0 multi-annual research programme. The work started with the classical Enlightenment premise that reason is the primary source of political authority and legitimacy. Recognising that advances in behavioural, decision and social sciences demonstrate that we are not purely rational beings, we sought to understand the other drivers that influence political decision-making. The first output “Understanding our political nature: how to put knowledge and reason at the heart of policymaking” published in 20191, addressed some of the most pressing political issues of our age. However, some areas that we consider crucial to providing an updated scientific model of the drivers of political decision-making were not fully addressed. One of them is the impact of our contemporary digital information space on the socio-psychological mechanisms of opinion formation, decision-making and political behaviour. The JRC, together with a team of renowned experts addresses this knowledge deficit in a report that synthesises the knowledge about digital technology, democracy and human behaviour to enable policymakers to safeguard a participatory and democratic European future through legislation that aligns with human thinking and behaviour in a digital context. It is hoped that this report will prove useful as policymakers reflect upon the forthcoming European Democracy Action Plan, the Digital Services Act, the EU Citizenship Report 2020, as well as on how to legislate against disinformation. The report has been written in spring/summer of 2020 when the COVID-19 pandemic took hold of Europe and the world. During this time, our democracies suffered while technology played a crucial role in keeping societies functioning in times of lockdown. From remote distance education to teleworking, religious services to staying in touch with family and friends, for many but not all, everyday activities moved online. Additionally, technological applications and initiatives multiplied in an attempt to limit the spread of the disease, treat patients and facilitate the tasks of overworked essential personnel. Conversely, however, significant fundamental rights questions have been raised as unprecedented initiatives to track, trace and contain the pandemic using digital technologies have proven controversial. Governments invoking emergency measures in support of public health decision-making, used advanced analytics to collect, process and share data for effective front-line responses that lacked transparency and public consultation. When used as an information source, social media have been found to present a health risk that is partly due to their role as disseminators of health-related conspiracies, with non-English language speakers being at greater risk of exposure to misinformation during the crisis. It is likely that these technologies will have a long-lasting impact beyond COVID-19. Yet despite the immediacy of the crisis, the authors invite the reader to take a longer perspective on technology and democracy to get a deeper understanding of the interrelated nuances. In dark times, we seek to bring light to the importance of understanding the influence of online technologies on political behaviour and decision-making. Show less
