TheNewTopical.com - current events, politics, culture, ethics, economics discussion forum  

Go Back   TheNewTopical.com - current events, politics, culture, ethics, economics discussion forum » Main Forum » Politics

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 03-01-11, 09:28 PM
Zichao's Avatar
Moderator
 

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 9,038
Default Nudge, nudge, wink wink... How the Government wants to change the way we think

Nudge, nudge, wink wink... How the Government wants to change the way we think - UK Politics, UK - The Independent

Quote:
Shame, vanity, laziness and the desire to fit in are all to be used as tools of Government policy by ministers acting on the advice of a new psychology unit in Whitehall.


The first glimpse into the confidential work of the Cabinet Office's Behavioural Insight Team came on Tuesday when ministers suggested members of the public should be able to make small charitable donations when using cashpoints and their credit cards.

On Friday, the Cabinet Office again followed the unit's advice in proposing that learner drivers be opted in to an organ donation scheme when they apply for a licence, and also floated the idea of creating a lottery to encourage people to take tests to prove they have quit smoking.

These initiatives are examples of the application of mental techniques which, while seemingly paradoxical to the Coalition's goal of a smaller state, are likely to become a common feature of Government policy.

The public will have "social norms" heavily emphasised to them in an attempt to increase healthy eating, voluntary work and tax gathering. Appeals will be made to "egotism" in a bid to foster individual support for the Big Society, while much greater use will be made of default options to select benevolent outcomes for passive citizens – exemplified by the organ donation scheme.

A clue to the new approach came early in the life of the Coalition Government, in a sentence from its May agreement: "Our Government will be a much smarter one, shunning the bureaucratic levers of the past and finding intelligent ways to encourage, support and enable people to make better choices for themselves," it read.

The Prime Minister, David Cameron, established the seven-strong unit in July, since when the Government has declined to divulge all its members and the full extent of its work. However, The Independent has learnt its guiding principles and some of the projects that have used its favoured techniques.

One experiment involved Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC) secretly changing the wording of tens of thousands of tax letters, leading to the collection of an extra £200m in income tax.

Other ideas tried elsewhere that have been studied by the unit include reducing recidivism by changing public perception of ex-prisoners, and cutting health costs by encouraging relatives to look after family members in "patient hotels".

The unit draws inspiration from the Chicago University professor Richard H Thaler and his colleague Cass Sunstein, whose book Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth and Happiness is required reading for Conservative frontbenchers.

Professor Thaler, who advises the UK team, suggests that instead of forcing people to behave more virtuously through legislation, governments can guide them in the right direction using psychology. Ministers should become, in his jargon, "choice architects", making virtuous choices more attractive than unvirtuous ones. In his books he quotes the example of automatically opting workers into company pensions to raise the amount saved for old age, which will come into force in the UK in 2012 having been enacted by Labour. Another is from Amsterdam's Schiphol airport, where flies were etched on to urinals to give men something to aim at, reducing spillages in the gent's toilets.

Mr Cameron embraced nudge theory two years ago in a speech about "Broken Britain", but has subsequently placed more emphasis on his own idea of the Big Society, where individuals and charities play a much greater role ias the state shrinks.

Both ideas, however, fit neatly into the work of the insight team, which reports to key Government figures including Jeremy Heywood, the Prime Minister's Permanent Secretary, Steve Hilton, Mr Cameron's director of strategy, and Sir Gus O'Donnell, the Cabinet Secretary.

Central to this is limiting regulation and cost, according to the unit's director, Dr David Halpern, a former Cambridge University social psychology lecturer.

In comments to policymakers and businesspeople in Brussels recorded by The Independent last month, Dr Halpern said: "One of the policies of this new administration is essentially a 'one in, one out' approach to regulation, so departments wanting to introduce a new form of regulation have to get rid one at the same time. One of the fashionable things to say is: 'Well, what are the alternatives to regulatory instruments?' – spending money – which they're not very keen on. So it tends to support this shift towards behavioural economics."

Dr Halpern has experience of seeking unconventional solutions to policy problems via his role as chief analyst at Tony Blair's Strategy Unit, which looked into ways of increase happiness in the UK that – in common with other western countries – have not kept pace with economic growth.

Dr Halpern's approach, carried over from his days with Mr Blair, centres on his favourite term, "Mindspace," an acronym that stands for: Messenger (i.e. he who communicates information affects its impact); Incentives; Norms (what others do influences individuals); Defaults (pre-set options tend to be accepted); Salience (revelance and novelty attract attention); Priming (sub-conscious cues); Affect (the power of emotional associations); Commitments (keeping public promises); and Ego (the stroking of which encourage positive action).

Seeking to explain Messenger he told his Brussels audience: "It matters who tells you. If you are go to say something about vaccination, you are much better off having the Chief Medical Officer say it than a Cabinet minister ... if you want anybody to follow the advice."

Similarly, tax officials who reinforce "norms" dramatically increase their collection rates. The authorities tend to be "quite aggressive and assertive" when chasing late payers, Dr Halpern said. "We will send you a rude letter and say: 'We're going to come and find you and break down your door and take away your children.' So [HMRC] officials had been reading a bit of [nudge] literature and they changed letters on just one block of letters [chasing] £600m in unpaid tax.

"The normal repayment rate is about 50 per cent. The [new] letter says: '94 per cent of people pay their tax on time', so now you emphasis the underlying social norm – and then: 'Even if one person doesn't it has a significant impact'. The repayment rate went up to 85 per cent, [collecting] £200m just in that experiment."

Intriguingly, closer co-operation between the unit and HMRC was referred to in passing by the Cabinet Office on Friday. At the centre of the unit's work, though, are its priorities: well-being, public health, the environment and philanthropy.

While there are few details so far on how the unit will tackle happiness, plans for public health are more advanced. Britons have one of the worst records in Europe when it comes to rates of obesity, drug use, and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). The Health Secretary, Andrew Lansley favours nudging rather than legislation and has controversially recruited food and drink multinationals, who profit from unhealthy behaviour, to devise appropriate strategies.

One is likely to see signs placed at supermarket checkouts reinforcing social norms about the amount of fruit and vegetables bought by the average shopper. Another is the idea of "patient hotels", a Continental innovation where relatives can sleep alongside patients, cutting costs and improving outcomes. This has the added attraction of reducing health spending at a time when the NHS budget will come under increasing pressure from rising demand.

Public health campaigns on STDs are likely to replace factual warnings with questions designed to emphasise social norms. So, instead of advising people of the likelihood of sexual partners having an STD, posters would ask: "What would your girlfriend think of you if you say you don't want to use a condom?"

Some professional health organisations, such as the British Medical Association, are concerned that nudges will be used at the expense of new legislation on tobacco advertising, tax on junk food and other issues.

But Nick Chater, Professor of Behavioural Science at Warwick Business School, who is not involved with the unit, welcomed the new emphasis on psychology. "Broadly speaking, I think it's a valid approach," he said.

"If you are interested in changing people's behaviour for their own or the collective good, then regulation is often a blunt tool and it often doesn't harness goodwill. But it's misleading to think with a few nudges consumer behaviour will head off in another direction. [Behavioural economics] is definitely an additional tool, [but] I don't see it as a way to eliminate regulation or redistribution."

The nudge unit's priorities

* Health

Public health is a priority for the unit, because half of UK health spending goes on treating the consequences of unhealthy behaviour such as drinking, smoking and having unprotected sex. Yet only one half of one per cent of NHS spending goes on promoting healthy behaviour. The unit suggests using respected medical figures to give health warnings and reinforcing social norms about other people's behaviour, to spur consumption of fresh produce and condom use.


* Environment

The unit has been drafted in to help the Coalition achieve its aim of being the greenest Government ever. While investing in new sources of low-carbon energy generation should limit greenhouse gas emissions, individuals will also need to make greener choices.


* Giving

Creating a band of active citizens who contribute to public life is central to the Big Society. The Coalition wants to create a "culture change" to increase time and money for good causes. Its green paper Giving last week noted that the average UK citizen spends 16 hours a week watching TV, but only one hour doing voluntary work. But telling people that volunteering increases life satisfaction is unlikely to be enough, it warns. As Dr Halpern explains: "Evolution has endowed us with a social brain that predisposes us to reciprocate acts of kindness, not to just blindly help anyone and everyone, regardless of how they treat us."


* Social networks

The unit believes that individuals' social contacts and connections are vital to their health and welfare, and are an untapped resource for the whole of society. "Harnessing the capacity of social networks and affecting the behaviour of the individual" is one of its aims. The Giving green paper said it wanted to do more to support community groups, charities and social enterprises.


* Well-being

Monthly polls by Ipsos-Mori show that the UK is a fearful place. Despite being among the wealthiest in Europe, Britons are less happy than others in Europe, particularly in Scandinavia. We are also less trusting of our fellow citizens. The unit is looking towards Denmark, which studies suggest is the happiest nation in Europe. The most important thing to Danes is "love". By contrast, the least happy people, Bulgarians, are "much more worried about jobs and money", Dr Halpern told an EU conference in Brussels.
How's this for a subtle nudge: Just fuck of and leave me alone you rich, sanctimonious, jellybean-faced douchecanoe. In case you've forgotten, I'm your boss, not your fucking retarded child. Don't even make me come over there.
__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 04-01-11, 12:30 AM
AnonymousIdiotSavant's Avatar
Senior Member
 

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,089
Default

Tip of the hat to whoever wrote up the article for getting away with calling the people pushing this thing a bunch of dicks over a dozen times.

Though it could just be a cultural thing, but over here "the unit" is pretty well understood to be another name for a man's junk.
__________________
Righteousness will always be the trap at the gates of hell
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 04-01-11, 12:35 PM
insignificant data point
 

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,799
Default

We know from the Poms who have emigrated here that the burden that God has placed on inhabitants of the (nominally) United Kingdom is an eternal legacy to be always complaining about something.

Some of the most intelligent and innovative have emigrated to Australia. We know that they are intelligent and innovative because they have brilliantly found things to complain about that never bothered any local resident.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 04-01-11, 01:59 PM
Gilles de Rais's Avatar
Moderator
 

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,639
Default

I thought you or Contra had already posted that article?!?

Originally Posted by Zichao View Post
How's this for a subtle nudge: Just fuck off and leave me alone you rich, sanctimonious, jellybean-faced douchecanoe.
Well, that's the beauty of nudging. You don't HAVE to do anything, if you don't want to... Kinda like with advertising... No one is forcing you to buy anything at the end of a commercial break...
__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 04-01-11, 02:14 PM
Zichao's Avatar
Moderator
 

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 9,038
Default

Advertisers don't presume that they know better than you how to run your life, and they weren't elected to carry out the wishes of the people.
__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 04-01-11, 02:15 PM
Zichao's Avatar
Moderator
 

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 9,038
Default

I've posted several others on the subject, but I don't think I've ever posted this one - I know I'm getting boring, but this does have new details on precisely what the ZF is planning to do.
__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 04-01-11, 02:21 PM
Gilles de Rais's Avatar
Moderator
 

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,639
Default

Originally Posted by Zichao View Post
Advertisers don't presume that they know better than you how to run your life...
But they pretend to presume... "Buy X and boundless happiness will follow" kinda message...

Quote:
and they weren't elected to carry out the wishes of the people.
Ah, but what are the wishes of the people? If you ask someone whether he WILL want a healthy snack or a sugary-fat-ladden one, that someone says "I WILL take the healthy one". However, if you ask that same someone to choose between the healthy and unhealthy snack RIGHT NOW, s/he will choose the unhealthy option.

So the question is: Which wish is more valid?

And why could the gvt not frame the question? Because, as opposed to what you suggest, the gvt has enough data to indeed KNOW what is best to run the life of its people, at the very least at an aggregated level.
__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 04-01-11, 02:33 PM
Zichao's Avatar
Moderator
 

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 9,038
Default

Quote:
But they pretend to presume... "Buy X and boundless happiness will follow" kinda message...
And having no duties ith regard to their audience they're perfectly free to do that.

Quote:
Ah, but what are the wishes of the people? If you ask someone whether he WILL want a healthy snack or a sugary-fat-ladden one, that someone says "I WILL take the healthy one". However, if you ask that same someone to choose between the healthy and unhealthy snack RIGHT NOW, s/he will choose the unhealthy option.

So the question is: Which wish is more valid?
What they say now.

Quote:
And why could the gvt not frame the question? Because, as opposed to what you suggest, the gvt has enough data to indeed KNOW what is best to run the life of its people, at the very least at an aggregated level.
Democracy is a regime that depends on transparency and accountability. If the government is using cheap tricks to make the citizens behave how it thinks they should then it has neither of those things.

Incidentally, if the government knows better than us, then why do we bother having elections? If they're clever and we're stupid then surely they should just pick themselves as leaders for the greater good. Or free market capitalism? If people are too stupid even to choose what they eat (I'm not sure where this leaves politicians like John Prescott or Eric Pickles; presumably they shouldn't really be in government but slipped through the net because they were elected by the people, who are morons), so we should just have the government decide what people are going to eat/wear/own and distribute it to them.
__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 04-01-11, 02:50 PM
Zichao's Avatar
Moderator
 

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 9,038
Default

Nick Clegg's sinister nannies are 'nudging' us towards an Orwellian nightmare – Telegraph Blogs

Quote:
After 13 years of New Labour nannying – all that non-stop hectoring about what we should eat, how we should raise our kids, where and with whom and how often we should have sex – many people breathed a sigh of relief when the Lib-Cons seized Downing Street in May last year. This rosy-cheeked government promised to elbow aside nanny and replace her with a renewed respect for individual autonomy. It sounded wonderful.

