Please wait a minute...
心理学报  2018, Vol. 50 Issue (8): 803-813    DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2018.00803
  “以小拨大:行为决策助推社会发展”专栏 本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
以小拨大:行为决策助推社会发展
何贵兵1,李纾2,3,梁竹苑2,3
1浙江大学 心理与行为科学系, 杭州 310028;
2中国科学院行为科学重点实验室中国科学院心理研究所, 北京 100101;
3中国科学院大学 心理学系, 北京 100049
Behavioral decision-making is nudging China toward the overall revitalization
HE Gui-Bing1,LI Shu2,3,LIANG Zhu-Yuan2,3
1 Department of Psychology and Behavioral Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310028, China;
2 CAS Key Laboratory of Behavioral Science, Institute of Psychology, Beijing 100101, China;
3 Department of Psychology, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
全文: PDF(549 KB)  
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)       背景资料
文章导读  
摘要 作为《心理学报》“以小拨大:行为决策助推社会发展”专栏的开篇, 本文尝试简要介绍助推含义和发展历程, 分析助推的必要性, 小结助推的主要方法和应用领域, 评述助推研究在提升民众的健康、财富、幸福等方面“以小拨大”的作用, 澄清关于助推的若干争议, 并对研究者开展助推研究提出了若干建议。在文章的最后, 我们简要勾勒了本专栏论文的主要内容, 讨论了助推研究在国内起步发展的方向, 冀望更多的心理学工作者加入到“助推研究”的行列。
服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
何贵兵
李纾
梁竹苑
关键词 助推行为科学行为决策公共政策促进社会发展    
Abstract:As an editorial for Acta Psychologica Sinica’s special column, this paper provides a concise overview of the nudge concept and its progress. The necessity of the concept is analyzed, and the main methods and fields of application are summarized. The effects of the concept on the promotion of people’s health, wealth, and happiness are elucidated, and the related disputes are clarified. Several suggestions that may help researchers in carrying out nudge research are also derived. We briefly draw the outlines for several papers in this special column and discuss the outlook for how nudge research should begin in China with the goal of attracting psychologists to devote to nudge research.
Key wordsnudge    behavioral sciences    behavioral decision making    public policy    promoting social development
收稿日期: 2018-05-04      出版日期: 2018-07-02
ZTFLH:  B849:C91  
基金资助:* 国家自然科学基金项目(71671162, 71761167001), 北京市自然科学基金项目(9172019)资助。
通讯作者: 梁竹苑, E-mail: liangzy@psych.ac.cn   
引用本文:   
何贵兵, 李纾, 梁竹苑. 以小拨大:行为决策助推社会发展[J]. 心理学报, 2018, 50(8): 803-813.
HE Gui-Bing, LI Shu, LIANG Zhu-Yuan. Behavioral decision-making is nudging China toward the overall revitalization. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2018, 50(8): 803-813.
链接本文:  
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2018.00803      或      http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlxb/CN/Y2018/V50/I8/803
Allcott, H. (2011). Social norms and energy conservation. Journal of Public Economics, 95(9–10), 1082–1095.
Arimura, T. H., Li, S., Newell, R. G., & Palmer, K. (2012). Cost-effectiveness of electricity energy efficiency programs. Energy Journal, 33, 63–99.
Behavioural Insights Team. (2015). The behavioural insights team update report 2013–2015. London: Cabinet Office. Retrieved from http://www.behaviouralinsights.co.uk/wp- content/uploads/2015/07/BIT_Update-Report-Final-2013-2015.pdf.
Benartzi, S., Beshears, J., Milkman, K. L., Sunstein, C. R., Thaler, R. H., Shankar, M., … Galing, S. (2017). Should governments invest more in nudging?. Psychological Science, 28(8), 1041–1055.
Bonini, B., Hadjichristidis, C., & Graffeo, M. (2018). Green nudging. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 50(8), 814–826.
Dawley, L. T., Dawley Jr, H. H., Glasgow, R. E., Correa, P., & Rice, J. (1991). Smoking control and smoking rate: Implications for worksite smoking cessation. Psychological Reports, 68(3_suppl), 1191–1194.
