Who nudges whom? Expert opinions on behavioural field experiments with public partners

Author:

Fels Katja MarieORCID

Abstract

AbstractField experiments which test the application of behavioural insights to policy design have become popular to inform policy decisions. This study is the first to empirically examine who and what drives these experiments with public partners. Through a mixed-methods approach, based on a novel dataset of insights from academic researchers, behavioural insight team members and public servants, I derive three main results: First, public bodies have a considerable influence on study set-up and sample design. Second, high scientific standards are regularly not met in cooperative field experiments, mainly due to risk aversion in the public body. Third, transparency and quality control in collaborative research are low with respect to pre-analysis plans, the publication of results and medium or long-term effects. To remedy the current weaknesses, the study sketches out several promising ways forward, such as setting up a matchmaking platform for researchers and public bodies to facilitate cooperation, and using time-embargoed pre-analysis plans.

Funder

German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy

Ministry of Innovation, Science and Research of the State of North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany

Publisher

Cambridge University Press (CUP)

Subject

Political Science and International Relations,Sociology and Political Science,Social Sciences (miscellaneous),Social Psychology,Applied Psychology

Reference80 articles.

1. Behavioural science and policy: where are we now and where are we going?;Sanders;Behavioural Public Policy,2018

2. Misleading evidence and evidence-led policy: making social science more experimental;Sherman;The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science,2003

3. Supporting Policy Reform from the Outside

4. OECD (2020), Behavioural Insights. Retrieved from: https://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-policy/behavioural-insights (accessed on July 14, 2020).

5. Tangen, T. (2020), Interview Conducted on 30 June 2020. Unpublished Transcript.

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Are social experiments being hyped (too much)?;TATuP - Zeitschrift für Technikfolgenabschätzung in Theorie und Praxis;2023-12-13

2. Comprehensive Evaluation of the Behavioral Insights Group Rotterdam;Administration & Society;2023-06-25

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3