Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-03T00:01:36.673Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Expectations, opportunities, and awareness: A case for combining i- and s-frame interventions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 August 2023

Ben R. Newell Open the ORCID record for Ben R. Newell [Opens in a new window] ,
Samuel Vigouroux  and
Harry Greenwell
Ben R. Newell
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia ben.newell@unsw.edu.au; http://www2.psy.unsw.edu.au/Users/BNewell/ UNSW Institute for Climate Risk & Response, Sydney, Australia s.vigouroux@student.unsw.edu.au
Samuel Vigouroux
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia ben.newell@unsw.edu.au; http://www2.psy.unsw.edu.au/Users/BNewell/
Harry Greenwell
Affiliation:
Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, Australian Government, Barton, ACT, Australia harry.greenwell@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We argue that: (1) disappointment in the effectiveness of i-frame interventions depends on realistic expectations about how they could work; (2) opportunities for system reform are rare, and i-frame interventions can lay important groundwork; (3) Chater & Loewenstein's evidence that i-frame interventions detract from s-frame approaches is limited; and (4) nonetheless, behavioural scientists should consider what more they can contribute to systemic reforms.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 46 , 2023 , e170
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Australian Government. (2018). National consumer protection framework for online wagering – National policy statement. Retrieved from https://www.dss.gov.au/communities-and-vulnerable-people-programs-services-gambling/national-consumer-protection-framework-for-online-wagering-national-policy-statementGoogle Scholar
Australian Government. (2019). Supporting supervisors to improve return-to-work outcomes of injured or ill workers. Retrieved from https://behaviouraleconomics.pmc.gov.au/projects/supporting-supervisors-improve-return-work-outcomes-injured-or-ill-workersGoogle Scholar
Australian Government. (2020). Better choices: Enhancing informed decision-making for online wagering consumers. Retrieved from https://behaviouraleconomics.pmc.gov.au/projects/applying-behavioural-insights-online-wageringGoogle Scholar
Australian Government. (2022). Communication counts: Helping small business supervisors support ill and injured workers to return to the workplace. Retrieved from https://behaviouraleconomics.pmc.gov.au/projects/communication-counts-helping-small-business-supervisors-support-ill-and-injured-workersGoogle Scholar
DellaVigna, S., & Linos, E. (2022). RCTs to scale: Comprehensive evidence from two nudge units. Econometrica, 90, 81–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dreijerink, L., & Paradies, G. (2020). How to reduce individual environmental impact? A literature review into the effects and behavioral change potential of carbon footprint calculators (Tech Rep. TNO 2020 P11148). Energy Transition, TNO: Amsterdam, NL.Google Scholar
Hallsworth, M. (2022). Making sense of the “Do nudges work?” Debate. Behavioral Scientist, Retrieved from https://behavioralscientist.org/making-sense-of-the-do-nudges-work-debate/Google Scholar
Hertwig, R., & Grüne-Yanoff, T. (2017). Nudging and boosting: Steering or empowering good decisions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12, 973–986.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Newell, B. R., & Moss, J. M. (2021). Making it easier to take environmental actions is not enough: Policymakers must also emphasize why action is necessary. Behavioural Science and Policy, 7(2), 91–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newell, B. R., & Shanks, D. R. (2023). Open minded: Searching for truth about the unconscious mind. MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sher, S., McKenzie, C. R. M., Müller-Trede, J., & Leong, L. (2022). Rational choice in context. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 31(6), 518–525. https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214221120387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simmons, J., Nelson, L., & Simonsohn, U. (2022). Meaningless means #1: The average effect of nudging is d=0.43. Blog post [105] posted on November 3. Retrieved from http://datacolada.org/105Google Scholar
Xie, B., Brewer, M. B., Hayes, B. K., McDonald, I., & Newell, B. R. (2019). Predicting climate change risk perception and willingness to act. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 65, 101331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar