Simon Munzert is Professor of Data Science and Public Policy at the Hertie School and Director of the Hertie School Data Science Lab. He received his Doctoral Degree in Political Science from the University of Konstanz. His research is focused on opinion formation in the digital age, public opinion, and the use of online data in social science research. His research has been published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Nature Human Behaviour, American Political Science Review, Political Analysis, Public Opinion Quarterly, Lancet, and other outlets. He teaches courses on causal inference and computational social science, and is author of a textbook on web scraping and text mining with R.

Personal website

Seminar chaired by Andrea Blasco

Online content moderation shapes what billions of people can say and see, yet the human judgments that train and evaluate moderation systems are themselves contested. Drawing on a pre-registered cross-national conjoint experiment with 19,172 respondents across 11 countries, we analyze over 150,000 moderation judgments of toxic social media posts. We find robust evidence of myside bias: people are substantially more likely to classify speech as hateful and to support sanctions against it when the attacked shares their position on the contested issue at hand. This pattern holds across countries, political camps, topics, and speech types, and is larger in magnitude than effects of gender, ideology, or ethnic identity. These results reveal a fundamental challenge for content moderation: systematic disagreement in moderation judgments is tied also to the content of beliefs, not only to fixed annotator characteristics. This means that standard bias-correction approaches - which adjust for stable demographic or partisan attributes - cannot resolve the underlying disagreement, posing a structural challenge for the governance of automated enforcement in polarized environments.

Sharon is a Principal Behavioural Scientist and Director in the Australian Public Service, where she leads a team dedicated to placing people at the centre of government's strategic policy agenda. Her work has applied behavioural science across diverse portfolios including climate change and energy, health, food standards, industry, science, national security and resources. She holds postgraduate qualifications in organisational and cognitive psychology, behavioural economics, and nutrition.

Sharon's career spans both public and private sectors. She has worked at Apple, consulted for big firms, and served as a senior researcher and lecturer in organisational and health psychology.

Currently, Sharon is undertaking doctoral studies at The Australian National University under the prestigious Sir Roland Wilson Scholarship, a collaboration between the Australian Public Service and academia. Her research focuses on developing behavioural interventions to debias leadership selection processes and increase representation of people with disability in senior leadership positions.

ANU profile page

Seminar chaired by Francesca Papa

Despite decades of organisational diversity initiatives, selection and promotion processes for leadership positions continue to produce inequitable outcomes. Traditional interventions targeting individual attitudes, such as unconscious bias training, show limited sustained effects on actual selection decisions. This suggests that modifying individual cognition alone is insufficient when environmental factors, such as time pressure, resourcing constraints, and the flexibility to construct post-hoc justifications for decisions, shape selection behaviour. An alternative approach focuses on redesigning decision-making environments (or changing the choice architecture) within selection processes, rather than attempting to change individuals' attitudes.

This scoping review systematically maps 37 empirical studies examining choice architecture interventions applied across the leadership selection pipeline. Following Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and PRISMA-ScR guidelines, studies were synthesised using two complementary behavioural science frameworks: the COM-B Model, to identify the main influences on behaviour (capability, opportunity, and motivation), and Münscher et al.'s (2016) taxonomy, to categorise the choice architecture techniques employed.

Three principal findings emerge. First, interventions constraining assessor discretion, particularly pre-commitment to evaluation criteria and accountability mechanisms, produced more consistently equitable selection behaviour than information-based approaches alone. Second, identity-concealed framing emphasising assessment quality outperformed identity-conscious framing emphasising diversity goals. Third, a critical conversion problem was identified, whereby interventions effective at earlier selection stages frequently failed to translate into hiring or promotion outcomes, indicating that integrated cross-stage approaches are necessary. Findings provide a framework for selection practitioners, identifying which techniques are effective, for whom, and under what conditions, while highlighting critical gaps in the evidence base.

21 May 2026

Speaker: Prof. Mikołaj Czajkowski (University of Warsaw)

Mikołaj Czajkowski is a Professor of Economics at the University of Warsaw. His research focuses on non-market valuation, stated- and revealed-preference methods, and the welfare evaluation of environmental and health-risk policies, with a particular interest in how information and learning shape preferences and behavior.

Personal website

Abstract:

Coastal bathing generates substantial welfare benefits but also exposes recreationists to low-probability, high-salience microbial risks (e.g., E. coli, enterococci, Vibrio, cyanobacteria) that are largely invisible at the point of decision-making. Under climate change, pathogen occurrence and closures are expected to become more frequent, increasing the policy importance of monitoring and credible risk communication under the EU Bathing Water Directive. This talk presents preliminary evidence from a three-wave randomized panel study of users of the Gulf of Gdańsk and the Vistula Lagoon (Poland), combining stated- and revealed-preference data to test whether pathogen-risk information shifts knowledge, preferences, and recreation demand. In Wave 1 we identify “active users” from a large stratified national sample and establish baseline preferences and trip behaviour. In Wave 2, the same respondents are randomly assigned to receive either no additional information or increasingly detailed pathogen-risk scripts, and then complete repeated discrete choice experiments on beach-site selection and monitoring attributes. Approximately one year later, Wave 3 measures longer-run outcomes, elicits policy support in an advisory-referendum DCE for programmes that combine risk reduction and higher-frequency monitoring, and repeats a travel-cost module capturing seaside trips and beach outings. The emerging pattern is that information increases knowledge and selectively shifts preferences and choices toward risk-relevant attributes, with corresponding demand-side responses. I then connect these findings to a practical benefit–cost perspective: because valuations and behavioural responses are information-dependent, "uninformed" welfare estimates used in appraisal may understate the benefits of monitoring/disclosure. Information campaigns are a scalable complement—rather than a substitute—to monitoring and mitigation.

Seminar chaired by Michal Krawczyk

23 April 2026

Speaker: Prof. Leonhard Lades (Stirling Business School)

Leonhard Lades is a Professor of Behavioural and Environmental Economics at the Stirling Business School and the Director of the Stirling Behavioural Science Centre. His research lies at the intersection of behavioural science and public policy, with a focus on environmental issues. His areas of expertise include behavioural public policy, behavioural economics, and economic psychology. In recent years, he has focused on understanding the role of sludge in environmental policymaking.

Personal website

Abstract:

Leo will discuss his work on "sludge," defined as unnecessary frictions that make it more difficult for people to achieve their goals. His research includes conceptual analyses of sludge, the development of sludge audits, and experimental studies in this area, and he is a member of the OECD Global Sludge Expert Panel. Leo will explore whether sludge can be a barrier to participation in environmental programs, how sludge can be identified, and who is most vulnerable to the effects of sludge. He will also discuss the opportunities and challenges for research and policy interventions related to sludge.

Seminar chaired by Marion Dupoux

23 March 2026

Speaker: Dr Armenak Antinyan (Thames Water)

Dr Armenak Antinyan is an Applied Economist who founded and leads the Behavioural Economics Unit at Thames Water (UK). Before joining Thames Water, Dr Antinyan served as a lecturer in Economics at Cardiff University (UK) and an associate professor in Economics at Zhongnan University of Economics and Law (China).

Dr Antinyan has collaborated with both public and private organizations, including UNDP, WHO, IOM, utilities, charities, health, and tax authorities.

Throughout his career, Dr Antinyan has trained hundreds of public and private sector professionals in Behavioural Science and has published 20 scientific papers in prestigious peer-reviewed journals such as The Economic Journal, Social Science & Medicine, and the European Economic Review, promoting knowledge exchange and contributing to the advancement of the field of Behavioural Science.

Personal website

Abstract:

Water scarcity is expected to worsen in the future across the globe, and Europe is no exception. This is driven by a combination of population growth, climate change, socio-economic factors, and changing consumption patterns. While water companies should minimize water loss (e.g., leakage) by investing in resilient infrastructure, customer-side interventions to reduce water demand are equally important. The toolkit water companies use to reduce residential households’ water demand includes, for example, financial instruments such as rising block tariffs, technological instruments such as smart meters, and behavioural instruments such as making the negative environmental implications of abundant water use salient in real time or comparing a household’s water consumption to that of their neighbours.

The presentation discusses two large-scale natural field experiments conducted with Thames Water (one of the largest utilities in the UK) to improve residential water use. It looks at the impact of behavioural and technological instruments on water demand reduction.

