American attitudes toward nudges
To successfully select and implement nudges, policy makers need a psychological understanding of who opposes nudges, how they are perceived, and when alternative methods (e.g. forced choice) might work better. Using two representative samples, we examined four factors that influence U.S. attitudes toward nudges aEUR" types of nudges, individual dispositions, nudge perceptions, and nudge frames. Most nudges were supported, although opt out defaults for organ donations were opposed in both samples. aEURoeSystem 1aEUR nudges (e.g. defaults and sequential orderings) were viewed less favorably than aEURoeSystem 2aEUR nudges (e.g. educational opportunities or reminders) System 1 nudges were perceived as more autonomy threatening, whereas System 2 nudges were viewed as more effective for better decision making and more necessary for changing behavior. People with greater empathetic concern tended to support both types of nudges and viewed them as the aEURoerightaEUR kind of goals to have. Individualists opposed both types of nudges, and conservatives tended to oppose both types. Reactant people and those with a strong desire for control opposed System 1 nudges. To see whether framing could influence attitudes, we varied the description of the nudge in terms of the target (Personal vs. Societal) and the reference point for the nudge (Costs vs. Benefits) Empathetic people were more supportive when framing highlighted societal costs or benefits, and reactant people were more opposed to nudges when frames highlighted the personal costs of rejection.