Regulation for Conservatives: Behavioral Economics and the Case for 'Asymmetric Paternalism'

By Colin F. Camerer, S. Issacharoff, George Loewenstein, Ted O’Donoghue, Matthew Rabin. 2003

1,167 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4e0a4d28f9b9427b611e55ecff45ffb01e93028c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

Citations in the corpus

Choice without Awareness: Ethical and Policy Implications of Defaults (2013, background): “529) characterize a default as “the choice alternative a consumer receives if he/she does not explicitly specify otherwise,” and other authors view defaults similarly (Camerer et al. 2003; Johnson, Bellman, and Lohse 2002; Sunstein and Thaler 2003).”
Present-Biased Preferences and Credit Card Borrowing (2009, neutral): “A number of policy implications with regards to card borrowing depend critically on borrower sophistication (see, for example Camerer et al., 2003).”
The Economist as Therapist: Methodological Ramifications of 'Light' Paternalism (2007, neutral): “The central insight of Camerer et al.'s (2003) notion of 'asymmetric paternalism' is that it is often possible to produce benefits for people who make suboptimal decisions while imposing minimal or no restrictions on those who make rational decisions that optimize their own welfare.”
Environmental Policy Theory Given Bounded Rationality and Other-regarding Preferences (2011, background): “Interventions by means of paternalistic-type policies can help boundedly rational consumers to make better decisions (Camerer et al. 2003).”
A conceptual framework of impression management: new insights from psychology, sociology and critical perspectives (2011, background): “Economic agents may engage in rational behaviour in the sense that they choose the best possible means to achieve their ends, but the ends are not necessarily ‘ what economists had supposed ’ (Camerer et al., 2003, p.1216; quoted in Zarri, 2009, p.2).”
Putting nudges in perspective (2017, background): “Rather than reflecting the broad agenda that underpinned the approach (Camerer et al., 2003; Thaler & Sunstein, 2003, 2008), policy and research has, with notable exceptions, initially focused on a narrow interpretation of the role of behavioural insights in the form of nudges that provide…”
From intention to action: Can nudges help consumers to choose renewable energy? (2014, background): “Secondly, research on the effectiveness of nudges in energy consumption (Allcott, 2011; Allcott and Mullainathan, 2010; Allcott and Rogers, 2012; Costa and Kahn, 2013) has shown the great effectiveness of using nudges as energy policy instruments.”
Decisional enhancement and autonomy: public attitudes towards overt and covert nudges (2013, neutral): “…intelligence alone does not defend against maladaptive decision biases (Stanovich & West, 2008). policy, psychology, economics, law, and ethics (Jolls et al., 1998; Camerer et al., 2003; Rachlinski, 2002; Sunstein & Thaler, 2003; Trout, 2005; Blumenthal-Barby & Burroughs, 2012; Bovens, 2009).”
Promoting Healthy Choices: Information versus Convenience (2010, positive): “The second class of approach we test is what behavioral economists refer to as an “asymmetrically paternalistic” intervention ( Colin Camerer et al. 2003; Richard H. Thaler and Cass R. Sunstein 2003 , which seeks to steer consumers toward “better” behaviors without limiting their freedom of choice.”
Nudges for Privacy and Security (2017, background): “…of nudging argue that policy makers should implement nudges when the net beneﬁt for “irrational” individuals exceeds the aggregate costs (e.g., changing a default setting) both to rational individuals and to any other affected entities such as businesses or taxpayers [Camerer et al. 2003].”
The dynamics of behavior change: Evidence from energy conservation (2016, background): “This paper contributes to an emerging literature on behavioral “nudges” as non-monetary strategies for behavior change (Camerer et al., 2003; Thaler and Sunstein, 2003; Ratner et al., 2008).”
The Bias Bias in Behavioral Economics (2018, background): “Subsequently, an attempt was made to explain the deviations by adding free parameters to expected utility theories (Camerer et al., 2003).”
Preference purification and the inner rational agent: a critique of the conventional wisdom of behavioural welfare economics (2016, background): “If the arrangement of the alternatives has a significant effect on the selections of the customers make, then their true ‘preferences’ do not formally exist.3 Sunstein and Thaler conclude that the first strategy, despite being paternalistic, is the only reasonable option for a well-intentioned direc”
Design of Stated Preference Surveys: Is There More to Learn from Behavioral Economics? (2010, background): “At the same time, the government should not unnecessarily interfere with the lives of individuals, something that has led to terms such as libertarian paternalism (Sunstein and Thaler 2003a,b) and regulation for conservatives (Camerer et al. 2003).”