Dolan, P., Hallsworth, M., Halpern, D., King, D., Metcalfe, R., & Vlaev, I. (2012). Influencing behaviour: The mindspace way. Journal of Economic Psychology, 33(1), 264–277.
Duchini, E. (2017). Is college remedial education a worthy investment? New evidence from a sharp regression discontinuity design. Economics of Education Review, 60, 36–53.
Fan, Y., Cui, W., & Jiang, J. (2018). The backfire effect of default amounts on donation behavior. Acta Psychologica Sinica. [樊亚凤, 崔稳权, 蒋晶. (2018). 网络公益平台默认选项设置对个人捐赠意愿的影响及作用机制. 心理学报.]
Gen, X., Zhang, F., Wang, J., & Yao, Y. (2018). Health goal priming decreases high-calorie food consumption. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 50(8), 840–847. [耿晓伟, 张峰, 王艳净, 范琳琳, 姚艳. (2018). 健康目标启动降低高热量食物消费. 心理学报, 50(8), 840–847.]
Gigerenzer, G., Luan, S., & Liu, Y. (2018). Are we truly irrational and almost impossible to educate? Analyzing the scientific evidence behind libertine paternalism. Acta Psychologica Sinica. [Gigerenzer, G., 栾胜华, 刘永芳. (2018). 人非理性且难教化?论支持自由家长主义的证据. 心理学报.]
Grüne-Yanoff, T., & Hertwig, R. (2016). Nudge versus boost: How coherent are policy and theory?. Minds and Machines, 26(1–2), 149–183.
Halpern, D. D. (2015). Inside the nudge unit: How small changes can make a big difference. London: Random House.
Hanks, A. S., Just, D. R., Smith, L. E., & Wansink, B. (2012). Healthy convenience: Nudging students toward healthier choices in the lunchroom. Journal of Public Health, 34(3), 370–376.
He, G. (2016). Nudge: The third way. Management Insights, 6, 101?105.
[何贵兵. (2016). 助推: 第三条道路. 管理视野, 6, 101– 105.]
He, Y. (2018-01-19). The second year of the universal two-child policy: Why did the birth population not rise?. The Beijing News, Retrieved from http://www.bjnews.com. cn/opinion/2018/01/19/473135.html. [何亚福. (2018年1月19日). “全面二孩”第二年, 出生人口为何不升反降?新京报, 取自: http://www.bjnews.com. cn/opinion/2018/01/19/473135.html.]
Hertwig, R.& Ryall, M. D. (2016). Nudge vs. boost: Agency dynamics under 'libertarian paternalism'. Retrieved from SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2711166.
Holland, R. W., Hendriks, M., & Aarts, H. (2005). Smells like clean spirit: Nonconscious effects of scent on cognition and behavior. Psychological Science, 16(9), 689–693.
Huang, Y-N., Song, X-Y., Shao, Y., Li, S., & Liang, Z-Y. (2018). Nudging: Default option effect and response mode promote organ donor registry participation in China. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 50(8), 868–879. [黄元娜, 宋星云, 邵洋, 李纾, 梁竹苑. (2018). 以小拨大: 默认选项和反应模式效应助推中国器官捐献登记. 心理学报, 50(8), 868–879.]
Ito, K. (2015). Asymmetric incentives in subsidies: Evidence from a large-scale electricity rebate program. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 7, 209–237.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Macmillan.
Kay, A. C., Wheeler, S. C., Bargh, J. A., & Ross, L. (2004). Material priming: The influence of mundane physical objects on situational construal and competitive behavioral choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 95(1), 83–96.
Li, A., Wang, H., Sun, H., Xiong, G., & Yang, S. (2018). The nudge effect of “foresight for the future of our children”: Pregnancy and environmental intertemporal choice. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 50(8), 858–867. [李爱梅, 王海侠, 孙海龙, 熊冠星, 杨韶丽. (2018). “长计远虑”的助推效应: 怀孕与环境跨期决策. 心理学报, 50(8), 858–867.]
