1 Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin.
2 Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2017 Nov;12(6):973-986. doi: 10.1177/1745691617702496. Epub 2017 Aug 9.
In recent years, policy makers worldwide have begun to acknowledge the potential value of insights from psychology and behavioral economics into how people make decisions. These insights can inform the design of nonregulatory and nonmonetary policy interventions-as well as more traditional fiscal and coercive measures. To date, much of the discussion of behaviorally informed approaches has emphasized "nudges," that is, interventions designed to steer people in a particular direction while preserving their freedom of choice. Yet behavioral science also provides support for a distinct kind of nonfiscal and noncoercive intervention, namely, "boosts." The objective of boosts is to foster people's competence to make their own choices-that is, to exercise their own agency. Building on this distinction, we further elaborate on how boosts are conceptually distinct from nudges: The two kinds of interventions differ with respect to (a) their immediate intervention targets, (b) their roots in different research programs, (c) the causal pathways through which they affect behavior, (d) their assumptions about human cognitive architecture, (e) the reversibility of their effects, (f) their programmatic ambitions, and (g) their normative implications. We discuss each of these dimensions, provide an initial taxonomy of boosts, and address some possible misconceptions.
近年来，世界各地的政策制定者开始认识到心理学和行为经济学对人们决策方式的见解的潜在价值。这些见解可以为非监管和非货币政策干预措施的设计提供信息——以及更传统的财政和强制措施。迄今为止，关于行为信息方法的讨论大多强调了“推动”，即旨在引导人们朝特定方向前进，同时保留他们选择自由的干预措施。然而，行为科学也为一种独特的非财政和非强制性干预提供了支持，即“促进”。促进的目的是培养人们做出自己选择的能力，即行使自己的代理权。在此基础上，我们进一步阐述了促进与推动在概念上的区别：这两种干预措施在以下方面有所不同：(a) 它们的直接干预目标，(b) 它们在不同研究计划中的根源，(c) 它们影响行为的因果途径，(d) 它们对人类认知结构的假设，(e) 它们效果的可逆性，(f) 它们的计划雄心，以及(g) 它们的规范含义。我们讨论了这些方面中的每一个，提供了促进措施的初步分类法，并解决了一些可能的误解。
