Who are the opponents of nudging? Insights from moral foundations theory

Figures & data

Table 1. Proportions of participants who rated the nudges as acceptable and as restricting freedom of choice in the non-preregistered study.

	Pro-self nudges				Pro-social nudges
	Cafeteria redesign	Deterrent cigarette pictures	Quit-smoking program	Healthy food labeling	Organ donation	Climate compen-sation	Energy consump- tion	Paying taxes
Acceptable
4 (Very much)	50.7%	53.6%	37.3%	53.9%	43.4%	44.8%	32.8%	56.3%
3 (Yes)	30.4%	25.6%	22.6%	30.4%	26.4%	25.6%	32.4%	25.4%
2 (No)	12.1%	13.7%	18.0%	11.1%	15.7%	13.8%	17.5%	10.0%
1 (Not at all)	6.8%	7.2%	22.1%	4.6%	14.5%	15.7%	17.3%	8.3%
Restricting freedom
4 (Very much)	12.9%	9.1%	29.7%	8.6%	18.6%	17.2%	15.7%	6.7%
3 (Yes)	23.5%	13.0%	21.8%	13.7%	17.8%	21.5%	21.8%	11.3%
2 (No)	26.1%	22.4%	19.6%	20.2%	31.8%	27.5%	24.6%	14.1%
1 (Not at all)	37.5%	55.5%	28.9%	57.6%	31.8%	33.9%	37.8%	67.9%

Table 2. Correlations between attitudes to nudges, moral intuitions, cultural cognition, and processing styles in the non-preregistered study.

	1.	2.	3.	4.	5.	6.	7.	8.	9.
1. Accept pro-self
2. Accept pro-social	.54***
3. Restrict freedom pro-self	−.46***	−.31***
4. Restrict freedom pro-social	−.29***	−.54***	.63***
5. Individualizing intuitions	.26***	.24***	−.09*	−.11**
6. Binding intuitions	−.02	−.12**	.27***	.28***	.23***
7. Egalitarianism	.23***	.38***	−.22***	−.33***	.39***	−.36***
8. Individualism	−.26***	−.35***	.22***	.26***	−.18***	.10*	−.39***
9. Preference for intuition	.00	−.08*	.18***	.24***	.10*	.34***	.16**	.08#
10. Preference for deliberation	.12**	.06	−.06	−.07#	.17***	.09*	.03	−.05	.15***

# p ≤.10, * p ≤.05. ** p ≤.01. *** p ≤.001. The correlations involving attitudes to nudges are Spearman rank-order correlations; the remaining correlations are Pearson product moment correlations.

Table 3. Standardized beta coefficients of moral foundations, cultural cognition, and processing styles predicting attitudes to nudges in hierarchical regression models in the non-preregistered study.

	Pro-self nudges		Pro-social nudges
	Acceptable	Restrict freedom	Acceptable	Restrict freedom
Step 1	(R^2 = 8.3%)	(R^2 = 8.3%)	(R^2 = 9.3%)	(R^2 = 10.8%)
Individualizing intuitions	.30[.22,.39]***	−.18[−.27, −.10]***	.30[.22,.38]***	−.19[−.27, −.11]***
Binding intuitions	−.08[−.16,.00]#	.29[.21,.37]***	−.19[−.27, −.11]***	.33[.25,.41]***
Step 2	(R^2 = 8.8%)	(R^2 = 9.7%)	(R^2 = 9.5%)	(R^2 = 13.4%)
Individualizing intuitions	.30[.21,.38]***	−.17[−.26, −.09]***	.30[.21,.38]***	−.18[−.26, −.10]***
Binding intuitions	−.08[−.17,.01]#	.25[.16,.34]***	−.19[−.28, −.10]***	.29[.20,.37]***
Preference for intuition	−.01[−.10,.07]	.12[.03,.20]**	−.01[−.10,.07]	.15[.07,.23]***
Preference for deliberation	.07[−.01,.14]	−.06[−.14,.02]	.05[−.03,.13]	−.10[−.17, −.02]*
Step 3	(R^2 = 14.6%)	(R^2 = 13.0%)	(R^2 = 20.4%)	(R^2 = 18.7%)
Individualizing intuitions	.20[.11,.30]***	−.13[−.23, −.03]**	.13[.04,.22]**	−.06[−.16,.03]
Binding intuitions	−.01[−.11,.09]	.22[.13,.33]***	−.06[−.15,.04]	.20[.10,.29]***
Preference for intuition	.00[−.08,.08]	.10[.02,.19]*	.00[−.08,.08]	.14[.06,.22]***
Preference for deliberation	.06[−.02,.13]	−.05[−.13,.03]	.04[−.04,.11]	−.09[−.16, −.01]*
Individualism	−.22[−.30, −.14]***	.19[.10,.27]***	–.25[−.32, −.16]***	.18[.10,.26]***
Egalitarianism	.08[−.03,.18]	.00[−.10,.10]	.20[.10,.29]***	−.13[−.23, −.03]*
Step 4	(R^2 = 16.3%)	(R^2 = 14.0%)	(R^2 = 22.3%)	(R^2 = 19.4%)
Individualizing intuitions	.22[.13,.32]***	−.14[−.25, −.05]**	.15[.06,.24]***	−.07[−.16,.03]
Binding intuitions	.01[−.09,.11]	.21[.11,.31]***	−.04[−.13,.06]	.19[.10,.29]***
Preference for intuition	.02[−.07,.10]	.10[.01,.18]*	.02[−.06,.09]	.14[.06,.22]***
Preference for deliberation	.03[−.05,.11]	−.04[−.12,.04]	.02[−.06,.09]	−.09[−.17, −.01]*
Individualism	−.22[−.30, −.13]***	.19[.10,.27]***	−.25[−.32, −.16]***	.18[.10,.25]***
Egalitarianism	.09[−.02,.19]#	−.01[−.11,.10]	.21[.11,.30]***	−.13[−.23, −.03]*
Sex	−.05[−.13,.03]	.01[−.07,.09]	−.04[−.11,.04]	−.02[−.10,.06]
Age	−.11[−.19, −.03]**	.07[−.01,.15]#	−.10[−.17, −.02]*	−.01[−.09,.07]
Income	.07[−.01,.15]#	−.09[−.17, −.01]*	.11[.03,.18]**	−.09[−.16, −.01]*

# p <.10, * p <.05, ** p <.01, *** p <.001

Figure 1. Standardized cluster means based on a six-cluster k-means cluster analysis of attitudes to nudges. Nudge opponents: Clusters of individuals who opposed the nudges. Nudge proponents: Clusters of individuals who supported the nudges.

Table 4. Proportions of participants who rated the nudges as acceptable and as restricting freedom of choice in the preregistered study.

	Pro-self nudges				Pro-social nudges
	Cafeteria redesign	Deterrent cigarette pictures	Quit-smoking program	Healthy food labeling	Organ donation	Climate compen-sation	Energy consump- tion	Paying taxes	Ingroup donations	Outgroup donations
Acceptable
4 (Very much)	42.2%	59.6%	34.6%	56.0%	43.8%	35.6%	42.7%	52.6%	23.7%	17.5%
3 (Yes)	30.3%	21.9%	23.1%	27.0%	26.4%	30.0%	32.9%	25.9%	23.0%	26.7%
2 (No)	16.1%	10.4%	15.5%	10.2%	13.2%	15.3%	15.0%	11.7%	19.7%	23.1%
1 (Not at all)	11.4%	8.1%	26.9%	6.8%	16.6%	19.0%	9.4%	9.9%	33.6%	32.7%
Restricting freedom
4 (Very much)	21.6%	14.2%	35.7%	11.9%	26.5%	23.7%	14.0%	11.0%	37.5%	34.3%
3 (Yes)	25.2%	18.1%	21.4%	14.5%	23.4%	24.5%	20.1%	14.2%	20.7%	27.1%
2 (No)	25.0%	18.1%	21.4%	20.1%	25.9%	24.9%	22.1%	19.9%	22.4%	20.5%
1 (Not at all)	28.2%	49.6%	21.4%	53.5%	24.2%	26.9%	43.8%	54.9%	19.4%	18.2%

Table 5. Correlations between attitudes to nudges, moral intuitions, cultural cognition, and processing styles in the preregistered study.

	1.	2.	3.	4.	5.	6.	7.	8.	9.	10.	11.	12.	13.	14.
1. Accept pro-self
2. Accept pro-social	.54***
3. Accept ingroup donations	.31***	.30***
4. Accept outgroup donations	.48***	.42***
5. Restrict freedom pro-self	−.44***	−.31***	−.16**	−.23***
6. Restrict freedom pro-social	−.28***	−.54***	−.11#	−.21***	.71***
7. Restrict ingroup donations	−.15*	−.18**	−.56***		.39***	.38***
8. Restrict outgroup donations	−.22***	−.16**		−.58***	.39***	.39***
9. Individualizing intuitions	.16***	.28***	.12*	.21***	−.11**	−.19***	−.05	−.10#
10. Binding intuitions	.10*	.07#	.03	.03	.17***	.15***	.13*	.01	.31***
11. Liberty intuitions	−.13***	−.14***	−.03	−.09	.17***	.19***	.05	.18**	.19***	.22***
12. Egalitarianism	.13***	.33***	.23***	.32***	−.24***	−.35***	−.23***	−.28***	.36***	−.26***	−.25***
13. Individualism	−.38***	−.42***	−.26***	−.35***	.24***	.28***	.17**	.30***	−.17***	−.04	.54***	−.34***
14. Preference for intuition	.07#	.05	.14*	−.02	.07	.05	−.01	.04	.24***	.38***	.23***	−.06	.00
15. Preference for deliberation	.10*	.05	.01	.01	.07	.05	.06	.02	.19***	.27***	.18***	−.07	−.06	.31***

