[HN Gopher] Evidence for behavioural interventions looks increas...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Evidence for behavioural interventions looks increasingly shaky
        
       Author : helsinkiandrew
       Score  : 64 points
       Date   : 2022-07-28 06:07 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.economist.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.economist.com)
        
       | meltyness wrote:
       | This seems like a healthier language for these types of
       | incentives.
       | 
       | Without discussion, engineering a system where the elevator is on
       | the top floor always is torture, sadism even.
       | 
       | But what of scholarships? Is money truly the common language
       | spoken at the tender ages these are issued? How do you convince
       | students, once beyond the drudgery of state-mandated public
       | school, that the sudden tradition, idolatry, and care of academia
       | is even a change? How do you put that fruit at eye-level without
       | using cash to whip scholars into meeting minimums, as adjudicated
       | by paper examination?
        
       | Vetch wrote:
       | What is a nudge? Do dark patterns, tactics employed by casinos or
       | loot box games that depend on whales and children of wealthy
       | parents count?
        
         | prohobo wrote:
         | Fundamentally yes, except that nudge theory is about
         | manipulating collective action (or inaction) in populations.
         | Promoters of this theory also envision themselves as trying to
         | help, not fleece people of their money.
        
           | asimpletune wrote:
           | I don't know a lot about this, but would an example be like
           | when Draghi was at the ECB and he responded with "Whatever it
           | takes" when asked about the S. Europe debt crises?
           | 
           | Or how exactly does nudging look like in practice?
        
             | simonh wrote:
             | There's a difference between nudge as in the technical
             | meaning here from behavioural psychology, and what we would
             | commonly call a nudge in everyday english. An economist or
             | politician might describe Draghi's statement as trying to
             | nudge the behaviour of the banks, sure, but that doesn't
             | conform to what behavioural psychologists mean by a nudge
             | in the technical sense.
             | 
             | Which is fine of course, pretty much every specialist
             | discipline has special meanings for some everyday words.
        
             | t_mann wrote:
             | No, Draghi's statement was signalling, not nudging. He was
             | willing to throw billions at the problem (and eventually
             | did), his communication was meant to reduce the need for
             | such an intervention.
        
             | prohobo wrote:
             | Nudging would look like this (excuse the politics, it's
             | just the most immediate source of examples): people who are
             | up to date on their vaccinations may get perks and be
             | allowed to enter certain venues just by showing their card,
             | while everyone else gets no perks and has to pay for
             | testing to enter venues or are barred entirely.
             | 
             | Another example: instead of regulating testing for travel,
             | allow third party companies to manage official testing
             | certificates and set their own prices. This happened in the
             | UK, where Covid tests were free from the government unless
             | you wanted to travel - at which point you had to pay a
             | private clinic upwards of PS50 (sometimes more like PS150)
             | to get a 24 hour pass.
             | 
             | Nudging looks very much like incentives and restrictions in
             | a mobile game.
        
               | cal85 wrote:
               | I think your examples are explicit incentives, not
               | nudges. From what I've read, a nudge is typically
               | something much subtler that works on an emotional level.
               | For example the tax office might A/B test different
               | wording for a tax demand letter template, finding that
               | it's more effective to say "Get a PS100 early-filing
               | discount if you pay before $DATE" instead of "An
               | additional PS100 late-filing penalty will be charged if
               | you fail to pay before $DATE". A strict logician or
               | economist might point out they amount to the same thing,
               | but the different emotional approach nonetheless makes a
               | measurable difference in the aggregate response. That's
               | what is usually meant by a nudge.
        
               | prohobo wrote:
               | That would simply be PR or friendly copy. The
               | implementation of nudge in your example would be to
               | create the "discount" itself to push more people to pay
               | taxes on time. Even then, in your example everyone
               | already understands and agrees with the rules of "pay a
               | fee for being late" because it's such a common practice
               | and is rational.
               | 
               | Nudges don't need to be rational - at least not directly.
               | They need to push people to do what you want them to do
               | to attain some opaque goal.
               | 
               | Similar to dark patterns, nudging is not about creating
               | reasonable guides for people to follow, it's about making
               | them feel less contempt for being shoehorned into taking
               | actions they'd otherwise prefer not to. Maybe people
               | don't want to pay taxes, but the proverbial "we" decided
               | long ago that taxes are a necessity to maintain the state
               | and so we punish people with prison time for cheating on
               | them. In nudging, "we" don't choose anything, the
               | institution quietly forces our hand without any
               | democratic process.
        