We address four central questions:

1. How do we engage customers to complete online water audits (digital assessments of household water usage)?
2. Do these audits impact household water consumption?
3. Does nudging increase household engagement with online gamification platforms?
4. Do gamified incentives impact household water consumption?

This seminar is organised jointly by the CCBI and SMAC

The Survey Methods and Analysis Centre (SMAC) is a specialised research centre in JRC Unit S.3 that supports high-quality data collection and analysis. By leveraging the expertise of social scientists (e.g. economists, econometricians, sociologists and political scientists), the team contributes to high-quality data collection and analysis that can effectively guide policymaking in the EU. The centre also organises seminars and training on survey related topics.

Following this seminar, Dr Antinyan will give a second seminar on Using Survey Experiments to Guide Policymaking in the EU from 15:30 - 16:30 (CET). The presentation will provide a methodological discussion of the strengths and challenges of survey experiments, then discuss their application to policy questions of societal relevance.

All participants are invited to join the second session. To sign up, please send an email to JRC-SMAC@ec.europa.eu

Seminar chaired by Colin Kuehnhanss

12 February 2026

Speaker: Prof. Sakshi Ghai (London School of Economics)

Sakshi Ghai is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychological and Behavioural Science at the London School of Economics and Political Science. She received her PhD in Psychology from the University of Cambridge. Her research spans two strands: applied work on how digital technologies such as social media, gaming, and AI shape young people’s well-being and online safety in the Global South, and meta-scientific work on diversity in behavioural science. She examines issues of sample representativeness, generalisability, and open science, with a focus on culturally relevant, rigorous approaches that broaden behavioural research to include populations in the Global South.

LSE profile page

Abstract:

Behavioural science has made important strides in recognising the lack of diversity in its samples. Yet, the question arises: is behavioural science in the process of updating its definition of sample diversity? In this talk, I will reflect on the perils and opportunities of diversity classifications, emphasizing the need to reconsider how we study diverse populations. The discussion will focus on two areas. First, I outline ways to rethink how we conceptualise and measure sample diversity, including approaches that capture both between-country and within-country heterogeneity –an issue central to designing inclusive, evidence-based policy. Second, I examine emerging methodological practices that can both increase and constrain diversity, introducing the idea of an illusion of generalisability. While oversampling rural demographics and employing nationally representative surveys can be promising ways forward, I will discuss research innovations needed to address inclusion more fully. The talk concludes with reflections on research practices that can support more equitable and globally relevant behavioural insights.

Seminar chaired by Francesca Papa

29 January 2026

Speaker: Dr. Nicolas Sommet (University of Lausanne)

Nicolas Sommet, PhD, is a social psychologist and Head of Research at the LIVES Centre at the University of Lausanne, Switzerland. His research examines the psychological consequences of economic inequality, including effects on motivation, competition, social comparison, trust, and health. He has received several grants, including an ERC Consolidator Grant (2026-2031) to investigate the consequences of income inequality in educational contexts. He is an Associate Editor at the European Journal of Social Psychology.

Personal website

Abstract:

Exposure to economic inequality is widely thought to erode subjective well-being and mental health, with important societal implications. However, existing studies face reproducibility issues, and theory suggests that inequality may matter primarily in disadvantaged contexts. I will present a meta-analysis of 168 studies using multilevel data (11,389,871 participants across 38,335 geographical units). Contrary to common narratives, individuals living in more unequal areas did not, on average, report lower subjective well-being. Moreover, although inequality initially appeared to be associated with poorer mental health, the association became null after correcting for publication bias. Further analyses suggested a more complex pattern: Inequality was negatively associated with mental health in low-income samples (but not in high-income samples) and negatively associated with subjective well-being in high-inflation contexts (with the association reversing in low-inflation contexts). We replicated these findings using Gallup World Poll data (up to 2 million participants). Overall, these results suggest that inequality may be better understood as a catalyst that amplifies other determinants of health, such as poverty and inflation, rather than as a direct, general cause of lower subjective well-being or poorer mental health. The presentation will close with brief policy implications.

Seminar chaired by Emanuele Ciriolo

11 December 2025

Speaker: Dr. Cristina Cattaneo (European Institute on Economics and the Environment)

Cristina is the Director of the Sustainable Earth Modelling Economics Division (SEME) at CMCC, where she is also head of the research area on migration. She holds a DPhil in Economics from the University of Sussex- Brighton (UK), a PhD in Economics from the Università degli Studi in Milan (Italy), and a MA in Development Economics from the University of Sussex. She has been involved in several internationally funded research projects. Cristina is adjunct professor at the Graduate School in Public Economics- DEFAP and previously taught in various universities in Italy and abroad, both at undergraduate and at graduate level. Her main research interests involve the economics of migration, energy economics, behavioural economics. She has published extensively on these topics in top field journals, including International Migration Review, Journal of Development Economics, Journal of International Economics, Journal of Human Resources, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management and Review of Environmental Economics and Policy.

Personal website

Abstract:

Advanced economies are undergoing a profound demographic transition characterized by population aging and declining fertility. This shift, combined with rising life expectancy, poses significant economic challenges that could be mitigated by higher inflows of migrants. Yet, public opposition to immigration remains strong. In this study, we use a survey experiment to examine how individuals perceive the economic trade-offs associated with immigration under alternative policy scenarios. Respondents are presented with multiple future immigration policies, each differing in the scale of inflows and their projected economic impacts on destination countries. We experimentally vary the type of economic information provided: one group receives information on the impact of immigration policies on aggregate income (per-capita GDP), another on individual income, while a control group receives no economic information. We then measure support for these different policies - with varying degrees of openness - as well as for two organizations—one assisting migrants in their countries of origin and the other in host countries. The experiment is implemented in three European countries.

Seminar chaired by Andrea Blasco

20 November 2025

Speaker: Dr. Katharina Gangl (Nuremberg Institute for Market Decisions)

Dr. Katharina Gangl is an economic psychologist and Director at the Nuremberg Institute for Market Decisions, as well as a Senior Research Fellow at the University of Vienna. Previously, she led the Behavioural Economics research group (Insight Austria) at the Institute for Advanced Studies and held research and teaching positions at several international universities. Her research explores financial decision-making and cooperative behavior, with her widely cited work published in leading peer-reviewed journals. Beyond academia, Dr. Gangl is an active public intellectual and keynote speaker, advising organizations and governments around the globe.

Abstract:

Citizen assemblies are an increasingly popular instrument. However, there are only few studies that evaluate their legitimacy and effectiveness. The current project examined two research questions based on field-experimental data from a citizen assembly on the Covid-19 crisis in Austria. First, are citizen assemblies representative of the population in terms of personality characteristics, and are invitation letters a suitable measure to improve representativeness in respect to those personality characteristics? Second, does the participation in a citizen assembly reduce affective polarization?

The sample to test our research questions consists of 14.999 citizens who received one of three different invitation letters from the national statistics office. 716 citizens agreed to participate and were randomly allocated to a participation and a waiting-list (i.e. control) group. They all filled in several surveys. During the same period, 2603 citizens were surveyed to assess the prevalence of personality characteristics in the population.

Concerning our first research question, results show that participants invited with a standard letter are indeed not representative of the population in terms of an important trait: Locus of control. However, if invitation letters emphasize the importance of inclusiveness of all voices compared to the requirement to bring own ideas, an increase in the representativeness of the assembly concerning locus of control is achieved.

Concerning the second research question, results show that affective polarization was significantly lower among the participation group compared to citizens on the waiting list at all survey assessment time points, with no evidence of further reduction following the assembly. Thus, the groups' level of polarization differed even before the assembly started, but the participation itself had no effect.

Overall, our results show that more evaluations and, based on that, adjustments of the method of the citizen assembly are needed to justify the current popular application.

Seminar chaired by Colin Kuehnhanss

6 November 2025

Speaker: Prof. Cameron Brick (University of Amsterdam)

Cameron Brick is Assistant Professor of Social Psychology at the University of Amsterdam, specializing in climate change and pro-environmental behavior. His research focuses on the gap between environmental attitudes, intentions, and actual high-impact behaviors, using survey experiments, behavioral data, and cross-national studies. He co-leads projects on plastics, fast fashion, activism, and citizen science, and his recent work calls for an impact-focused approach that measures behaviors and environmental impacts more directly rather than relying on intentions or vague self-reports.

