Mis-Nudging Morality

References

• Abeler J, Nosenzo D, Raymond C (2019) Preferences for truth‐telling. Econometrica 87(4):1115–1153.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Anderson C, Kraus MW, Galinsky AD, Keltner D (2012) The local-ladder effect: Social status and subjective well-being. Psych. Sci. 23(7):764–771.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Babcock L, Loewenstein G, Issacharoff S, Camerer C (1995) Biased judgments of fairness in bargaining. Amer. Econom. Rev. 85(5):1337–1343.Google Scholar
• Bateman IJ, Day BH, Jones AP, Jude S (2009) Reducing gain–loss asymmetry: A virtual reality choice experiment valuing land use change. J. Environ. Econom. Management 58(1):106–118.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bénabou R, Tirole J (2004) Willpower and personal rules. J. Polit. Econom. 112(4):848–886.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beshears J, Choi JJ, Laibson D, Madrian BC, Milkman KL (2015) The effect of providing peer information on retirement savings decisions. J. Finance 70(3):1161–1201.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bohn HG (1855) A Hand-book of Proverbs: Comprising Ray's Collection of English Proverbs, with His Additions from Foreign Languages. And a Complete Alphabetical Index (G. Bell).Google Scholar
• Bursztyn L, Fiorin S, Gottlieb D, Kanz M (2019) Moral incentives in credit card debt repayment: Evidence from a field experiment. J. Polit. Econom. 127(4):1641–1683.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cain DM, Loewenstein G, Moore DA (2005) The dirt on coming clean: Perverse effects of disclosing conflicts of interest. J. Legal Stud. 34(1):1–25.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Capraro V, Jagfeld G, Klein R, Mul M, Van De Pol I (2019) Increasing altruistic and cooperative behaviour with simple moral nudges. Sci. Rep. 9(1):1–11.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Champ PA, Moore R, Bishop RC (2009) A comparison of approaches to mitigate hypothetical bias. Agricultural Resource Econom. Rev. 38(2):166-180.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cialdini RB, Trost MR, Newsom JT (1995) Preference for consistency: The development of a valid measure and the discovery of surprising behavioral implications. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 69(2):318–328.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cummings RG, Taylor LO (1999) Unbiased value estimates for environmental goods: A cheap talk design for the contingent valuation method. Amer. Econom. Rev. 89(3):649–665.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Damgaard MT, Gravert C (2018) The hidden costs of nudging: Experimental evidence from reminders in fundraising. J. Public Econom. 157:15–26.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dana J, Weber RA, Kuang JX (2007) Exploiting moral wiggle room: Experiments demonstrating an illusory preference for fairness. Econom. Theory 33(1):67–80.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Daniels DP, Zlatev JJ (2019) Choice architects reveal a bias toward positivity and certainty. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 151:132–149.Crossref, Google Scholar
• DellaVigna S, Linos E (2022) RCTs to scale: Comprehensive evidence from two nudge units. Econometrica 90(1):81–116.Google Scholar
• DellaVigna S, Pope D (2018) Predicting experimental results: who knows what? J. Polit. Econom. 126(6):2410–2456.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Epley N, Tannenbaum D (2017) Treating ethics as a design problem. Behav. Sci. Policy 3(2):72–84.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Falk A, Zimmermann F (2018) Information processing and commitment. Econom. J. 128(613):1983–2002.Google Scholar
• Fiore SM, Harrison GW, Hughes CE, Rutström EE (2009) Virtual experiments and environmental policy. J. Environ. Econom. Management 57(1):65–86.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fitzsimons GJ, Shiv B (2001) Nonconscious and contaminative effects of hypothetical questions on subsequent decision making. J. Consumer Res. 28(2):224–238.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gino F, Pierce L (2009) The abundance effect: Unethical behavior in the presence of wealth. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 109(2):142–155.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gino F, Schweitzer ME, Mead NL, Ariely D (2011) Unable to resist temptation: How self-control depletion promotes unethical behavior. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 115(2):191–203.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gneezy U, Saccardo S, Van Veldhuizen R (2019) Bribery: Behavioral drivers of distorted decisions. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc. 17(3):917–946.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gneezy U, Saccardo S, Serra-Garcia M, van Veldhuizen R (2020) Bribing the self. Games Econom. Behav. 120:311–324.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gollwitzer PM (1999) Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans. Amer. Psych. 54(7):493–503.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Goswami I, Urminsky O (2016) When should the ask be a nudge? The effect of default amounts on charitable donations. J. Marketing Res. 53(5):829–846.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greenberg J (2002) Who stole the money, and when? Individual and situational determinants of employee theft. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 89(1):985–1003.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harvey P, Martinko MJ (2009) An empirical examination of the role of attributions in psychological entitlement and its outcomes. J. Organ. Behav. 30(4):459–476.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Koenker R, Machado JA (1999) Goodness of fit and related inference processes for quantile regression. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 94(448):1296–1310.Google Scholar
