Do Nudges Harm Autonomy? Empirical Studies on the Effect of Nudges on Expected and Experienced Autonomy

Abstract

In the past decade, nudging as a tool to change behaviour has become increasingly popular in scientific research and public policy. However, it has been suggested that nudges may come at the cost of the decision maker’s perceived autonomy. Previous research has shown that perceived autonomy is crucial for well-being. We therefore examined whether nudges violate subjective autonomy as has been suggested. The first part of the dissertation focussed on people’s expectations about different types of nudges to harm subjective autonomy. We found that social norm nudges were not expected to harm autonomy, while default nudges, under specific conditions, were expected to have a negative effect. Further research showed that neither social norm nudges, nor default nudges, harmed autonomy when people had actually been exposed to these nudges. It was also investigated whether making the decision maker aware of the nudge and its effect would increase (expected) subjective autonomy. We found that transparency in general did not affect autonomy, with the exception that it negatively affected autonomy expectations under certain circumstances. Finally, we found that also in high stake choices (i.e., being registered as an organ donor), nudges did not decrease perceived autonomy when people made an active choice upon being nudged. People who did not act after being nudged and were therefore automatically registered as a donor did report lower autonomy. Altogether, nudges appear to be mostly harmless insofar subjective autonomy is concerned even though people sometimes expect otherwise. In case of passive decision makers who do not respond to nudges, nudges may bear negative implications. These findings bear important implications for communication as a public policy tool.