Personal website

Abstract:

Policymakers face a persistent challenge: strong public support for climate action does not reliably translate into the behaviors or political choices that reduce emissions. Social scientists have often treated environmental attitudes and intentions as adequate proxies for action, but recent evidence shows attitudes and intentions are only weakly associated with objective outcomes such as energy use, mobility, or consumption.

This talk will outline an “impact-focused approach” to studying climate behavior, which distinguishes mental properties (concern, attitudes, intentions) from physical outcomes (emissions, biodiversity, collective action). I will present findings where self-reported “eco-behaviors” correlated with higher emissions, illustrating how reliance on intentions can obscure real effects. Demographics like income and context like infrastructure and social visibility may explain behavior better than attitudes and intentions.

This misalignment is an implementation barrier: assuming intentions will translate into action risks policies underperforming at scale. Effective evaluation should prioritize direct behavioral or impact-based measures, so that research and policy align on outcomes rather than intentions. Such an approach reveals both the limits of behavioral influence strategies and the opportunities for structural change.

Seminar chaired by Francesca Papa

16 October 2025

Speaker: Prof. Cecilie Steenbuch Traberg (Copenhagen Business School)

Dr. Cecilie Steenbuch Traberg is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Digitalization at Copenhagen Business School. Her research examines how people influence one another in digital environments, with a particular focus on digital threats such as misinformation, polarisation, extremism and radicalisation, and negative forms of social influence. She earned her PhD in Psychology from the University of Cambridge, where her dissertation investigated the social cognition of misinformation and psychological strategies to build resilience against it. She has held visiting scholarships at Princeton University and Harvard Business School, and has collaborated on applied projects with organisations including NATO StratCom and the World Health Organization. Her work combines experimental research with policy-oriented applications on digital platforms, democratic resilience, and emerging technologies.

Personal website

Abstract:

Misinformation poses a growing threat to European societies by eroding trust in democratic institutions, fuelling polarisation, and undermining public health and climate action. While much policy attention has centred on fact-checking and accuracy nudges, this talk presents research showing that these approaches overlook a crucial factor: people rarely evaluate information in isolation. Instead, they rely on social and contextual cues - such as consensus signals, engagement metrics, or the subjective credibility of information sources - which can make misleading claims appear trustworthy.

Drawing on experimental studies conducted during my doctoral research at the University of Cambridge, I show how social influence processes increase susceptibility to misinformation and assess the effectiveness of psychological inoculation (“prebunking”) interventions. Inoculation - so-called “psychological vaccines” - strengthen resilience, yet even inoculated individuals remain vulnerable in socially mediated environments. This highlights the need for interventions that are not only cognitively robust but also socially embedded and scalable.

For policymakers, the findings suggest a shift from reactive fact-checking toward proactive resilience strategies. The talk concludes by reflecting on how these insights can inform European approaches to strengthening resilience - across digital literacy, informed democratic participation, and the design of the online information environment. As a practical case example, I introduce Solomon’s Secret, a gamified inoculation tool that demonstrates how interactive approaches can prepare young audiences to resist manipulation in the digital age.

Seminar chaired by Hendrik Bruns

18 September 2025

Speaker: Mia Drazilova (OECD - Observatory of Public Sector Innovation (OPSI))

Mia is a Behavioural Economics Advisor at the OECD’s Observatory for Public Sector Innovation (OPSI), where she supports governments in applying behavioural insights to address complex public policy challenges. In her current role, she contributes to fostering an international network of behavioural science experts, practitioners and policymakers to drive knowledge-sharing and global best practices. She supports the development of guidelines, tools, standards and training to help governments better integrate behavioural science into policy processes, and provides expert behavioural advice to both OECD member and partner countries.

Before joining the OECD, Mia worked as a behavioural insights expert and consultant, advising government agencies, banks, insurance companies, and media organisations on applying behavioural science across a range of public and private sector challenges. She holds an MSc in Behavioural Economics from Erasmus University Rotterdam and a BSc in Economics and Business from the Vienna University of Economics and Business.

Abstract:

Human behaviour is central to the green transition: achieving a sustainable, low-carbon economy requires behavioural changes from individuals, businesses, and governments. Governments play a pivotal role in driving these changes and fostering sustainable behaviour across the economy. This talk will present a recent OECD policy paper identifying six key trends illustrating how behavioural science is shaping public policy to accelerate the green transition. Drawing on over 100 case studies, the paper provides policymakers with a practical roadmap to integrate behavioural science into environmental policy. The trends include embedding behavioural science throughout the policy cycle, assessing public acceptability of green reforms, enhancing citizen participation in environmental policies, strengthening resilience against climate misinformation, and increasing demand for sustainable goods and services.

Seminar chaired by Marion Dupoux

10 July 2025

Speaker: Prof. Thomas Robinson (London School of Economics)

Thomas Robinson is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Methodology at the London School of Economics. He received his PhD in Politics from the University of Oxford in 2020. Before joining LSE, he was an Assistant Professor in the Centre for Institutions and Political Behavior at Durham University.

Thomas' research is focused on the use of machine learning in causal inference and experimental research designs. He is particularly interested in deep learning methods, non-parametric modelling of heterogeneous treatment effects, and questions surrounding synthetic data in the social sciences. His work focuses on substantive fields including political behaviour, money in politics, public health, and public opinion/survey research.

LSE profile page

Abstract:

With the development of generative machine learning techniques in the 2010s, and rapid acceleration of these efforts with the success of large language modelling, it is increasingly easy to generate "synthetic samples"—data that appears as if sampled from the real world, but which are generated by statistical models. How should we understand what these models are doing? What aspects of (social scientific) research can these models improve? And what are the inherent limitations of using generative models trained on finite data samples? In this talk, I situate how synthetic data relates to other forms of data we commonly use in the social sciences and show when it is likely (not) to be useful. I illustrate these claims by presenting a method for training deep, generative neural networks on tabular data. In particular, I show how these models can synthesise realistic looking, but entirely novel, survey data.

Seminar chaired by Francesca Papa

05 June 2025

Speaker: Dr Cameron Belton (Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), UK)

Dr Cameron Belton is Technical Specialist in Behavioural Economics at the Financial Conduct Authority, the UK’s financial regulator. At the FCA he oversees the work of the Behavioural Economics and Data Unit, who use behaviourally-informed data science and experimental methods to inform the FCA’s strategic and policy decision-making. Prior to this, he has worked with a number of regulators and government departments in the UK and Ireland to apply behavioural science to regulation and policymaking, and has published extensively in international journals at the intersection of behavioural science and public policy. An economist by training, he holds a PhD in Behavioural Economics from the University of East Anglia.

Abstract:

The Consumer Duty is a landmark regulatory development for the UK financial sector, introduced by the Financial Conduct Authority in July 2023. In its objective to improve outcomes for consumers, insights from behavioural science have shaped the regulation’s development and implementation.

Findings from behavioural science have been explicitly embedded within the regulatory guidance, and regulated firms are expected to proactively consider evidence and research from behavioural science in how they operate and engage with their customers in order to be compliant.

This talk will discuss the successes and challenges of explicitly embedding a behaviourally-informed approach into public policy and regulation, using this novel and innovative case study. It will also share case studies of experimental and behavioural data science research designed to support the implementation of the Duty in specific policy areas such as consumer investments and retail banking.

It will be of interest to behavioural scientists working in applied settings in other areas of policy/ regulation as well as to academics interested in the theoretical and practical considerations of the intersection of behavioural science and public policy.

Seminar chaired by Hendrik Bruns

8 May 2025

Speaker: Prof. Adam Oliver (London School of Economics)

Adam Oliver is Professor of Behavioural Public Policy at the LSE. He has helped to develop a whole new field of public policy – behavioural public policy – that focusses on how the findings of behavioural economics specifically, and behavioural science more broadly, can be linked to public policy concerns. As a contribution towards this effort, Oliver wrote a trilogy of books on the origins, development and future of the field: The Origins of Behavioural Public Policy (2017), Reciprocity and the Art of Behavioural Public Policy (2019), and A Political Economy of Behavioural Public Policy (2023), all published by Cambridge University Press.

LSE profile page

Abstract:

Buzzwords abound in behavioural public policy and are used to label various and varied conceptual policy frameworks in the field. The first and most famous of these buzzwords is ‘nudge’, which in its original manifestation encapsulated a coherent, if limited, perspective. However, instead of acknowledging the limitations of the approach, which several alternative frameworks were developed to address, the advocates of nudge and those with little expertise in the field widened the parameters of the framework to an extent that its original meaning was largely lost.

In this presentation, Prof. Oliver details these developments and proposes that the buzzwords that are often loosely attached to behavioural public policy interventions – e.g. nudges, nudge-plus, boosts, shoves and budges – be dropped. Instead, it is suggested that academics, practitioners, policy makers and the general public reflect more deeply on the type of society in which we collectively wish to live, and assess each behavioural public policy intervention on its own terms to discern whether it is congruent with our societal values.

Seminar chaired by Colin Kuehnhanss

3 April 2025

Speaker: Prof. Pete Lunn (Economic and Social Research Institute Dublin)

Professor Pete Lunn is the founder and head of the Behavioural Research Unit (BRU) at the ESRI in Dublin. The BRU undertakes behavioural studies to address policy problems in Ireland, mostly funded by government departments and state agencies. Pete’s primary area of study is how people make decisions that affect environmental, health and financial outcomes. Pete and his team at the BRU have recently published multiple research studies on perceptions and understanding of climate change, as well as public engagement with climate action.

ESRI profile page

Abstract:

Air travel generates disproportionate greenhouse gas emissions. In the absence of supply-side options to reduce emissions, there is interest in demand-side measures, which include providing emissions information at the point-of-sale. We deployed a pre-registered experiment to test whether emissions labelling shifts consumers towards lower-emission flights and whether consumers understand the labels currently in use. Participants completed two tasks on a realistic travel website, one where they were asked to purchase holiday flights as they normally would and another where they were incentivised to choose the lowest-emission flight for someone else. We found that while labels produce a modest shift towards flights with lower relative emissions on a given route, they also lead some participants to choose higher-emitting flights. This happens because the labels “greenwash” long-haul flights with large reductions in relative emissions. Consistent with this, the labels generate confusion: two-in-three people misinterpret the reference point for relative labels and few correctly identify the factors that contribute to label calculations. We conclude that current emissions labels are unlikely to reduce aviation emissions or to inform consumers about the impact of their travel choices.

Seminar chaired by Emanuele Ciriolo

6 March 2025

Speaker: Prof. Robert Dur (Erasmus University Rotterdam)

Robert Dur is Professor of Economics at Erasmus University Rotterdam. His expertise lies in the fields of public economics, behavioral economics, and organizational economics. He has run numerous randomized experiments together with businesses and public sector organizations so as to learn about the effects of a great variety of policies. He is also president of the Royal Dutch Economic Association, columnist at De Correspondent, and expert member of the Policy Evaluation Committee at the Dutch Ministry of Finance.

Erasmus University Rotterdam profile page

Abstract:

In many public policy areas, randomized policy experiments can greatly contribute to our knowledge of the effects of policies and can thus help to improve public policy. However, policy experiments are not very common. This paper studies whether a lack of appreciation for policy experiments among voters may be the reason for this. Collecting survey data representative of the Dutch electorate, we find clear evidence contradicting this view. Voters strongly support policy experimentation and particularly so when they do not hold a strong opinion about the policy. In a subsequent survey experiment among a selected group of Dutch politicians, we find that politicians conform their expressed opinion about policy experiments to what we tell them the actual opinion of voters is.

Seminar chaired by Colin Kuehnhanss

11 February 2025

Speaker: Prof. Enrique Fatas (Universidad Europea de Valencia)

Enrique Fatas is Full Professor of Behavioral Economics at the Universidad Europea in Spain, where he directs Behavioral Economics Institute since September 2023, when he returned to Spain after working as a Full Professor at Loughborough University and the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom, at the University of Pennsylvania in the United States, and at the Universidad ICESI in Colombia. Enrique is a qualified expert in decision and behavioral sciences, and in the design of public policies inspired by behavioral economics. Since obtaining his PhD in Economics at the University of Valencia, in Spain, he has published more than 100 scientific works in journals such as Psychological Science, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, Management Science, or the American Economic Journal – Microeconomics. His research has been generously funded by the National Science Foundation (in the United States) and the Economic and Social Research Council (in the United Kingdom), among many others. He has worked as a senior consultant for governments and international organizations like the World Bank. USAID, and the United Nations.

Personal website

Abstract:

We report the results of a field experiment targeting discrimination towards Venezuelan migrants in Colombia. We provide a large and representative sample of young adult residents in Bogota with a sequence of short radio podcast episodes, presenting daily interaction between Colombians and Venezuelans. We randomly split participants, stratified by gender and SES, in two groups: one receiving links to the podcast by WhatsApp (Treated), the other one being asked to fill a sequence of surveys, identical to the ones filled by participants in the treated condition (Control). We evaluate the impact of the intervention collecting data before the intervention starts (Baseline survey), immediately after the intervention ends (Final survey) and weeks later (Tracking survey). In the Baseline survey, participants (all of them untreated) were randomly assigned to one condition in a survey experiment. The experiment had two vignettes, describing job applications and fast-food restaurant scenarios. The factorial design manipulates the nationality (Venezuelan or Colombian) and sex (changing names) of the vignette’s main character. Our differences-in-differences analysis strongly suggests that discrimination towards Venezuelan migrants is rampant among young residents in Bogota. In the Baseline, participants dismiss Venezuelan applicants to a fictitious job and refuse to serve a Venezuelan client entering a fast-food restaurant. Behavior is consistent with both preference- based and systemic discrimination. Interestingly, we find no trace of intersectional discrimination, as male and female migrants are discriminated equally. The Final and Tracking surveys show that the intervention works, as it significantly and substantially changes the attitudes and behavior of young residents towards migrants. Treated participants change their perception of migrants’ work ethic, educational achievements, and likelihood of committing a crime. Mistrust towards migrants is severely reduced, and participants are significantly more open to engage with migrants. Results are largely homogeneous across participants’ sex, political orientation and SES. Most results, but not all, persist weeks after the intervention concluded.

Seminar chaired by Michal Krawczyk

23 January 2025

Speaker: Prof. Lorraine Whitmarsh (University of Bath)

Professor Lorraine Whitmarsh, MBE, is an environmental psychologist, specialising in perceptions and behaviour in relation to climate change, energy and transport, based in the Department of Psychology, University of Bath. She is Director of the ESRC-funded UK Centre for Climate Change and Social Transformations (CAST). She regularly advises governmental and other organisations on low-carbon behaviour change and climate change communication, was one of the expert leads for Climate Assembly UK, and Lead Author for IPCC’s Working Group II Sixth Assessment Report. Her research projects have included studies of meat consumption, energy efficiency behaviours, waste reduction and carrier bag reuse, perceptions of smart technologies and electric vehicles, low-carbon lifestyles, and responses to climate change.

University of Bath profile page

Abstract:

In this talk, Prof. Whitmarsh argues that most of the measures required to reach our climate change targets require at least some degree of behaviour change. And that more broadly, social transformation is required to reach ’net zero’ carbon targets in the coming years. In order to achieve this, we need public engagement and participation in decision-making about what a low-carbon future looks like, and how to reach it. We also need a wide range of measures to change people’s behaviour at home, work and elsewhere. I will present findings from polls and citizens assemblies on public concern about climate change, and support for net zero policies; and from behavioural science research on how to effectively change behaviour to cut emissions.

Seminar chaired by Kaloyan Mitev

10 December 2024

Speaker: Prof. Wouter Botzen (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam)

Prof. Wouter Botzen is director of the Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), Vrije Universiteit (VU), Amsterdam. IVM is the oldest multidisciplinary environmental research institute in the Netherlands, and one of the world's leading institutes in sustainability science. He is Professor of Economics of Climate Change and Natural Disasters at IVM. His previous positions include being a Professor of Economics of Global Environmental Change at the Utrecht University School of Economics, and a senior research fellow at the Risk Management and Decision Processes Center at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.

His main research interests are climate change economics with a particular focus on risk, natural disaster insurance, behavioural economics of decision making under risk, and natural disaster risk assessment and management. Wouter has done extensive behavioural research on individual decisions about adaptation to climate change risks, and how policy interventions can improve preparedness for natural disasters. He has published widely in international scientific journals on these themes. His research obtained various awards, such as from the Society of Risk Analysis in the USA and the Lloyd’s Science of Risk Prize. Wouter has contributed to various international high-level policy reports, such as the IPCC, the UN Global Assessment Report on Disaster Risk Reduction [GAR], and the European Climate Risk Assessment.

