| Nudges have been used by private companies and governments alike to alter individual's behavior and influence their decision-making process.However,to successfully implement nudges,those who structure choice systems must develop an understanding of how nudges are perceived by the public.Cultural differences between countries can alter people's attitudes towards the same nudges and in turn affect how successful those nudge interventions are.This paper examines the attitude differences between citizens of two different countries,the United States and China,towards different nudges aimed at promoting environmental protection.As the 'fathers' of nudges,economists Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein have introduced and popularized the theory,helping to implement nudges in both the private and public sector.Touted as a unique behavior changing tool/method,nudges use behavioral insights to influence and guide the decision-making process without limiting choice or imposing large economic penalties or incentives.Thaler & Sunstein's book,Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health,Wealth,and Happiness,was used as the basis for this study along with other studies from them and other researchers on the topic.These studies covered the effectiveness,attitudes,perceptions,etc.of nudges in multiple sectors such as healthcare,environmental protection,and finance.Daniel Kahneman's work on the psychology of judgement and decision-making heavily influenced Thaler & Sunstein's work,and in turn,had a large impact on this study as well.His book,Thinking,Fast and Slow,emphasized the dual processing system people use when making decisions.Known as System 1 and System 2,this system is the bases of which Thaler & Sunstein lay out the building blocks of nudges.For studying cultural differences,Dutch psychologist Gerard(Geert)Hendrik Hofstede's work was used as a method to evaluate and measure the cultures in the United States and China.Hofstede's four original cultural dimensions were selected covering individualism-collectivism,masculinity-femininity,uncertainty avoidance,and power distance.The United States and China were chosen as countries of focus due to their large influence on the world,economically and politically.For companies,individuals,and governments alike,it is important to have a good understanding of these two countries.Environmental protection was chosen as the aim for the nudges in this study.In recent years,climate change and global warming have been a concern for many with science illustrating the environmental consequences that are to come if no action is taken.Science has also made it clear that much of the global warming that is happening is not due to nature but human behavior.In light of this,it was decided that the nudges in this study would aim to nudge participants towards adopting environmentally friendly practices.Based off an in-depth literature review,five hypotheses were made to guide this study.The first hypothesis looked at whether attitudes towards different nudges in the United States and China would be the same or different.The remaining four hypotheses predicted which types of nudges would be more acceptable in each country.To test these hypotheses,a survey was sent out to both countries.The notion of acceptance or rejection was used as an indicator of attitude.An English and Chinese version was made and covered items such as demographics,cultural values,environmental beliefs,and attitudes towards different types of nudges.The survey was sent out digitally in both countries through email and social media.Participation was voluntary with participants often passing the survey on to others.Questions asking about values,beliefs,and attitudes were measured using a seven-point Likert Scale.The nudges selected for this study were based off of two different parameters: cognitive systems(System 1 and System 2)and framing(individual focused versus society focused and costs versus benefits).In total eight nudges were designed and included in the survey.Over the course of the study over 300 people participated,with each country having roughly the same number of participants.SPSS Statistics was used to analyze the data gathered.Independent sample t-tests were run to measure and analyze the differences in acceptance scores for both countries.The same method of analysis was also used to examine cultural dimensions and environmental belief scores.Demographics such as gender and age were also analyzed in relation to nudge scores.After all analysis and tests were completed,it was found that the majority of the hypotheses could not be proven.Hypothesis 1(attitudes towards different nudges in the United States and China will be different)was able to be accepted,however,only for nudges 1-6.The data from nudges 7 and 8 was not found to be significant enough to support the hypothesis.Data for hypotheses 2-5 was also found to be not significant enough to prove and support the respective hypotheses.There were several reasons identified that may be able to explain why a majority of the hypotheses could not be proven.One was sample size and representativeness.The United States and China are both large countries with large populations.Considering this,the study would have benefited greatly from a larger sample size.In addition,participant demographics were skewed and were not completely representative of the current populations in each country.Survey distribution method could have also contributed to this as participants all voluntarily took part in the study.Surveys were first sent to previously known contacts such as friends,family,and colleagues who then passed it on to others.Although this method of distribution is simple and efficient,it does lead to participants being clustered in certain areas.Another possible explanation could be differences in Hofstede's cultural dimensions and the cultural findings of this study.Three out of four dimensions differed from Hofstede's findings.This could,again,be due to sample size and representativeness;however,it could also be due to changing cultural attitudes in both the United States and China.Finally,differences between hypotheses and results could be due to the goals of the nudges themselves.Although all tested nudges were aimed at promoting eco-friendly practices,they targeted different types.Some targeted purchasing eco-friendly products while others pushed for less water and electricity usage.The reason why some nudges were deemed more acceptable than others may be partially due to bias towards the nudges themselves and the goals that they are trying to achieve.Although this study was not able to prove many of the proposed hypotheses,it did shine a light on many possible future research topics.As one of the small number of studies that explores attitude differences between the United States and China towards nudges,this study opened many doors for research not only on this particular topic,but on other topics such as environmental nudges,cultural values/perceptions,and age and gender implications.Future research can learn from this study and implement improvements such as larger samples sizes,achieving better representativeness across the populations,and improving the survey distribution method. |
PDF Full Text Request