Choice without Awareness: Ethical and Policy Implications of Defaults

By N. Smith, Daniel G. Goldstein, Eric J. Johnson. 2013

230 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, General Decision Sciences

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f429f9536eec1e585b4839a655f73e63c860723d

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

1. Elke U. Weber
2. Eric J. Johnson
3. Daniel G. Goldstein
4. Ellen Peters
5. Benedict G. C. Dellaert
6. John W. Payne
7. Craig R. Fox
8. Brian Wansink

In General Decision Sciences

1. Elke U. Weber
2. Jack B. Soll
3. Eric J. Johnson
4. Ellen Peters
5. Bart P. Knijnenburg
6. Richard P. Larrick
7. John W. Payne
8. Benedict G. C. Dellaert

Citations in the corpus

• A User's Guide to Debiasing (2014, background): “The one‐size‐fits‐all nature of many defaults, which do not typically account for preference heterogeneity, may benefit many people at the expense of harming a few (for a thorough and excellent discussion of the benefits and limitations of defaults, see Smith et al., 2013).”
• Evaluating Recommender Systems with User Experiments (2015, background): “• Smith , Goldstein , and Johnson , " Choice Without Awareness : Ethical and Pol - icy Implications of Defaults " [ 105 ] : A recent paper discussing the ethical im - plications of defaults in decision - making .”
• Green nudges: Do they work? Are they ethical? (2016, background): “48 See Sunstein andReisch (2014: 140–144) for an overviewand Smith et al. (2013) for a much more detailed elaboration.”
• Beyond nudges: Tools of a choice architecture (2012, background): “Choice architects should be mindful of the ethical risks involved in setting defaults (Smith et al. 2010).”