VU Amsterdam profile page

Abstract:

Economic losses from flooding are increasing around the world, which highlights the need to take measures that limit flood risk. However, many individuals in flood-prone areas do not invest in cost-effective flood risk mitigation measures and do not purchase flood insurance coverage. This has been explained by a variety of behavioural biases. In this talk, I will discuss these biases leading to suboptimal flood preparedness. Moreover, I will present behavioural economic studies that tested policy interventions designed to address these biases. These interventions can help individuals better prepare for future floods, such as nudges and financial incentives provided through insurance policies. Based on these findings, I will offer recommendations for flood risk management policies.

Seminar chaired by Colin Kuehnhanss

28 November 2024

Speakers: Mary MacLennan (Executive Office of the UN Secretary-General) and Dr. Malte Petersen (German Federal Chancellery)

Mary MacLennan is the Senior Advisor on Behavioural Science to the United Nations Executive Office of the Secretary-General where she leads behavioural science efforts. She is also the Lead of the UN Behavioural Science Group in the UN Innovation Network. In these roles she expands and supports behavioural science application across the UN.

As a behavioural scientist with over a decade of experience, Mary has worked in the foundational stages of government behavioural science teams and as an expert advisor to the OECD and UN Women, among other organisations. Mary is currently a Fellow at the El-Erian Institute of Behavioural Economics and Policy at the University of Cambridge and a Senior Visiting Fellow at the London School of Economics.

Dr Malte Petersen is a psychologist working as policy advisor on behavioural science and citizen-centred policies in the German Federal Chancellery. His work focuses on the integration of behavioural science findings into policy design and the promotion of exchange between the scientific community and policymakers.

Abstracts:

Behavioural Science at the United Nations

The UN Secretary-General released a policy brief on "UN 2.0" which highlights the importance of behavioural science in creating forward thinking culture and as one of five cutting edge skills for the 21st century. This commitment is reaffirmed in the Secretary-General’s 2021 Guidance Note on Behavioural Science and supported by the UN Behavioural Science Group , which brings together over 6,000 colleagues from 70+ UN Entities and 140+ countries.

This session will focus on how behavioural science is being applied in the UN to policy, programming and administration - and where the UN is headed next.

German Federal Chancellery

In this talk we will share initiatives and learnings from this legislative term to further embed expertise from behavioural and social sciences in our governmental processes: we will talk about consultations of draft bills, legal design and the citizen check. We hope to encourage a debate about learning from similar initiatives, such as the dutch Doenvermogentoets.

Seminar chaired by Emanuele Ciriolo

14 November 2024

Speaker: Dr. David De Coninck (KU Leuven)

David De Coninck (PhD) is a postdoctoral researcher and guest professor at the Centre for Sociological Research at KU Leuven (Belgium). His research interests revolve around intergroup relations, with special attention to migrant deservingness, media effects, and intergroup contact. He has published widely on these topics in highly ranked academic journals in various fields.

KU Leuven profile page

Abstract:

I will highlight the development of a new framework that provides a fresh perspective on public preferences regarding migrants, how it can be used to gain further insights into discriminatory behaviour towards migrants, and investigate the extent to which this framework is found in news media coverage of migrants. In the field of social policy, the CARIN criteria (Control, Attitude, Reciprocity, Identity, Need) have been used to assess public preferences with regards to the allocation of welfare benefits to different groups. I will apply these criteria to migrant deservingness: which ‘type’ of migrant does the public feel deserves to settle in a country? The framework of deservingness draws from a variety of academic perspectives, through the integration of multiple research disciplines: e.g. sociology, social policy, migration studies, communication sciences, and political communication. In a current project on the topic, I combine desk research of media content with a mixed-method approach to develop the theoretical framework and to deliver new insights for academia and policy makers: an online survey will gauge public opinion and experimental correspondence tests will be conducted to assess discriminatory behaviours towards migrants. Based on this developed theoretical framework, I formulate recommendations for policy and practice.

Seminar chaired by Michal Krawczyk

24 October 2024

Speakers: Dr. Stephen Wendel (sistemaFutura) and Wendy Chamberlin (independent consultant)

Dr. Wendel is an applied behavioral scientist who helps organizations effectively use behavioral science to the benefit of their customers. Before co-founding sistemaFutura, he led the behavioral science efforts at Morningstar, HelloWallet and Busara, developing and field-testing hundreds of interventions, and he founded the international non-profit organization Bescy. He has authored three books on applied behavioral science, including the broadly-used textbook, Designing for Behavior Change, now in its second edition.

Ms. Chamberlain is a development professional with over 18 years’ experience working in the philanthropic sector, research, in direct implementation. She focuses on solutions to drive financial inclusion in emerging markets, especially for climate adaptive solutions, women's economic empowerment, locally led adaptation, and arid/semi-arid land markets.

sistemaFutura website

Abstract:

In order for climate adaptation policy to be effective, individuals and the institutions in which they are embedded need to take action: from government employees, to businesses, to consumers. Well-intentioned and well-crafted policies that seek to ameliorate the effects of climate risks are wasted if they are not implemented, if people do not comply with them, or if vital feedback on their effects is not gathered and utilised in further policy development. In each of these areas, behavioural science can help.

In this discussion, we share a framework to understand the various ways in which behavioural science can help support climate adaptation policy. Specifically, it employs a behavioural systems analysis, an emerging technique that seeks to drive meaningful behavioural change at both the individual level and the system level. We’ll share a concrete example of climate adaptation among Kenyan pastoralists, and then demonstrate how the framework can be for other multi-level policy challenges

Seminar chaired by Marion Dupoux

02 October 2024

Speaker: Prof. Balázs Bodó (University of Amsterdam)

Dr. Balazs Bodo is Associate Professor, socio-legal researcher at the Institute for Information Law (IViR) at the University of Amsterdam. He was a Fulbright Visiting Researcher at Stanford University’s Center for Internet and Society in 2006/7. In 2012/13 he was a Fulbright Fellow at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University. In 2013 he moved to Amsterdam as a Marie Curie Fellow at the Institute for Information Law (IViR) at the University of Amsterdam.

In 2018 he received an ERC Starting Grant to study the legal, and political implications of blockchain based technologies, and started the Blockchain & Society Policy Research Lab. In 2019 he has been a senior visiting fellow at the Weizenbaum-Institut für die vernetzte Gesellschaft, Berlin. He is the founding (co)director of the University of Amsterdam’s interdisciplinary research area on Trust in the digital society. He is the Program Director of a new interdisciplinary Advanced LLM program in Technology Governance. His academic interests include digital piracy, decentralized techno-social systems, shadow libraries, informal media economies, regulatory conflicts around new technological architectures, and trust.

University of Amsterdam profile page

Abstract:

The Trust in the Digital Society Research Priority Area at the University of Amsterdam is an interdisciplinary research effort to better understand trust dynamics in the digital society. Platforms, social media, AI systems, e-commerce systems, search engines, algorithmic recommenders and filtering systems, blockchains, reputation management systems, dating apps and app marketplaces, welfare and predictive policing systems are just a few of those info-communication technologies which either produce new forms of (dis)trust, replace, remediate, or disrupt existing mechanisms of trust formation.

Our project focuses on four major questions:

• What are the new digital infrastructures we increasingly rely on to build trust in our social, political, economic, and interpersonal relations in society?
• What kind of societal trust dynamics emerge by this increased reliance of trust through technology?
• Are these infrastructures trustworthy? And if, as we have every reason to believe, they aren’t,
• What combination of regulation, design, competition, economic incentives, public oversight, and political accountability makes these infrastructures (more) trustworthy?

In this talk UvA researchers will discuss how they operationalized these questions, and what research projects are in the making. The goal of this meeting is to explore building research networks, sharing resource, starting collaborative efforts on empirical, theoretical and legal/policy work.

In particular, we’ll touch upon how social media facilitates the circulation of (dis)trust narratives; what platforms’ trust and safety units are doing; how the emerging EU tech regulation framework can and cannot contribute to the trustworthiness of digital technologies; and how we can better understand the psychological processes of (dis)trust formation in the digital environment.

Seminar chaired by Andrea Blasco

03 September 2024

Speaker: Prof. Robert Metcalfe (Columbia University)

Robert Metcalfe is a Professor of International and Public Affairs and holds the SIPA Professorship of Energy Policy at Columbia University. His research covers environmental and energy economics, behavioral economics, and public economics. He has published over 25 academic peer-reviewed papers in journals such as the American Economic Review, Journal of Political Economy, and the Journal of Public Economics. He is a co-editor at the Journal of Public Economics and an associate editor at the Journal of Political Economy: Microeconomics, and is the chief economist at the Centre for Net Zero (part of the Octopus Energy Group). He has previously worked at University of Southern California, Boston University, University of Chicago, and University of Oxford. He has also previously worked in the U.K. Government and the Social and Behavioral Sciences Team at the Office of Science and Technology Policy, Office of the U.S. President.

Personal website

Abstract:

What are the most effective ways to address climate change? This seminar presents a research paper that extends and applies the marginal value of public funds (MVPF) framework to help answer this question. We examine 96 US environmental policy changes studied over the past 25 years. These policies span subsidies (wind, residential solar, electric and hybrid vehicles, vehicle retirement, appliance rebates, weatherization), nudges (marketing and energy conservation), and revenue raisers (fuel taxes, cap and trade). For each policy, we draw upon quasi-experimental or experimental evaluations of causal effects and translate those estimates into an MVPF. We apply a consistent translation of these behavioral responses into measures of their associated externalities and valuations of those externalities. We also provide a new method for incorporating learning-by-doing spillovers.

The analysis yields three main results:

• First, subsidies for investments that directly displace the dirty production of electricity, such as production tax credits for wind power and subsidies for residential solar panels, have higher MVPFs (generally exceeding 2) than all other subsidies in our sample (with MVPFs generally around 1).
• Second, nudges to reduce energy consumption have large MVPFs, with values above 5, when targeted to regions of the US with a dirty electric grid. By contrast, policies targeting areas with cleaner grids such as California and the Northeast have substantially smaller MVPFs (often below 1), despite larger treatment effects in those areas.
• Third, gas taxes and cap-and-trade policies are highly efficient means of raising revenue (with MVPFs below 0.7) due to the presence of large environmental externalities.

We contrast these conclusions with those derived from more traditional cost per ton metrics used in previous literature.

Seminar chaired by Andrea Blasco

27 June 2024

Speaker: Prof. Kristian S. Nielsen (Copenhagen Business School)

Kristian S. Nielsen is an Assistant Professor at Copenhagen Business School, Department of Management, Society and Communication. Kristian’s research focuses on the role of behavior change in mitigating climate change and conserving biodiversity. He is particularly interested in identifying effective and scalable initiatives to change behavior, understanding how individual behavior changes can contribute to reducing environmental impacts, and understanding how to increase the feasibility of transformative climate and biodiversity initiatives. His research is rooted in quantitative environmental psychology and behavioral science but with an interdisciplinary outlook. Before joining Copenhagen Business School, he was a postdoc in the Department of Psychology and Department of Zoology at the University of Cambridge.

Copenhagen Business School profile page

Abstract:

Addressing the biodiversity crisis requires unprecedented societal transformations within a short time frame. Behavioral science has an important role in informing this transformation, but so far, it has only had a relatively minor role in informing biodiversity conservation strategies. In my talk, I will first discuss how to think about conservation-relevant behavior and its determinants. I will then characterize the typical behavioral science approach to studying conservation-relevant behaviors and pinpoint pertinent limitations and blind spots. I will close by offering suggestions for developing behavior change interventions.

Seminar chaired by Marion Dupoux

28 May 2024

Speaker: Prof. Sergei Guriev (Sciences Po, Paris)

Sergei Guriev joined Sciences Po as a tenured professor of economics in 2013 after serving as the Rector of the New Economic School in Moscow in 2004-13. In 2016-19, he was on leave from Sciences Po serving as the Chief Economist and Member of the Executive Committee of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). In 2022, Sergei Guriev was appointed Provost at Sciences Po. Professor Guriev’s research interests include political economics of populism and autocracy. He has published in the leading economics and political science journals including American Economic Review, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Review of Economic Studies, and American Political Science Review. His 2022 book “Spin Dictators: The Changing Face of Tyranny in the 21st Century” (Princeton University Press) has been translated into 13 languages. Professor Guriev is also a member of the Executive Committee of the International Economic Association and a Global Member of the Trilateral Commission. He is also a Research Fellow at the Centre for Economic Policy Research, London (where he has also served as a founding Leader of the Research and Policy Network on Populism). He is a Senior Member of the Institut Universitaire de France, an Ordinary Member of Academia Europeae, and an Honorary Foreign Member of the American Economic Association.

Abstract:

We develop a comprehensive framework to assess policy measures aimed at curbing false news dissemination on social media. A randomized experiment on Twitter during the 2022 U.S. mid-term elections evaluates such policies as priming the awareness of misinformation, fact-checking, confirmation clicks, and prompting careful consideration of content. Priming is the most effective policy in reducing sharing of false news while increasing sharing of true content. A model of sharing decisions, motivated by persuasion, partisan signaling, and reputation concerns, predicts that policies affect sharing through three channels: (i) updating perceived veracity and partisanship of content, (ii) raising the salience of reputation, and (iii) increasing sharing frictions. Structural estimation shows that all policies impact sharing via the salience of reputation and cost of friction. Affecting perceived veracity plays a negligible role as a mechanism in all policies, including fact-checking. The priming intervention performs best in enhancing reputation salience with minimal added friction.

Joint work with Emeric Henry, Théo Marquis and Ekaterina Zhuravskaya

Seminar chaired by Hendrik Bruns

11 April 2024

Speaker: Dr. Sophie Attwood (World Resources Institute)

Dr Sophie Attwood is Senior Behavioral Scientist at the World Resources Institute (WRI) and her work focusses on helping people to switch to healthier and more sustainable diets and reduce food waste. Sophie is a Chartered Health Psychologist and Doctor of Behavioral Science from the University of Cambridge. She has researched and published extensively on the science of behavior change for health and sustainability, covering the areas of diet, physical activity, wellbeing, smoking cessation, and alcohol reduction. Her work has featured in a range of international media outlets including Reuters, Forbes, The Guardian, and the World Economic Forum.

Abstract:

Think of the words ‘food waste’, and chances are that your mind conjures up an image of a rotting, mouldy, smelly pile of food, landfill with flies buzzing around it, or a half-eaten plate leftovers.

For those of us working to reduce the amount of food that households waste in the European Union, the fact that this problem is ugly, boring and gross, makes it all the more difficult to create change at the scale we need. We must first overcome implicit negative associations in order to engage consumers, and work hard to correct misperceptions that food waste is only post-consumption scraps, rather than uneaten, edible food. In this presentation, I will review research on consumer perceptions of food waste and how these influence consumer motivations to engage with the issue and take action. Subsequently, I will explore how behavioral science can be applied to change consumer perceptions, presenting a series of studies exploring social norms interventions to make food waste socially unacceptable, and subsequently outline suggestions for how to reframe consumer perceptions of food waste, so that tackling this problem is seen as innovative, creative and altruistic instead.

Seminar chaired by Hendrik Bruns

12 March 2024

Speaker: Dr. Renos Vakis (World Bank - Mind, Behavior, and Development Unit)

Renos Vakis leads the Mind, Behavior, and Development Unit (eMBeD), which integrates behavioral science in the design of anti-poverty policies in a wide range of issues such as financial inclusion, social cohesion, human development and employment. He has written extensively on issues related to poverty dynamics and mobility, aspirations, mental well-being and social protection and has led numerous randomized trials on a range of anti-poverty interventions in various settings. Renos has also taught at Johns Hopkins University (SAIS) and the University of Cyprus. He holds a Ph.D. from the University of California, Berkeley.

Mind, Behavior, and Development Unit (eMBeD)

Abstract:

The proliferation of mis- and disinformation threatens to erode the credibility of public institutions and limit their capacity to implement policies that enhance public well-being. While misinformation represents an urgent global challenge, relatively little research has examined solutions in low- and middle-income countries. We experimentally test the impact of a novel WhatsApp chatbot game intervention in Jordan to boost capacity to identify common misinformation techniques and reduce the likelihood of sharing misleading headlines with others -effectively 'inoculating' them against misinformation. A sample of 2,851 participants was recruited online and randomly assigned to five study arms: (1) comprehensive game-based inoculation that highlighted examples of misinformation and non-misinformation, (2) brief game-based inoculation that highlighted examples of only misinformation, (3) infographics-based inoculation, (4) exposure to placebo infographics unrelated to misinformation, and (5) pure control. To evaluate the impact of our intervention, we assess two main outcomes: (i) ability to accurately discern headlines using misinformation techniques and headlines that do not use misinformation techniques, and (ii) discernment in sharing the two types of headlines. Compared to the control group, the comprehensive version of the game significantly improved discernment of misinformation and reduced likelihood of sharing misleading headlines. A brief version of the game yielded weaker effects on discernment of misinformation and likelihood of sharing misleading headlines. In contrast, exposure to infographics teaching similar techniques or a set of placebo infographics on an unrelated topic showed no significant impacts on discernment of misinformation and sharing intentions. These findings suggest that games can be highly effective mechanisms for inoculating the public against misinformation in the context of a middle-income country in the short term. Future research is also needed to explore the boundary conditions of our findings including assessment of medium- and long-term effects.

Seminar chaired by Hendrik Bruns

27 February 2024

Speaker: Prof. Axel Ockenfels (Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods)

Axel Ockenfels is Professor of Economics at the University of Cologne and Director at the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods in Bonn. He combines tools from market design and the behavioral sciences to find solutions in the electricity, climate, finance, transportation, telecommunications, Internet, and other sectors. Ockenfels is a member of the Advisory Board of the German Federal Ministry of Economics and Climate Action, an advisor to the German Chancellor's Office, and a member of several German academies of science. His research has been honored with the highest German and European research distinctions.

University of Cologne

Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods

Abstract:

Human behavior shapes nearly every aspect of our lives. It affects the success of societies, markets, organizations and individuals. Indeed, many economic and social challenges, such as pandemics, climate change, and energy crises, require behavioral change. In this talk, I will use case studies, mostly from my own research, to show how research in market design and behavioral economics can be used to design mechanisms that align incentives and behavior with underlying goals.

Seminar chaired by Colin Kuehnhanss

25 January 2024

Speaker: Dr. Michael Pahle (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research - PIK)

Dr Michael Pahle is head of the working group “Climate and Energy Policy” at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK). He holds a PhD in economics from TU Berlin. His research focuses on emission trading systems, public support for carbon pricing, and regulatory frameworks to achieve net-zero. He is Principle Investigator on “European Climate and Energy Policy” in the BMBF Ariadne Project , Germany’s largest social science Energiewende research project. Based on his research, Michael advises the German government and parliament, the EU Commission and the EU Parliament on the development, reform and extension of emission trading. He is also a member of the consultative working group for ESMA's Risk Comittee .

Michael Pahle - Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research

Abstract:

National environmental protection policies are coming under pressure despite increasingly dramatic climate realities. At the same time, global cooperation in achieving fast enough emission reduction to fulfil the Paris Agreement is lacking. Knowledge of this lack of international cooperation may further reduce citizens’ willingness to support climate policies at home, potentially leading to a viscious circle of lower ambitions in national politics undermining global commitments. In this context, we present experimental survey evidence from all major EU countries with more than 50,000 participants, investigating links between individual attitudes on climate, moralisation and donation behaviour, and evaluating the effects of an information treatment showing international failure to cooperate. We analyse participants’ preferences for action at the national, EU and global level. We show that many people are committed to spending their own money on reducing emissions, and that this relates strongly to climate policy moralisation. Negative information on global cooperation has no negative effect on peoples’ support for climate policies, offering an optimistic take on future policies. We further explore country differences in attitudes, behaviours and knowledge about climate-related policies.

Seminar chaired by Marion Dupoux

5 December 2023

Speakers: Prof. Mike Luca (Harvard Business School), Stefan Hunt (Keystone) and Kush Amlani (Mozilla)

Prof. Mike Luca is the Lee J. Styslinger III Associate Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School, and a faculty research fellow at the NBER. His research, teaching, and advisory work focuses on the design of online platforms, and on the ways in which data can inform managerial and policy decisions. His research has been published in academic journals including the Journal of Economic Perspectives, Management Science, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, American Economic Review: Papers and Proceeding, the American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, and the American Economic Journal: Microeconomics. He has also written about behavioral economics and online platforms for major media outlets including The Wall Street Journal, Economist, Financial Times, Guardian and the Huffington Post amongst others.

Michael Luca - Harvard Business School

Dr. Stefan Hunt is Head of Keystone’s Advanced Technology Services (K.ATS) in Europe and has over 20 years of experience in economics, behavioural analysis and experimental design. Prior to joining Keystone, Stefan was the Chief Data and Technology Insight Officer at the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). He created and led a world-leading team of technologists – including behavioural scientists. Stefan worked on digital regulation and was actively involved in all the CMA’s major digital cases, from mergers and acquisitions to market studies and investigations, to antitrust cases. Prior to that he was the founder and head of the behavioural economics and data science unit at the UK Financial Conduct Authority. He has a PhD in economics from Harvard University, a master’s in experimental psychology and mathematics from the University of Cambridge, and he is an Honorary Professor in economics at the University of Nottingham.

Stefan Hunt - Keystone

Kush Amlani is Global Competition and Regulatory Counsel at Mozilla, leading the competition legal and policy work at this leading not-for-profit technology company. Prior to joining Mozilla, Kush was a Senior Competition and Regulatory Lawyer at the BBC for five years. He joined the BBC from SJ Berwin LLP (later Kings and Wood Mallesons) where he worked on competition cases in sectors such as energy, media, telecoms and pharmaceuticals, including the pay-for-delay cases before the European Commission and the Court of Justice. Kush studied law at the University of Warwick and Université Montesquieu Bordeaux IV.

Kushall Amlani - profile on LinkedIn

Abstract:

It is well established that defaults have a strong impact on people’s behaviours – for example the browser that people use on their phone or desktop, and many don’t even know they are being defaulted or how to change it. One potential solution regulators are considering is the use of ‘choice screens’ that prompt people to actively select their preferred default browser instead of it being selected for them by the platform/device manufacturer – and in the EU such choice screens are a requirement under the Digital Markets Act. The aim is to give people more control over the browser they use and ultimately promote greater competition amongst browsers. However, there is little robust evidence to date on the use and design of such choice screens. We undertook a large-scale experiment to test how differently designed choice screens influence people’s choices and levels of satisfaction. Our analysis provides insight into the impact of the design of choice screens and their potential to be effective. We found that certain elements of design – in particular ordering and placement – can significantly influence the choices that people make. People also had clear stated preferences for being shown a choice screen, and being shown more information about the browsers included on it.

Discussant: Vanessa Turner (The European Consumer Organisation, BEUC)

Vanessa is Senior Advisor - Competition at The European Consumer Organisation, BEUC. Within BEUC, Vanessa focusses on ensuring that consumer interests are taken into account in European competition policy and key enforcement cases, in particular in Digital Markets and Sustainability. Since September 2020 Vanessa also acts as a non-governmental advisor to the International Competition Network for the European Commission.

Prior to joining BEUC, Vanessa was a Partner in the Competition Practice of Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer and Allen and Overy in Brussels (as well as in London and Düsseldorf). In between these roles, she was a Member of the Cabinet of the Commissioner for Competition Policy at the European Commission (responsible for mergers and antitrust cases and policy), Special Advisor to the US FTC in Washington DC, and General Counsel, Company Secretary and Executive Vice President at Visa Europe.

Seminar chaired by Emanuele Ciriolo

7 November 2023

Speaker: Prof. Robert Sugden (University of East Anglia)

Robert Sugden is Professor of Economics at the University of East Anglia in the United Kingdom. His research uses a combination of theoretical, experimental and philosophical methods to investigate issues in behavioural economics, normative economics, choice under uncertainty, the foundations of decision and game theory, the methodology of economics, and the evolution of social conventions. His current work aims to reconcile behavioural and normative economics, using principles of opportunity and mutual advantage rather than welfare. This work is synthesised in his recent book The Community of Advantage (Oxford University Press, 2018).

University of East Anglia profile page

Abstract:

Many of the empirical findings of behavioural economics are routinely described as ‘biases’ or ‘errors’ which interpose between individuals’ true preferences and their choices. Behavioural economists’ recommendations about public policy are often justified in terms of their effects on individuals’ welfare, with ‘welfare’ defined as the satisfaction of preferences. The difference from traditional welfare economics is that preferences are not assumed to be reliably revealed in choice, even when individuals have full information about the relevant market. Instead, each individual is implicitly assumed to have latent preferences which would be revealed in her decisions if she had complete information and was not subject to biases or errors attributable to deficiencies of cognitive capacity, attention or self-control.

