Ethical defaults: which transparency components can increase the effectiveness of default nudges?

Figures & data

Table 1. Overview of the experimental conditions and disclosures.

Condition	Disclosure
Default and target behavior disclosure	Please note the following: we would want you to choose Category C (5–7 min). Therefore, we have preselected this category.
Default and purpose disclosure	Please note the following: with choosing Category C (5–7 min), you guarantee that we will be able to accomplish our research objectives. Therefore, we have preselected this category.
Default and general effect disclosure	Please note the following: we know that in decision situations, people often stick with a choice option which is preselected for them. Therefore, we have preselected Category C (5–7 min).
Conventional default	None
Free choice	None

Table 2. Proportion of participants choosing the target option per condition.

Condition	Default and target behavior disclosure	Default and purpose disclosure	Default and general effect disclosure	Conventional default	Free choice
Choice of target option	83.6% (46/55)	85.4% (41/48)	60.4% (32/53)	49.1% (27/55)	22.2% (12/54)

Participants’ choice of the target option versus choice of another option ratios is in parentheses.

Table 3. Summary of logistic regression analysis for the effects of default and transparency on choice of target option.

Predictor	B	S.E.	Wald	df	Exp(B)
Default	3.391**	0.58	34.128	1	29,696
Transparency	1.806**	0.493	13.413	1	6.086
Constant	0.443	0.141	9.827	1	1.557

The predictors are Helmert contrasts. Default compares participants from the free choice condition versus participants from the default conditions. Transparency compares participants from the transparent default conditions against the conventional default condition.

**p < .001.

Figure 1. Participant choice of target option per condition.

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, [Y.P.], upon reasonable request.