# p ≤.10, * p ≤.05. ** p ≤.01. *** p ≤.001. The correlations involving attitudes to nudges are Spearman rank-order correlations; the remaining correlations are Pearson product moment correlations.

Table 6. Standardized beta coefficients of moral foundations, cultural cognition, and processing styles predicting attitudes to nudges in hierarchical regression models in the preregistered study.

	Pro-self nudges		Pro-social nudges		Ingroup donations		Outgroup donations
	Acceptable	Restrict freedom	Acceptable	Restrict freedom	Acceptable	Restrict freedom	Acceptable	Restrict freedom
Step 1	(R^2 = 6.1%)	(R^2 = 8.4%)	(R^2 = 11.7%)	(R^2 = 11.5%)	(R^2 = 1.5%)	(R^2 = 3.0%)	(R^2 = 6.3%)	(R^2 = 4.4%)
Individualizing intuitions	.18[.09,.26]***	−.20[−.29, −.12]***	.31[.23,.39]***	−.28[−.36, −.20]***	.11[−.01,.23]#	−.11[−.23,.01]#	.25[.13,.36]***	−.13[−.25, −.01]*
Binding intuitions	.07[−.01,.16]#	.22[.13,.30]***	.01[−.07,.09]	.21[.13,.29]***	.02[−.11,.15]	.19[.06,.32]**	.01[−.10,.13]	.05[−.07,.16]
Liberty intuitions	−.19[−.27, −.11]***	.15[.07,.22]***	−.21[−.28, −.13]***	.19[.11,.27]***	−.04[−.17,.08]	.00[−.12,.13]	−.13[−.24, −.02]*	.18[.07,.30]***
Step 2	(R^2 = 6.6%)	(R^2 = 8.6%)	(R^2 = 11.9%)	(R^2 = 11.7%)	(R^2 = 4.7%)	(R^2 = 4.1%)	(R^2 = 6.6%)	(R^2 = 4.4%)
Individualizing intuitions	.17[.08,.25]***	−.21[−.29, −.13]***	.31[.23,.39]***	−.28[−.36, −.20]***	.11[−.02,.23]#	−.11[−.23,.01]#	.26[.14,.38]***	−.13[−.25, −.01]*
Binding intuitions	.05[−.04,.14]	.21[.12,.29]***	−.01[−.09,.08]	.20[.12,.29]***	−.04[−.17,.10]	.22[.08,.35]**	.03[−.09,.15]	.05[−.08,.17]
Liberty intuitions	−.20[−.28, −.12]***	.14[.06,.22]***	−.21[−.29, −.13]***	.19[.11,.27]***	−.07[−.19,.05]	.02[−.11,.14]	−.12[−.24, −.01]*	.18[.07,.30]**
Preference for intuition	.04[−.05,.12]	.00[−.09,.09]	.04[−.04,.13]	−.01[−.10,.07]	.20[.08,.33]**	−.12[−.24,.01]#	−.06[−.19,.06]	−.01[−.13,.12]
Preference for deliberation	.06[−.02,.15]	.04[−.04,.13]	.02[−.07,.10]	.04[−.04,.12]	−.05[−.17,.08]	.04[−.08,.17]	.00[−.11,.12]	.01[−.11,.12]
Step 3	(R^2 = 18.1%)	(R^2 = 13.0%)	(R^2 = 27.7%)	(R^2 = 17.3%)	(R^2 = 16.0%)	(R^2 = 10.0%)	(R^2 = 19.1%)	(R^2 = 13.0%)
Individualizing intuitions	.03[−.06,.12]	−.10[−.20, −.01]*	.09[.01,.18]*	−.13[−.23, −.04]**	−.09[−.23,.05]	.04[−.10,.18]	.04[−.09,.17]	.05[−.08,.19]
Binding intuitions	.05[−.04,.14]	.18[.09,.28]***	.05[−.04,.13]	.15[.06,.24]**	.05[−.09,.18]	.15[.01,.29]*	.10[−.03,.22]	−.01[−.14,.12]
Liberty intuitions	.08[−.02,.18]	−.03[−.13,.07]	.11[.02,.20]*	.01[−.09,.11]	.22[.07,.37]**	−.19[−.34, −.03]*	.12[−.02,.25]#	−.02[−.15,.12]
