Nudging
HC 1
Predicatable problems:
- Separation of benefits and costs
- Difficulty of problems
- (invullen met slide)
Deviation from optimallity:
- Heuristics
- Overreaction to losses
- Status quo
- Social norms
- Impulsivity
- Optimism and overconfidence
How does Nudging interacts with the system thinking?
Nudging is influential in this situation
Nudging: A gentle push. Especially in order to gain attention or give a signal (Thaler &
Sunstein, 2021)
Take aways of readings hc1:
- A little push can go a long way
- Too much of a push can give counter reactions (negative results, people don’t want
to be pushed in a way)
- People can start strategizing to when to follow a nudge
Libertarian Paternalism:
Putting to words together, we let people be while making sure they will get the best (state
should interfere): Nudge is somewhere in between.
Libertarian paternalism is the idea that it is both possible and legitimate for private and
public institutions to affect behavior while also respecting freedom of choice, as well as the
implementation of that idea.
Choice architecture:
Choice architecture are architectures that designs choice environment so as to encourage
the chooser to select a preferred choice.
better architectures provides freedom
A choice architect designs
(
the choice environment so
1
,as to encourage the chooser
to select a preferred
choice. Maintain the
chooser’s freedom to select
other choices. Make
desirable choice available,
and
easier. Make undesirable
choice available, and
harder.
A choice architect designs
the choice environment so
as to encourage the chooser
to select a preferred
choice. Maintain the
chooser’s freedom to select
other choices. Make
desirable choice available,
and
2
,easier. Make undesirable
choice available, and
harder.
Stairs example:
- Not cleaning the stairs (showing others use it
- Piano
- Kcal burned
Principles of Nudging:
- Cheap and easy ways
- Often small solutions for big problems
- Choice architects?
- Freedom of choice
- Not mandates
- They are transparent and able to be avoided.
Neutral design slide (cafeteria): design of environment influences choices
nudges is adding choices and influencing other choices
Stimulus-response compatibility: sidewalk shortcut example, push door with handle)
2. Course organization
HC 2 – Intuition, Overconfidence and Defaults
- Intuition: A quick judgment or a hypothesized initial proposal with
little modification.
o It helps with processing multiple pieces of information.
- System 1 quickly proposes intuitive answers to judgment problems
as they arise.
- System 2 monitors the quality of these proposals, which it may
endorse, correct, or override
Moderators for intuition:
Intuition doesn’t have to become better over time/experience (couple preference prediction
example) – Moderator
Monty Hall Problem:
2/3 of the people keep the first choice box
While switching after the first box wins are more frequent??
3
, Optimizing monty hall: The key question is: What is the best strategy for the
contestant to maximize their chances of winning the car? Should they
stick with their initial choice, switch, or does it not matter?
The counterintuitive result is that the contestant should always switch
doors. If they switch, their probability of winning the car is 2/3, while if
they stick with their initial choice, the probability is only 1/3. The optimal
strategy can be understood through probability reasoning, involving
conditional probabilities and the fact that Monty's action provides
additional information.
Why? Cognitive biases causing (monty hall effect):
- Loss aversion, we don’t want to switch the second time and after that seeing that
your first had the prize (other way around you can make up stories and feel
consistent (reden geven) (Anticipated regret)
- Status quo
- Endowment effect an individual places a higher value on an object that they already
own than the value they would place on that same object if they did not own it.
- Illusion of control
- Switching/ change aversion
- Projection bias: The projection bias is a self-forecasting error, where we overestimate
how much our future selves will share the same beliefs, values and behaviors as our
current selves, causing us to make short-sighted decisions
4