• Kouchaki M, Smith-Crowe K, Brief AP, Sousa C (2013) Seeing green: Mere exposure to money triggers a business decision frame and unethical outcomes. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 121(1):53–61.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kristal AS, Whillans AV (2020) What we can learn from five naturalistic field experiments that failed to shift commuter behaviour. Nature Human Behav. 4(2):169–176.Crossref, Google Scholar
• List JA (2001) Do explicit warnings eliminate the hypothetical bias in elicitation procedures? Evidence from field auctions for sportscards. Amer. Econom. Rev. 91(5):1498–1507.Google Scholar
• List JA, Gallet CA (2001) What experimental protocol influence disparities between actual and hypothetical stated values? Environ. Resource Econom. 20(3):241–254.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mazar N, Hawkins SA (2015) Choice architecture in conflicts of interest: Defaults as physical and psychological barriers to (dis)honesty. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 59:113–117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mazar N, Amir O, Ariely D (2008) The dishonesty of honest people: A theory of self-concept maintenance. J. Marketing Res. 45(6):633–644.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Milkman KL, Rogers T, Bazerman MH (2008) Harnessing our inner angels and demons: What we have learned about want/should conflicts and how that knowledge can help us reduce short-sighted decision making. Perspect. Psych. Sci. 3(4):324–338.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Milkman KL, Beshears J, Choi JJ, Laibson D, Madrian BC (2011) Using implementation intentions prompts to enhance influenza vaccination rates. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 108(26):10415–10420.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Monin B, Miller DT (2001) Moral credentials and the expression of prejudice. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 81(1):33–43.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Morales AC, Amir O, Lee L (2017) Keeping it real in experimental research—Understanding when, where, and how to enhance realism and measure consumer behavior. J. Consumer Res. 44(2):465–476.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Murphy JJ, Allen PG, Stevens TH, Weatherhead D (2005) A meta-analysis of hypothetical bias in stated preference valuation. Environ. Resource Econom. 30(3):313–325.Crossref, Google Scholar
• O’Hora D, Maglieri KA (2006) Goal statements and goal-directed behavior: A relational frame account of goal setting in organizations. J. Organ. Behav. Management 26(1-2):131–170.Google Scholar
• Pierce L, Rees-Jones A, Blank C (2020) The negative consequences of loss-framed performance incentives. NBER Working Paper 26619, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Reiff J, Dai H, Beshears J, Milkman KL (2020) Save more today or tomorrow: The role of urgency and present bias in nudging pre-commitment. Preprint, submitted June 11, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3625338.Google Scholar
• Rogers T, Milkman KL, John L, Norton MI (2013) Making the best-laid plans better: How plan making increases follow-through. Working Paper, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Saccardo S, Serra-Garcia M (2021) Cognitive flexibility or moral commitment? Evidence of anticipated beliefs distortion. Preprint, submitted August 18, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3676711.Google Scholar
• Sachdeva S, Iliev R, Medin DL (2009) Sinning saints and saintly sinners: The paradox of moral self-regulation. Psych. Sci. 20(4):523–528.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schultz PW, Nolan JM, Cialdini RB, Goldstein NJ, Griskevicius V (2007) The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psych. Sci. 18(5):429–434.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Seuntjens TG, Zeelenberg M, Van de Ven N, Breugelmans SM (2015) Dispositional greed. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 108(6):917–933.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tenbrunsel AE, Diekmann KA, Wade-Benzoni KA, Bazerman MH (2010) The ethical mirage: A temporal explanation as to why we are not as ethical as we think we are. Res. Organ. Behav. 30:153–173.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhang T, Gino F, Bazerman MH (2014) Morality rebooted: Exploring simple fixes to our moral bugs. Res. Organ. Behav. 34:63–79.Crossref, Google Scholar