Abstract

Presenting a default option is known to influence important decisions. That includes decisions regarding advance medical directives, documents people prepare to convey which medical treatments they favor in the event that they are too ill to make their wishes clear. Some observers have argued that defaults are unethical because people are typically unaware that they are being nudged toward a decision. We informed people of the presence of default options before they completed a hypothetical advance directive, or after, then gave them the opportunity to revise their decisions. The effect of the defaults persisted, despite the disclosure, suggesting that their effectiveness may not depend on deceit. These findings may help address concerns that behavioral interventions are necessarily duplicitous or manipulative.

pdf

Additional Information

ISSN
2379-4615
Print ISSN
2379-4607
Pages
pp. 35-42
Launched on MUSE
2016-02-01
Open Access
N

Copyright

Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.