Talk:Nudge theory

A single example would be great. Thanks. 37.5.208.114 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:18, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

fyi yall
this reads a bit like a piece that advocates that theory is good/ cool/ effective/ modern/ savvy/ influential. I think it is an interesting concept. But the theory's concrete standing in scientific or other circles, or it's true influence in whatever sphere is not well reflected in this article. I am not tagging it for tone, but someone could. for those who care about this subject, I would put more work into this article. skakEL 18:22, 23 January 2014 (UTC)

I agree, there a lot of pages like this in this general area of faddish trends in psychology as applied to politics, economics etc. Some a bareley referenced and some exist like cloud castles referencing each other but nothing in the actual real world. Lot of hard yards needed. 110.23.47.123 (talk) 23:38, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't realise I wasn't logged in for previous comment which is mine Robertwhyteus (talk) 23:40, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, this is a good start. "Nudge" is not a faddish concept but a hugely influential one in several disciplines. However, the name of the article is a misnomer. "Nudge theory" is not a thing. Nudge is a concept that is used in a theory called "libertarian paternalism" (as invented by Sunstein/Thaler). If I could I would change the name of the article to "Nudging". It's hugely influential concept in: Cognitive Psychology, Behavioral Economics, Applied Ethics, Social Psychology, and many others... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.191.12.108 (talk) 19:49, 5 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I think 'Nudge theory' is OK. Thaler and Sunstein might not have used this term themselves, but the phrase appears extremely frequently in high-standard academic literature on the subject.--ChrisSampson87 (talk) 11:42, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

I disagree - this should not be called "nudge theory". The authors do not call it that way, it is not a theory in any technically accurate sense of the term, and this page inaccurately portrays it that way. The academic literature does not use the term frequently, at least not the one in behavioral economics. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:45:5C33:C867:A064:D8A7:FAB:8136 (talk) 23:03, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Essential Reading
I don't think it's mention in name, but the nudge theory can already be detected in the works of Kurt Lewin: https://archive.org/details/KurtLewinResolvingSocialConflictsReeducationOfGermans --105.8.0.175 (talk) 17:30, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You need a third party reference to make any such connections -Snowded TALK 17:43, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

related concept: gamification
Hi! don't you think that gamification is a related concept and should be referenced?--Helderpmc (talk) 14:53, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Primary self-source added by D kout moved here

 * Applied in the retail environment, the nudge theory has also the potential to influence food purchasing. In online supermarkets, altering the default order to show foods in ascending order of saturated fat significantly reduced the saturated fat content of the chosen foods.

Content from recent edit added by moved here. Primary source by Koutoukidis, Dimitrios A. Adakiko (talk) 04:26, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Isn't this just "design"?
so, the idea of "nudges" is that the environment somebody is engaging with is designed to produce more of a specific behavior? and that one specific set of actions in a path is made to be the easiest way to do a thing? that's what we in the arts usually call design. so, it's interesting that this article links to videogames, when videogames are designed this way, because this is what good design is. like, from package design to web design, to architecture, this is what designing things is for, this is what it's meant to do, it nudges you into intended behaviors.

I dunno, I stumbled on here and I feel like I fell into some kind of behavioral economics zone that hasn't head of the arts and discovered the unifying theory of graphic design from first principles and then gave it a new name. like, I barely know where to start for linking in those pages because where does one even begin?? like, do I start with Cybernetics and keep rolling on up?

98.247.146.29 (talk) 08:48, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

The distinction between type 1 and type 2 nudges has the wrong reference
The distinction as well as the figure is from this paper by Hansen & Jespersen 2013:

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/european-journal-of-risk-regulation/article/nudge-and-the-manipulation-of-choice/D1ED64479FF868BD79FFE90E76A4AB54 93.167.99.226 (talk) 20:42, 14 March 2024 (UTC)