Li, M., Sun, Y., & Chen, H. (2018). The decoy effect as a nudge: Boosting hand hygiene with a worse option. Psychological Science. DOI: 10.1177/0956797618761374
Li, S. (2001). Allais Paradox: A behavioral explanation. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 33(2), 176–181. [李纾. (2001). 艾勒悖论(Allais Paradox)另释. 心理学报, 33(2), 176–181.]
Li, S. (2016). Neither "carrot" nor "stick": A new shortcut to nudge social development. Management Insights, 6, 92?96. [李纾. (2016). 既非“胡萝卜”也非“大棒”: 助推社会发展的一条新捷径. 管理视野, 6, 92–96.]
Libotte, E., Siegrist, M., & Bucher, T. (2014). The influence of plate size on meal composition. Literature review and experiment. Appetite, 82, 91–96.
Lu, X. & Hsee, C. K. (2018). Joint evaluation versus single evaluation: A field full of potentials. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 50(8), 827–839.
[路西, 奚恺元. (2018). 联合评估和单独评估: 富有潜力的助推手段. 心理学报, 50(8), 827–839.] Social and Behavioral Sciences Team. (2015). Social and Behavioral Sciences Team annual report. Washington, DC: National Science and Technology Council, Executive Office of the President. Retrieved from https://www.dol. gov/asp/evaluation/reports/sbst_2015_annual_report_final_9_14_15.pdf.
Sunstein, C. R. (2014). Why nudge: The politics of libertarian paternalism. Yale University Press.
Teachman, B. A., Norton, M. I., & Spellman, B. A. (2015). Memos to the president from a “Council of Psychological Science Advisers”. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(6), 697–700.
Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Wang, X. T. (2018). Using behavioral economics to cope with uncertainty: Expand the scope of effective nudging. Acta Psychologica Sinica. [王晓田. (2018). 用行为经济学应对不确定性: 拓展有效助推的范围. 心理学报.]
Wang, X., An, X., Luo, H., Xu, S., Yu, X., Hu, S., & Wang, Y. (2018). Anchoring effect as a nudge on improving public health: Two field experiments. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 50(8), 848–857. [王晓庄, 安晓镜, 骆皓爽, 徐晟, 于馨, 胡施雅, 王玉涵. (2018). 锚定效应助推国民身心健康: 两个现场实验. 心理学报, 50(8), 848–857.]
World Bank. (2015). World developent report 2015: Mind, society, and behavior. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Xin, C., Meng, Y., Lin, Q., & Qin, Z. (2018). Exploring the effect of women’s childbearing deadline on women’s childbearing motivation. Acta Psychologica Sinica. [邢采, 孟彧琦, 林青青, 秦子玉. (2018). 生育年龄限制感提高女性的计划生育数量. 心理学报.]
[1] Nicolao Bonini; Constantinos Hadjichristidis; Michele Graffeo. 绿色助推[J]. 心理学报, 2018, 50(8): 814-826.
[2] 路西, HSEE. Christopher K.. 联合评估和单独评估:富有潜力的助推手段[J]. 心理学报, 2018, 50(8): 827-839.
[3] 黄元娜, 宋星云, 邵洋, 李纾, 梁竹苑. 以小拨大:默认选项和反应模式效应助推中国器官捐献登记[J]. 心理学报, 2018, 50(8): 868-879.
[4] 李爱梅, 王海侠, 孙海龙, 熊冠星, 杨韶丽. “长计远虑”的助推效应:怀孕与环境跨期决策[J]. 心理学报, 2018, 50(8): 858-867.
[5] 王晓庄, 安晓镜, 骆皓爽, 徐晟, 于馨, 胡施雅, 王玉涵. 锚定效应助推国民身心健康:两个现场实验[J]. 心理学报, 2018, 50(8): 848-857.
[6] 李大治,王二平. 公共政策制定程序对政策可接受性的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2007, 39(06): 1093-1101.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
版权所有 © 《心理学报》编辑部
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发  技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn