Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

How autonomy is understood in discussions on the ethics of nudging

  • ANASTASIA VUGTS (a1), MARIËTTE VAN DEN HOVEN (a2), EMELY DE VET (a3) and MARCEL VERWEIJ (a4)

Abstract

Nudging is considered a promising approach for behavioural change. At the same time, nudging has raised ethical concerns, specifically in relation to the impact of nudges on autonomous choice. A complexity is that in this debate authors may appeal to different understandings or dimensions of autonomy. Clarifying the different conceptualisations of autonomy in ethical debates around nudging would help to advance our understanding of the ethics of nudging. A literature review of these considerations was conducted in order to identify and differentiate between the conceptualisations of autonomy. In 33 articles on the ethics of nudging, we identified 280 autonomy considerations, which we labelled with 790 unique autonomy codes and grouped under 61 unique super-codes. Finally, we formulated three general conceptualisations of autonomy. Freedom of choice refers to the availability of options and the environment in which individuals have to make choices. Agency involves an individual's capacity to deliberate and determine what to choose. Self-constitution relates to someone's identity and self-chosen goals. In the debate about the ethics of nudging, authors refer to different senses of autonomy. Clarifying these conceptualisations contributes to a better understanding of how nudges can undermine or, on the other hand, strengthen autonomy.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      How autonomy is understood in discussions on the ethics of nudging
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      How autonomy is understood in discussions on the ethics of nudging
      Available formats
      ×

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      How autonomy is understood in discussions on the ethics of nudging
      Available formats
      ×

Copyright

Corresponding author

*Correspondence to: Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN, Wageningen, The Netherlands. Email: anastasia.vugts@wur.nl

References

Hide All
Ashcroft, R. E. (2013), ‘Doing good by stealth: Comments on “Salvaging the concept of nudge”’, Journal of Medical Ethics, 39(8): 494.
Baldwin, R. (2014), ‘From Regulation to Behaviour Change: Giving Nudge the Third Degree’, Modern Law Review, 77(6): 831857.
Baylis, F., Kenny, N. P., and Sherwin, S. (2008), ‘A relational account of public health ethics’, Public Health Ethics, 1(3): 196209.
Berlin, I. (1958), ‘Two Concepts of Liberty’, In Berlin, Isaiah (1969) Four Essays on Liberty, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Blumenthal-Barby, J. S., and Burroughs, H. (2012), ‘Seeking better health care outcomes: The ethics of using the “nudge”’, The American Journal of Bioethics, 12(2): 110.
Bovens, L. (2009), ‘The ethics of nudge In: Grüne-Yanoff, T., and Hansson, S. O. (Eds.), Preference Change: Approaches From Philosophy, Economics and Psychology. Theory and decision library, (pp. 207219). Springer.
Bovens, L. (2013), ‘Why couldn't I be nudged to dislike a Big Mac?’, Journal of Medical Ethics, 39(8): 495496.
Brooks, T. (2013), ‘Should We Nudge Informed Consent?’, The American Journal of Bioethics, 13(6): 2223.
Cohen, S. (2013), ‘Nudging and informed consent’, The American Journal of Bioethics, 13(6): 311.
Feinberg, J. (1986), Harm to self, New York: Oxford University Press.
Gold, A., and Lichtenberg, P. (2012), ‘Don't call me “nudge”: The ethical obligation to use effective interventions to promote public health’, The American Journal of Bioethics, 12(2): 1820.
Hansen, P. G., and Jespersen, A. M. (2013), ‘Nudge and the manipulation of choice: A framework for the responsible use of the nudge approach to behaviour change in public policy’, The European Journal of Risk Regulation, 1, 328.
Kahneman, D. (2003), ‘A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality’, American Psychologist, 58, 697720.
Kahneman, D. (2011), Thinking, fast and slow, Penguin Books.
Kant, I. (1785), Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten.
Kant, I. (1797), ‘On a supposed right to lie from altruistic motives’, In Singer, P. (Ed.) Ethics. An Anthology, (pp. 280281). Oxford University Press.
Korsgaard, C. M. (1996), The sources of normativity, Cambridge University Press.
Ménard, J-F. (2010), ‘A “nudge” for public health ethics: Libertarian paternalism as a framework for ethical analysis of public health interventions?’, Public Health Ethics, 3(3): 229238.
Mill, J. S. (1859), On Liberty, London.
Ploug, T., and Holm, S., (2013), ‘Pharmaceutical “Nudging”-reinterpreting the ethics of evaluative conditioning’, The American Journal of Bioethics, 13(5): 2527.
Rozin, P., Scott, S., Dingley, M., Urbanek, J. K., Jiang, H., and Kaltenbach, M. (2011), ‘Nudge to nobesity I: Minor changes in accessibility decrease food intake’, Judgment and Decision Making, 6(4): 323332.
Saghai, Y. (2013a), ‘Nudging in interpersonal contexts’, American Journal of Bioethics, 13(6): 3334.
Saghai, Y. (2013b), ‘Salvaging the concept of nudge’, Journal of Medical Ethics, 39(8): 487493.
Saghai, Y. (2013c), ‘The concept of nudge and its moral significance: a reply to Ashcroft, Bovens, Dworkin, Welch and Wertheimer’, Journal of Medical Ethics, 39(8): 499501.
Scanlon, T. (1998), What we owe to each other, Harvard University Press.
Selinger, E., and Whyte, K. (2011), ‘Is there a right way to nudge? The practice and ethics of choice architecture’, Sociology Compass, 5(10): 923935.
Sharot, T. (2011), The optimism bias: A tour of the irrationally positive brain, Pantheon Books.
Steel, P. (2007), ‘The nature of procrastination: a meta-analytic and theoretical review of quintessential self-regulatory failure’, Psychological Bulletin, 133(1): 6594.
Strech, D., and Sofaer, N. (2012), ‘How to write a systematic review of reasons’, Journal of Medical Ethics, 38, 121126.
Sunstein, C. R. (2015), Nudging and choice architecture: ethical considerations. Forthcoming in Yale Journal on Regulation.
Tengland, P. A. (2012), ‘Behavior change or empowerment: on the ethics of health-promotion strategies’, Public Health Ethics, 5(2): 140153.
Thaler, R. H., and Sunstein, C. R. (2008), Nudge: improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness, Penguin Books.
Verweij, M., and van den Hoven, M. (2012), ‘Nudges in public health: Paternalism is paramount’, The American Journal of Bioethics, 12(2): 1617.
Wardrope, A. (2015), ‘Relational autonomy and the ethics of health promotion’, Public Health Ethics, 8(1): 5062.
Wilkinson, T. M. (2013), ‘Thinking harder about nudges’, Journal of Medical Ethics, 39(8): 486.
Type Description Title
WORD
Supplementary materials

Vugts et al. supplementary material
Appendix

 Word (17 KB)
17 KB

How autonomy is understood in discussions on the ethics of nudging

  • ANASTASIA VUGTS (a1), MARIËTTE VAN DEN HOVEN (a2), EMELY DE VET (a3) and MARCEL VERWEIJ (a4)

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed