When it comes to nudging, it’s very much a case of ‘different strokes for different folks'. A free donut might entice some people to take a vaccine; for others, it might make them even more skeptical. Fortunately, a combination of digital footprints and ‘thin slicing’ psychology means that nudges can now be targeted to the right people in the right way.
There are “moral meanings” that people ascribe to objects in white and black colors. We show that consumers see buying a product in white color as an act that is morally good and buying a product in black color as an act that is morally bad. Those who buy white-colored products feel licensed to behave less prosocially afterward, while those who buy black-colored products are more prosocial as they feel a need to compensate for their initial misconduct.
Minor acts of dishonesty that range from cheating on one’s taxes to petty institutional corruption are very prevalent in everyday life social settings. How others behave in these settings or what they believe is the proper course of action may lead to minor or major acts of dishonesty. Our research finds that exposure to increased peer cheating promoted major dishonesty, while the presence of rule reminders reduced minor acts of dishonesty without influencing major dishonesty.
Charities have different moral objectives. Some seek to promote welfare (e.g., Red Cross), but others seek to promote justice and equality (e.g., ACLU). We demonstrate how these different charities can employ specific positive emotions in their campaigns to nudge donations. Charities that seek to promote welfare should utilize compassion in their campaigns, but charities that seek to promote equality in society should utilize gratitude in their campaigns.
When it comes to behaviour, politics is never absent, argued Mike Kelly, at a UCL Centre for Behaviour Change seminar on policy and evidence.
