
doi: 10.1111/joca.12431
AbstractThis study examines the ethics of nudging and consumers' approval of nudges through the prism of moral foundations theory. Results showed that binding foundations (loyalty/betrayal, authority/subversion, sanctity/degradation) are, in general, positively related to approval of System 1 (relying on automatic information processing) and System 2 (relying on deliberative information processing) nudges. Individualizing foundations (care/harm, fairness/cheating) are, in general, positively related to supporting System 2 nudges. Some exceptions to these relationships exist, based on the issue the nudge is addressing. Binding foundations mediate the effects of empathy and conservatism on approval of both types of nudges. Individualizing foundations mediate the effects of empathy on approval of System 2 nudges. Moral foundations theory is useful for examining acceptance of nudges as it identifies diverse ethical reasons (welfare, fairness, loyalty, authority deference, sanctity) for supporting nudges, linking ethical evaluations with consumers' approval of nudges. Findings provide insights for persuading consumers to support nudges.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 11 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
