Whom Do We Trust on Social Policy Interventions?

Abstract

Social policy interventions, such as nudges (behavioral change techniques), have gained significant traction globally. But what do the public think? Does the type of expert proposing a nudge influence the kinds of evaluations the public make about nudges? Three experiments investigated this by presenting U.S. (N = 689) and U.K. (N = 978) samples with descriptions of nudges (genuine and fictitious) proposed by either scientists or the government. Overall, compared to opaque and fictitious nudges, transparent and genuine nudges were judged more ethical and plausible, and scientists proposing them were judged more trustworthy than a government working group. Also, trust in fictitious interventions proposed by scientists was higher than in genuine interventions proposed by a government working group.