Preference for intuition	.02[−.06,.10]	.01[−.07,.10]	.02[−.05,.10]	.00[−.09,.08]	.17[.05,.29]**	−.09[−.22,.03]	−.06[−.18,.06]	.00[−.13,.12]
Preference for deliberation	.03[−.06,.10]	.06[−.02,.15]	−.02[−.09,.06]	.06[−.03,.14]	−.08[−.20,.04]	.06[−.06,.19]	−.02[−.13,.09]	.02[−.09,.14]
Individualism	−.42[−.51, −.32]***	.23[.14,.33]***	–.42[−.51, −.33]***	.21[.11,.30]***	−.34[−.49, −.20]***	.24[.09,.39]**	−.29[−.42, −.16]***	.24[.10,.38]***
Egalitarianism	.07[−.03,.16]	−.09[−.19,.00]#	.21[.12,.30]***	−.18[−.27, −.09]***	.23[.10,.37]***	−.18[−.32, −.04]*	.26[.13,.39]***	−.22[−.35, −.08]**
Step 4	(R^2 = 19.7%)	(R^2 = 13.7%)	(R^2 = 27.8%)	(R^2 = 17.6%)	(R^2 = 19.2%)	(R^2 = 10.3%)	(R^2 = 20.6%)	(R^2 = 15.7%)
Individualizing intuitions	.06[.-04,.15]	−.12[−.21, −.02]*	.10[.01,.18]*	−.13[−.22, −.03]**	−.08[−.22,.06]	.04[−.11,.18]	.06[−.07,.20]	.01[−.13,.15]
Binding intuitions	.04[−.05,.14]	.19[.10,.29]***	.05[−.04,.13]	.15[.05,.24]**	.07[−.07,.21]	.16[.02,.30]*	.09[−.03,.22]	.01[−.12,.14]
Liberty intuitions	.06[−.04,.16]	−.03[−.13,.07]	.11[.02,.20]*	.00[−.10,.10]	.18[.03,.33]*	−.19[−.35, −.03]*	.10[−.04,.23]	.02[−.12,.15]
Preference for intuition	.03[−.06,.11]	−.01[−.09,.08]	.02[−.05,.10]	.00[−.09,.08]	.16[.04,.28]*	−.09[−.22,.04]	−.05[−.17,.07]	−.05[−.17,.08]
Preference for deliberation	.02[−.06,.10]	.08[.00,.17]#	−.02[−.09,.06]	.06[−.02,.14]	−.07[−.19,.06]	.05[−.08,.18]	−.03[−.14,.08]	.06[−.06,.17]
Individualism	−.39[−.49, −.29]***	.23[.13,.33]***	−.42[−.51, −.33]***	.21[.11,.31]***	−.30[−.45, −.16]***	.25[.09,.40]**	−.26[−.40, −.13]***	.20[.06,.33]**
Egalitarianism	.06[−.03,.16]	−.10[−.20, −.01]*	.21[.12,.30]***	−.18[−.28, −.09]***	.24[.10,.37]***	−.18[−.33, −.04]*	.25[.12,.39]***	−.23[−.37, −.09]***
Sex	.00[−.08,.07]	.08[.00,.16]#	.00[−.08,.07]	.00[−.08,.08]	.06[−.05,.18]	.01[−.11,.13]	.04[−.07,.15]	.07[−.04,.19]
Age	−.13[−.20, −.05]***	.02[−.06,.10]	.00[−.07,.07]	−.04[−.12,.04]	−.16[−.27, −.06]**	.00[−.11,.11]	−.11[−.22,.00]*	.13[.02,.24]*
Income	.01[−.06,.09]	.02[−.06,.10]	.01[−.07,.08]	−.02[−.10,.05]	.02[−.08,.12]	.02[−.09,.13]	.05[−.07,.16]	−.09[−.21,.03]
Education	−.02[−.10,.05]	−.03[−.11,.05]	−.03[−.10,.05]	−.02[−.10,.06]	−.04[−.15,.07]	.04[−.07,.16]	.03[−.09,.14]	−.06[−.17.06]

# p <.10, * p <.05, ** p <.01, *** p <.001

Figure 2. Standardized cluster means based on an eight-cluster k-means cluster analysis of attitudes to nudges. Nudge opponents: Cluster of individuals who opposed the nudges. Neutral to nudges: Clusters of individuals with relatively neutral attitudes to nudges. Nudge proponents: Clusters of individuals who supported the nudges.