4 ms·

Some other poster posted that they must have a pretty specific definition of nudge, because it defies credulity that defaults don’t change outcome if only becau

Some other poster posted that they must have a pretty specific definition of nudge, because it defies credulity that defaults don’t change outcome if only because half the time I don’t read the defaults or know where to find them. I mean I just found out two weeks ago you could change the hacker news banner color. Are you telling me I’m in a statistically insignia can’t minority of hacker news users? Also how many settings are there in the average application, you can’t tell me most users go through all of those settings to get exactly what they want.

xyzzy123 4y ago
If defaults don't work then Google wasted 15 billion dollars last year paying Apple to be in the search bar... I guess there must be further detail in the paper and I will have to read it to understand the nuance.
- Gustomaximus 4y ago
  Also fair to recognise google also pays Apple to not make or promote a competitor that may offer far more competition. Id say this is a large part of the reason Gmail, Android and Chrome exist.
- pessimizer 4y ago
  Or Google is using the search bar as a pretense for paying Apple for something else.
  - greggsy 4y ago
    Suggesting that there is a corporate or government conspiracy without actually saying what it might actually be is the worst type of conspiracy.
    - pessimizer 4y ago
      That's not a conspiracy. When two companies, or countries, or individuals have business dealings on many different levels, a lot of things can be negotiated at the same time.
- inglor_cz 4y ago
  Defaults very clearly work in matters such as consent to organ donation. In countries where you need to opt out of organ donation, few people bother to do so. Another question is whether this increases the total amount of successful donations. I was looking around for studies and found this one [1], which basically says "in some countries, yes". [1] https://behavioralpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Does-changing-defaults-save-lives_-Effectd-of-presumed-consent-organ-donation-policies.pdf https://behavioralpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Does...
  - iudqnolq 4y ago
    I've heard people argue that that effect isn't a nudge, it's deceit. That is, all you're doing is tricking people who didn't read carefully. People don't know they've opted in and would opt out if you called and told them that they checked the box. I find it generally plausible that defaults don't matter much for what people consider very important decisions. I have minimal experience in this area, though.
  - manwe150 4y ago
    There is also some research suggesting that defaults in organ donation (so called presumed consent) may decrease rates of actual donations in those countries. I can't find the original podcast where I heard about it (I assume related to either Planet Money or Freakonomics), but found this source: https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2017/09/25/organ-donation-presumed-consent-and-focusing-on-what-matters/ https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2017/09/25/organ-donati...
  - jjgreen 4y ago
    Without consent, it's not a donation. "Harvesting" would be an appropriate name.
    - salawat 4y ago
      Consider that 401k's are an onramp through which one delegates one's capital to be allocated by someone else, and it should be obvious the objective. Capital wants to have the spigot left on. If people don't feed the beast voluntarily, Capital will make that the default.
analog31 4y ago
It seems quite possible for two things to be true: 1) The common sense notion that manipulation works; and 2) Social science couldn't find the signal above the noise.
SilasX 4y ago
> Some other poster posted that they must have a pretty specific definition of nudge, because it defies credulity that defaults don’t change outcome if only because half the time I don’t read the defaults or know where to find them. My pet theory is, these results hinge on, “does it scale?” Like, yes, you can do nudges and see behavioral changes. But what about when everyone is doing it constantly? Then people will get fatigued and form countermeasures. Imagine this dynamic in another context: “Guys, guys check this out, people are guaranteed to buy your product if you show arguments for it to random people!” But, oops, centuries of marketing later, advertising isn’t automatically effective enough to cover its costs, people don’t automatically believe the ads.
IMSAI8080 4y ago
I'm guilty of not reading this paper in any detail but it feels that the default setting "nudge" idea should work as described. So if you e.g. nudge people by setting up a pension plan by default (that they can opt out of) does that seriously fail to cause more people to have a pension? Or is this claiming something else?
- elevaet 4y ago
  Another similar example is jurisdictions that switched to assuming an individual consents to organs donation when they die, rather than having an opt-in system, see much higher rates of organ donation. https://sparq.stanford.edu/solutions/opt-out-policies-increase-organ-donation https://sparq.stanford.edu/solutions/opt-out-policies-increa...
rad88 4y ago
The hacker news banner color doesn't matter and few have ever wanted to change it. But your financial position and needs, what % of your salary you can afford to money-hole until retirement, does matter and is pretty individual. It doesn't defy credulity to me that generally people would make a choice about this (when can I retire?), and that the default doesn't influence it. I grant that it would be surprising if it had no influence at all, but I think the effect is more the social signal that you should want to save the max, that your neighbors probably do (it's the default after all), etc., rather than people completely ignoring/missing it.
- concordDance 4y ago
  The default influenced me and pretty much everyone in my company Ive talked to (namely, almost everyone stuck to it). So yes, it defies credulity.
  - rad88 4y ago
    I believe you. If you know it influenced you though, that means you didn't ignore it or not even realize you could change it, which is the idea I was replying to. Again, it would be surprising if it didn't matter at all, but not unimaginable. What you're saying is that almost everybody in your company would have contributed a lesser amount if not for the default. It means you can all afford to give up $20k or whatever in income this year. There are other factors. There is no truth to the matter of "whether defaults change behavior". This thread started about 401ks and then was taken into color preferences on the web. If someone has a gun to their head is asked if they want to die, I'm sure we'll agree that whatever the default is doesn't matter. Whether defaults do anything depends on what we're talking about. Nudges might work in web ux but not economics, why is that so incredulous?
    - concordDance 4y ago
      But they DO work in economics. Otherwise why would almost everyone contribute the default rather than a lower or higher amount? Defaults are very strong when there is a lot of uncertainty about the payoffs of different answers.
jolux 4y ago
You have to have a certain amount of karma to change the banner color.
HardlyCurious 4y ago
I'm not sure it is useful to lump nudging on decisions users don't want to or don't know how to make in with nudging on decisions users either want to or have to make. It's a no brainer that defaults will alter outcomes for users who aren't willing or capable of making a selection for the choice in question.

xyzzy123 4y ago

If defaults don't work then Google wasted 15 billion dollars last year paying Apple to be in the search bar... I guess there must be further detail in the paper and I will have to read it to understand the nuance.