             | refurb wrote:
             | I thought a good example is when you get a drivers license
             | and it asks if you'd like to become an organ donor, it
             | "pre-checks" the "yes" box rather than leaving it blank.
             | 
             | The idea being people who are on the fence are more likely
             | to just accept the "yes" than go through the effort to
             | check "yes"
        
               | chasd00 wrote:
               | Or why the "subscribe me to all your spam and your third
               | party's spam" checkbox is always checked by default.
        
             | yourusername wrote:
             | >Or how exactly does nudging look like in practice?
             | 
             | If you want people to take the stairs you might make the
             | elevator stay at the top floors so that people always have
             | to press the call elevator button, they might choose to
             | walk up instead of waiting.
             | 
             | If you want people to eat less animal based proteins you
             | can make vegan options the default for catering/meal
             | options with meat only available as a option you can
             | request. Some people will take whatever is the default.
             | 
             | You want more organ donations you make being a organ donor
             | the default with a option to opt-out.
             | 
             | The goal is to make the desired option the easiest way out
             | so most people will avoid the cognitive work of doing what
             | they would actually prefer if they thought about it.
        
               | AmericanChopper wrote:
               | Turning the option that most people want into the
               | hardest/most tedious/most onerous option for them to
               | select is a great way to foster contempt for your system.
        
               | yourusername wrote:
               | I think nudges are supposed to be subtle enough that you
               | don't notice them. And probably for every not so subtle
               | manipulation we notice there are 5 we don't notice.
        
               | cobbzilla wrote:
               | Some are meant to be noticed: mandated calorie counts on
               | food menus (nudge to health eating), or dire warnings on
               | cigarette packs (nudge to quit smoking). Neither of these
               | have had any measurable impact on their goals; I welcome
               | evidence to the contrary.
        
               | BoxOfRain wrote:
               | Anecdotally I was still smoking when they brought in
               | mandated gore on British tobacco pouches, very quickly
               | people were joking like 'I got the bloke with a hole in
               | his side, just need the curious baby with a cigarette and
               | I've got the lot' etc. Those who were really bothered by
               | it just got a baccy tin or if they smoked straights, a
               | cigarette case.
               | 
               | What led me to quit wasn't any 'nudging' by the
               | government but simply that vaping is a lot more
               | convenient than smoking and lacked the finger-wagging
               | inherent in other nicotine replacement approaches, and
               | once I was only vaping I could turn down the nicotine
               | over the course of six months or so to spare the worst of
               | the grimness of quitting.
        
               | AmericanChopper wrote:
               | I'm sure that's what professional nudgers like to think,
               | but I certainly feel like I see them all over the place.
        
         | djmips wrote:
         | I've heard that whales, which might be a thing in casinos,
         | isn't really a thing in video game markets.
        
       | tpoacher wrote:
       | The problem I see increasingly is the conflation of "X as an
       | intervention doesnt work" with "There is no evidence for X",
       | which is two entirely different things.
       | 
       | To give a concrete example: "Stop-smoking interventions commonly
       | fail" equated to "no evidence that stopping smoking improves
       | health".
        
       | winslett wrote:
       | Read the article. Retitled article should read "Not all nudges
       | work".
       | 
       | The interesting bit from the source article is that changes to
       | the mean do not always reflect the value of the nudge. So, when
       | judging a nudge, data should be spun various ways to determine
       | impact on different segments of the population.
        
         | ur-whale wrote:
         | > "Not all nudges work".
         | 
         | The real question being, what's the actual hit rate. If below
         | 50%, they'd be better off flipping a coin.
        
       | prohobo wrote:
       | The chair of behavioral insights advisory in the WHO is one of
       | the co-authors of Nudge Theory. So it's probably safe to say that
       | government health programs - in any country that is supported by
       | the WHO - also implement Nudge to some extent.
        
         | jansan wrote:
         | Freddie Sayers made a really, really good comment at the end of
         | his recent UnHerd video about this:
         | 
         | "It's not a conspiracy. It's no a communist plot. But what it
         | is, is taking a particular worldview, a view about how society
         | should operate, and removing it from the normal democratic
         | conversation, where people can battle it out, and instead
         | hardwiring it into poerful supranational organizations."
         | 
         | Here is the part of the video that I am referring to:
         | https://youtu.be/Lm-S5zlnHIk?t=528
        
           | brandmeyer wrote:
           | > It's not a conspiracy ... poerful [sic] supranational
           | organizations.
           | 
           | Come on. You can't claim that something isn't a conspiracy
           | and then invoke world-government conspiracies in the same
           | paragraph and expect to be taken seriously.
        