But they’ve done nothing of the sort. Instead David Cameron and his yellow sidekicks have managed the remarkable feat of replacing nanny with an even more freedom-loathing, brain-invading political creed: nudging. Their desire to nudge the populace towards good behaviour makes New Labour’s bossy prudery seem almost liberal and level-headed in comparison.

This year is likely to be the Year of the Nudge, the year of politicians using all kinds of Derren Brown-style mind-trickery to try to coax or cajole or hoodwink the people of Britain into adopting a state-approved lifestyle – that is, a healthy-eating, bike-riding, beer-avoiding lifestyle, which will guarantee you instant access (should you want it) to the Cleggite set of former prefects and perfect bores who never abuse their bodies with anything more toxic than a weekly glass of chardonnay.

The Lib-Cons have a Behavioural Insight Team inside Downing Street. Inspired and advised by Richard Thaler, co-author of the phenomenally successful book Nudge: Improving Decisions About Wealth, Health and Happiness, the team aims not only to change people’s behaviour but to “change the way citizens think” (to quote Clegg himself).

As yesterday’s Independent reported, it will use various “mental techniques” and “psychological tricks” to “alter our behaviour” – for example, by offering less well-off shoppers health vouchers to encourage them to buy Hellman’s Light Mayonnaise rather than a King Sized Mars Bar; or by changing our local community infrastructure to make it harder to drive a car and easier to ride a bike; or by having cashpoint machines ask us: “Would you like to make a donation to a charity?”

In the past, the revelation that there was a Behavioural Insight Team at the heart of government would have set alarm bells ringing. It would have brought to mind the worst excesses of the Soviet Union (which treated political dissent as a mental illness to be corrected) or even of Orwell’s nightmare world in Nineteen Eighty-Four. In that novel, O’Brien, the torturer of Winston Smith, says: “We create human nature. Men are infinitely malleable.” Cameron and Clegg have merely added a bit of PC spit-and-polish to this authoritarian view of men’s minds as putty for the elite to play around with.

The whole nudge thing is spectacularly Orwellian. A Cabinet Office document says that because the masses make decisions “outside of conscious awareness” (ie. we’re a bit thick), the government should aim to become our “surrogate willpower”, making decisions on our behalf. In short, the authorities should colonise our minds and do our thinking for us. It is pure Big Brother. The state-approved lifestyle is no life at all.
__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 04-01-11, 02:51 PM
Gilles de Rais's Avatar
Moderator
 

Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 7,639
Default

Originally Posted by Zichao View Post
And having no duties with regard to their audience they're perfectly free to do that.
I fail to see the difference. Or rather it feels like a difference without importance...

Quote:
What they say now.
Why? Especially given that governing/leading does involve some planning for the future...

Quote:
Democracy is a regime that depends on transparency and accountability. If the government is using cheap tricks to make the citizens behave how it thinks they should then it has neither of those things.
Why not? No one is suggesting hiding the fact that nudges are used. I imagine they will be reviewed publicly and can be discuss by MPs and citizens in the normal fashion...

Quote:
Incidentally, if the government knows better than us, then why do we bother having elections?
Well, because, to quote Churchill - "Democracy is the worst system... with the exception of all the others"... OTOH, if you hand me total control, you could indeed dispense with elections... That's coz I'd be the perfect leader...

Quote:
If they're clever and we're stupid...
1- It's not so much a matter of genetic/educational superiority than a matter of access to proper actuarial data...
2- Nudging works whether you're clever or stupid. You might know it's being done and still it might work on you... For example, a couple of months ago, I read a book explaining at length (and in a rather stupid childish tone) about "emotional eating" - Just reading that book lead me to lose some weight in the following months as I started eating less for purely emotional reasons...

Quote:
... so we should just have the government decide what people are going to eat/wear/own and distribute it to them.
We could do that. But people tend to resent it. And then rebel/start wars/kill whole classes of people. Which is highly ineffective and unproductive. Which makes nudging, with its embedded choice and optionality, far less aggressive and far less resented and thus does not lead to rebellions, wars etc etc.

Nudging is not about the absolute best being imposed on everyone. A computer could try and do that - it's probably computationable. But it'd only last a few weeks before the country blew up in arms. And that's what nudging recognises...
__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.
Reply With Quote
Reply


(View-All Members who have read this thread : 7
AnonymousIdiotSavant, contracycle, FredFredson, Gilles de Rais, PostmodernProphet, roadkill, Zichao
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0