Gustomaximus 4y ago
Also fair to recognise google also pays Apple to not make or promote a competitor that may offer far more competition. Id say this is a large part of the reason Gmail, Android and Chrome exist.
pessimizer 4y ago
Or Google is using the search bar as a pretense for paying Apple for something else.
- greggsy 4y ago
  Suggesting that there is a corporate or government conspiracy without actually saying what it might actually be is the worst type of conspiracy.
  - pessimizer 4y ago
    That's not a conspiracy. When two companies, or countries, or individuals have business dealings on many different levels, a lot of things can be negotiated at the same time.
inglor_cz 4y ago
Defaults very clearly work in matters such as consent to organ donation. In countries where you need to opt out of organ donation, few people bother to do so. Another question is whether this increases the total amount of successful donations. I was looking around for studies and found this one [1], which basically says "in some countries, yes". [1] https://behavioralpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Does-changing-defaults-save-lives_-Effectd-of-presumed-consent-organ-donation-policies.pdf https://behavioralpolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Does...
- iudqnolq 4y ago
  I've heard people argue that that effect isn't a nudge, it's deceit. That is, all you're doing is tricking people who didn't read carefully. People don't know they've opted in and would opt out if you called and told them that they checked the box. I find it generally plausible that defaults don't matter much for what people consider very important decisions. I have minimal experience in this area, though.
- manwe150 4y ago
  There is also some research suggesting that defaults in organ donation (so called presumed consent) may decrease rates of actual donations in those countries. I can't find the original podcast where I heard about it (I assume related to either Planet Money or Freakonomics), but found this source: https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2017/09/25/organ-donation-presumed-consent-and-focusing-on-what-matters/ https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2017/09/25/organ-donati...
- jjgreen 4y ago
  Without consent, it's not a donation. "Harvesting" would be an appropriate name.
  - salawat 4y ago
    Consider that 401k's are an onramp through which one delegates one's capital to be allocated by someone else, and it should be obvious the objective. Capital wants to have the spigot left on. If people don't feed the beast voluntarily, Capital will make that the default.

analog31 4y ago

It seems quite possible for two things to be true: 1) The common sense notion that manipulation works; and 2) Social science couldn't find the signal above the noise.

SilasX 4y ago

> Some other poster posted that they must have a pretty specific definition of nudge, because it defies credulity that defaults don’t change outcome if only because half the time I don’t read the defaults or know where to find them. My pet theory is, these results hinge on, “does it scale?” Like, yes, you can do nudges and see behavioral changes. But what about when everyone is doing it constantly? Then people will get fatigued and form countermeasures. Imagine this dynamic in another context: “Guys, guys check this out, people are guaranteed to buy your product if you show arguments for it to random people!” But, oops, centuries of marketing later, advertising isn’t automatically effective enough to cover its costs, people don’t automatically believe the ads.

IMSAI8080 4y ago

I'm guilty of not reading this paper in any detail but it feels that the default setting "nudge" idea should work as described. So if you e.g. nudge people by setting up a pension plan by default (that they can opt out of) does that seriously fail to cause more people to have a pension? Or is this claiming something else?

elevaet 4y ago
Another similar example is jurisdictions that switched to assuming an individual consents to organs donation when they die, rather than having an opt-in system, see much higher rates of organ donation. https://sparq.stanford.edu/solutions/opt-out-policies-increase-organ-donation https://sparq.stanford.edu/solutions/opt-out-policies-increa...

rad88 4y ago

The hacker news banner color doesn't matter and few have ever wanted to change it. But your financial position and needs, what % of your salary you can afford to money-hole until retirement, does matter and is pretty individual. It doesn't defy credulity to me that generally people would make a choice about this (when can I retire?), and that the default doesn't influence it. I grant that it would be surprising if it had no influence at all, but I think the effect is more the social signal that you should want to save the max, that your neighbors probably do (it's the default after all), etc., rather than people completely ignoring/missing it.

concordDance 4y ago
The default influenced me and pretty much everyone in my company Ive talked to (namely, almost everyone stuck to it). So yes, it defies credulity.
- rad88 4y ago
  I believe you. If you know it influenced you though, that means you didn't ignore it or not even realize you could change it, which is the idea I was replying to. Again, it would be surprising if it didn't matter at all, but not unimaginable. What you're saying is that almost everybody in your company would have contributed a lesser amount if not for the default. It means you can all afford to give up $20k or whatever in income this year. There are other factors. There is no truth to the matter of "whether defaults change behavior". This thread started about 401ks and then was taken into color preferences on the web. If someone has a gun to their head is asked if they want to die, I'm sure we'll agree that whatever the default is doesn't matter. Whether defaults do anything depends on what we're talking about. Nudges might work in web ux but not economics, why is that so incredulous?
  - concordDance 4y ago
    But they DO work in economics. Otherwise why would almost everyone contribute the default rather than a lower or higher amount? Defaults are very strong when there is a lot of uncertainty about the payoffs of different answers.

jolux 4y ago

You have to have a certain amount of karma to change the banner color.

HardlyCurious 4y ago

I'm not sure it is useful to lump nudging on decisions users don't want to or don't know how to make in with nudging on decisions users either want to or have to make. It's a no brainer that defaults will alter outcomes for users who aren't willing or capable of making a selection for the choice in question.