             | nradov wrote:
             | It's not a conspiracy. These powerful supranational
             | organizations are doing it out in the open and have
             | publicly stated their intentions. Many of us disagree with
             | their goals, and consider their methods unethical.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | raxxorraxor wrote:
       | Following the same erroneous line of thought the next strategies
       | might now situate themselves between nudging and strong
       | enforcement. Something to really look forward to.
       | 
       | Asking people or setting an example are of course ideas that have
       | to be discarded, applied statistical analysis is far more
       | convenient and you have to write some kind of paper. They don't
       | strictly have to but are certainly decisively nudged to do that.
       | In the interest of their career of course, you got to get that
       | numbers up.
       | 
       | At least nudging worked for pissoirs though. I like the subtlety
       | of the critic saving the theory. It would be good to do something
       | against publication bias as suggested in the article.
        
         | AzzieElbab wrote:
         | It seems weird to me that no one mentions the importance of
         | timing and source of "nudging". I hoped govs and agencies would
         | learn not to go overboard with nudging when trust levels in
         | their policies was low to begin with.
        
       | taylorius wrote:
       | Honest debate and persuasion is so 20th Century.
        
         | ariendj wrote:
         | I kind of miss honesty, though.
        
           | winReInstall wrote:
           | Honest debate was the ultimate adventure. Sad its gone,
           | replaced by yelling matches in feeling hive-mind choirs.
           | Guess this how medieval times felt, with oppossing faiths.
        
             | nervousvarun wrote:
             | "Guess this how medieval times felt, with oppossing
             | faiths."
             | 
             | And we all know that led to...crusades?
             | 
             | Welp.
        
             | klibertp wrote:
             | At least for now we still have the yelling matches where
             | people of different faiths can yell at each other without
             | fear of burning at a stake. Getting "cancelled" as a result
             | of yelling the unpopular thing is still less painful than
             | torture and execution on the town's plaza.
             | 
             | "For now" and "still" are the words which I had to insert
             | in the above, and their forced presence seriously scares
             | me.
        
       | martingoodson wrote:
       | This is a poor headline (from The Economist) that does not
       | reflect the referenced work. The correct interpretation is that
       | nudges need to be tested in the field to find out if they work.
       | This is common knowledge in behavioural science.
       | 
       | Experts are not good at predicting which nudges are going to work
       | in practice[1]. Trials are always needed.
       | 
       | This is no different to the requirement for drug trials. Drugs
       | are not released just on the say so of pharmacologists, empirical
       | evidence is needed. And yet nobody says pharmacology is looking
       | 'shaky'.
       | 
       | [1] https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2115126119
        
         | vintermann wrote:
         | I wonder if the problem with "nudge" is that for publicity
         | reasons, people only call it a nudge if it sounds like a tiny
         | thing that doesn't sound like it would work. If it's an obvious
         | intervention, such as a default option in a pension form, or
         | higher prices on tobacco, or condom vending machines in hotel
         | restrooms, they don't call it a nudge anymore.
         | 
         | And I also have the feeling some of these may be babies that
         | the Economist's editors would _like_ to throw out with the
         | bathwater.
        
           | t_mann wrote:
           | Default options in forms are the standard example of a nudge,
           | a tax however is definitely not a nudge, the article actually
           | explicitly says so.
        
             | vintermann wrote:
             | In that big meta study that questioned the efficiency of
             | nudges, it was said in the discussion on HN that they
             | excluded default options from the definition of nudges.
             | 
             | Either way, the line seems arbitrary to me, and it's part
             | of why I think they're moving the goalposts.
        
               | t_mann wrote:
               | I don't know what people on HN said, but it's the first
               | example of nudges of you look here (and pretty much
               | anywhere else):
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nudge_theory#Types_of_nudge
               | s
        
               | vintermann wrote:
               | The article in question was "No evidence for nudging
               | after adjusting for publication bias". That study
               | apparently counted default choices on forms as
               | "structural interventions" - a term wide enough to
               | usually include immunisation programs and taxes.
        
           | MichaelCollins wrote:
           | Nudge does seem to imply some degree subtlety. In a
           | colloquial sense, >100% tax rates on cigarettes is more of a
           | shove than a nudge.
        
             | throwaway0a5e wrote:
             | Pretty much every policy stick short of a bullet seems to
             | be sailing under the flag of a nudge these days.
        
           | ZeroGravitas wrote:
           | Nudges are basically the opposite of dark patterns.
           | 
           | If a headline seems dubious when you swap the two then it's
           | probably got an agenda.
           | 
           | "Dark Patterns don't work anyway, so we should carry on using
           | them" vs "Nudges don't work anyway, we should stop using
           | them"
           | 
           | https://www.simpleusability.com/inspiration/2019/03/dark-
           | pat...
        
           | simonh wrote:
           | I don't follow. The Economist's editors aren't the ones
           | deciding what is or isn't counted as a nudge in the academic
           | literature.
        
             | vintermann wrote:
             | The headline doesn't say nudges. It says behavioural
             | interventions.
             | 
             | (and as far as I can tell, the academic literature isn't
             | consistent on what counts as a nudge or not)
        
               | simonh wrote:
               | Nudges are behavioural interventions. It's just a
               | headline.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | simplMath10 wrote:
         | Germans speak German; wow people store information and take up
         | the routines their understanding of that information implies.
         | Field test complete.
         | 
         | Social science is based on observing the same world as "hard"
         | science. We already have plenty of models and theory about
         | information transmission.
         | 
         | Human biology retains information it's structure encounters;
         | social science solved.
         | 
         | Wrapping hard science in cultural semantics does not exclude
         | the hard science explanation from being the right explanation.
         | The social science explanation is superfluous and almost
         | intentionally manipulative; professors will give extra fake
         | points for jumping higher. But if the fake points are of little
         | real world value, people don't care. It's a parlor trick that
         | works on the ignorant, not a fundamental cognitive function of
         | everyone.
        
       | next_xibalba wrote:
       | Can an expert in the field dissuade me of my pessimism about
       | psychology as a science? From the outside looking in, it appears
       | to be a field populated by grifters and incompetents who churn
       | out junk knowledge.
       | 
       | Power Posing (Amy Cuddy) Priming (Bargh, Kahneman, and others)
       | Outright fraudsters (Diederik Stapel, Dirk Smeesters)
       | Precognition (Daryl Bem) Disgust & Homophobia (Yoel Inbar)
       | Anchoring (Kahneman and Jacowitz)
       | 
       | Or is it all of human sciences (the scandal of Alzheimer's
       | research comes to mind)?
        
         | JPLeRouzic wrote:
         | > _about psychology as a science?_
         | 
         | You can easily have the opposite point of view: The so called
         | hard sciences deal with human concepts and not reality. An
         | alien society would not have the same physic or math. Many
         | concepts of our physic are a bit circular or need ad hoc
         | parameters.
         | 
         | Kepler make a good model from data by Tycho Brahe. Newton made
         | an even larger model from Kepler's laws, yet it's only a model.
         | Einstein... you get it. Without Tycho Brahe all the rest would
         | be simply speculations. Without Michael Faraday, would we have
         | Maxwell, and Heaviside?
         | 
         | The Romans did not liked math, and the Bantu migration did not
         | even used writing scripts as we know them. Gengis Khan was able
         | to conquer and create the greatest empire of the world and
         | Mongols of that time used little scripts.
         | 
         | The so called human sciences on contrary deal with reality,
         | it's incredibly complex. There is no real way for us to
         | understand the complexity of reality.
        
           | onlyrealcuzzo wrote:
           | > An alien society would not have the same physic or math
           | 
           | They would have the same math. They might have a different
           | number system.
        
         | robocat wrote:
         | The "human sciences" are just freaking hard - for all the
         | reasons you are pessimistic. The "hard sciences" are much
         | easier - less of that soft stuff to work around.
         | 
         | Agree that the humanities are often pants-on-head whacko.
         | 
         | Disclaimer: hard science engineer type.
        
         | slim wrote:
         | not an expert but around age 17 a psychologist saw I carried a
         | knife and asked if I got separated from my father when I was 9
         | months old. he blew my mind because it was true. till that
         | moment I was thinking of psychology as some sort of fortune
         | telling, now suddenly it's in the realm of science because you
         | can make deductions
        
       | not_knuth wrote:
       | http://archive.today/cuHfh
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-07-28 17:01 UTC)