I will argue that the concept of latent preference lacks psychological foundations and, in consequence, is explanatorily redundant. How far an individual’s decisions are context-dependent is an empirical question, but which contexts induce true preferences is not. In privileging preferences revealed in some contexts over those revealed in others, behavioural economists are being paternalistic while pretending otherwise. I do not claim that public policy should never be paternalistic, but paternalistic recommendations should be made openly. Alternatively, one can take a non-paternalistic approach in which the normative criterion is opportunity rather than preference-satisfaction.

Seminar chaired by Colin Kuehnhanss

18 October 2023

Speaker: Prof. Nicola Bellè (Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna, Pisa)

Nicola Bellè is an associate professor at the Institute of Management of the Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies in Pisa, where he coordinates the Behavioral Insights Unit within the Management and Healthcare Laboratory. Before joining Sant'Anna, he was an assistant professor at Bocconi University, where he coordinated the Observatory on Change in Public Administration. His research focuses on behavioral and experimental public administration.

Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna (Pisa) profile page

Abstract:

The seminar will delve into a series of experimental studies examining the influence of cognitive biases and decision noise on belief formation among employees in public and healthcare organizations. The aim of the seminar is twofold. On the one hand, it seeks to elucidate practical applications in an attempt to bridge the gap between theory and real-world implementation. On the other hand, it aims to nurture the theoretical discourse about instability and heterogeneity in belief formation.

Seminar chaired by Marianna Baggio

21 September 2023

Speakers:

Prof. Sebastian Krügel (University of Southern Denmark), Prof. Andreas Ostermaier (University of Southern Denmark), Prof. Matthias Uhl (Technische Hochschule Ingolstadt)

Abstract:

We empirically investigate the ethical implications of human-machine interaction. Specifically, we present the results of three experiments on the influence of machines on people’s judgments and decisions in the moral domain. First, in a vignette experiment, we research the role of transparency for the influence that algorithms exercise on people. We find that subjects are strongly influenced by algorithmic advice across various moral dilemmas and that this influence even persists if subjects are given reasons to doubt the advice’s moral quality. Second, in an incentivized experiment, we test for unintended behavioral effects in human-machine interaction and stress the relevance of an ethically aligned design of this interaction. We observe that subjects’ selfishness is uninfluenced by the presence of a machine corrective but that their selfishness increases if they are supposed to correct a machine’s decision. Third, in another recent vignette study, we study the effect of ChatGPT on users’ moral judgments. We find that our subjects’ answer to the trolley problem is highly influenced by the chatbots inconsistent advice and that this effect is unconscious to a large degree.

Seminar chaired by Alexia Gaudeul

13 June 2023

Speaker: Prof. Timothy J. Hatton (University of Essex)

Tim Hatton is a Professor of Economics at the University of Essex. His principal research interests are in economic history and the economics of international migration. One branch of his research is the study of refugees and the flow of asylum applications to the developed world. More recently he has focused on public opinion on immigration and asylum and the development of policy, especially in the European Union.

University of Essex profile page

Abstract:

This talk offers a selective overview of some issues on public opinion on immigrants and asylum seekers and possible links to asylum policies. The talk is organised around three questions:

1. How far does policy deviate from public opinion?
2. Does public opinion actually influence policy?
3. How could policymakers better take account of public opinion?

Seminar chaired by Michal Krawczyk

17 May 2023

Speaker: Prof. Barbara Biasi (Yale School of Management)

Barbara Biasi is an Assistant Professor of Economics at the Yale School of Management and a Visiting Assistant Professor at the Einaudi Institute for Economics and Finance. Her research focuses on education, innovation, and gender, making her a leading authority in the field. With her extensive background and contributions to academia, Barbara serves as a Faculty Research Fellow at NBER (National Bureau of Economic Research) and a Research Affiliate at CEPR (Centre for Economic Policy Research), IZA (Institute of Labor Economics), and CESifo (Center for Economic Studies and Ifo Institute). Barbara was recently awarded an ERC (European Research Council) Starting Grant to conduct an in-depth study on educators' careers, underscoring her work's significance in understanding labour dynamics and policy implications.

Personal website

Abstract:

Does flexible pay increase the gender wage gap? To answer this question, we analyze the wages of public school teachers in Wisconsin, where a 2011 reform allowed school districts to set teachers’ pay more flexibly and engage in individual negotiations. Using quasi-exogenous variation in the timing of the introduction of flexible pay, driven by the expiration of preexisting collective-bargaining agreements, we show that flexible pay lowered the salaries of women compared with men with the same credentials. This gap is larger for younger teachers and smaller for teachers working under a female principal or superintendent. Survey evidence suggests that the gap is partly driven by women engaging less frequently in negotiations over pay, especially when the counterpart is a man. The gap is unlikely to be driven by observable gender differences in job mobility or teacher ability, although the threat of moving and a high demand for male teachers could exacerbate it. Our results suggest that pay discretion and wage bargaining are important determinants of the gender wage gap and that institutions, such as unions, might help narrow this gap.

Seminar chaired by Andrea Blasco

16 May 2023

Speaker: Prof. Shaul Shalvi (Amsterdam School of Economics)

Behavioural Ethics Lab profile page

Abstract:

The EU has set four priorities that shape the political and policy agenda until 2024. Those include for example, building a climate-neutral, green, fair and social Europe and promoting European interests and values such as global peace, stability, democracy and human rights. For policies to be effective, EU citizens’ support and engagement is essential. We will discuss various experimental evidence showing however, that people often prefer to remain ignorant of the impact their behaviour has on others or the environment. By claiming “I did not know”, people can feel good while being selfish. The research highlights the importance of transparency in communicating the consequences of our actions to others.

Seminar chaired by Hannah Nohlen

19 April 2023

Speaker: Prof. Elizabeth Linos (Harvard Kennedy School of Government)

Dr. Elizabeth Linos is the Emma Bloomberg Associate Professor for Public Policy and Management, and Faculty Director of The People Lab at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. Most of her research deals on how to improve government, by focussing on its people and the services they deliver. Specifically, she uses insights from behavioral science and evidence from public management to consider how to recruit, retain, and support the government workforce, how to reduce administrative burdens that low-income households face when they interact with their government, and how to better integrate evidence-based policymaking into government. Her research has been published in various top academic journals. As the former VP and Head of Research and Evaluation at the BIT in North America, she worked with government agencies in the US and the UK to improve programs using behavioral science and to build capacity around rigorous evaluation. Prior to this role, Dr. Linos worked directly in government as a policy advisor to the Greek Prime Minister, George Papandreou, focussing on social innovation and public sector reform.

Harvard profile page

Abstract:

Prof. Linos will share insights from her previous research, in particular from "Bottlenecks for Evidence Adoption": Governments increasingly use RCTs to test innovations before scale up. Yet, little is known about whether and how they incorporate the results of the experiments into policy-making. Elizabeth and her co-authors followed up with 67 U.S. city departments which collectively ran 73 RCTs in collaboration with a national Nudge Unit. Compared to most contexts, the barriers to adoption are low. Yet, city departments adopt a nudge treatment in follow-on communication in 27% of cases. As potential determinants of adoption, they considered (i) the strength of the evidence, as determined by the RCT itself, (ii) features of the organization, such as “organizational capacity” of the city and whether the city staff member working on the RCT has been retained, and (iii) the experimental design, such as whether the RCT was implemented as part of pre-existing communication. Their insightful results underline the importance of considering the barriers to evidence adoption, beginning at the stage of experimental design and continuing after the RCT completion.

Seminar chaired by Emanuele Ciriolo

8 March 2023

Speaker: Prof. Jan Bauer (Copenhagen Business School)

Copenhagen Business School profile page

Seminar chaired by Marion Dupoux

7 February 2023

Speaker: Prof. Gordon Pennycook (University of Regina)

Personal website

Seminar chaired by Hendrik Bruns

18 January 2023

Speaker: Prof. Natalia Montinari (University of Bologna)

Natalia Montinari received her PhD in Economics and Management in 2011, from the University of Padua (Italy). She was a post-doc at the Max Planck Institute of Economics (Germany, 2011-13) and an Assistant Professor at Lund University (Sweden, 2013-16). Besides her current research, in the past she studied how monetary and non-monetary incentives interact with the heterogeneity of individual preferences. She mainly applies experimental economics methodologies. The results of her research activities have been published in international journals, including European Economic Review, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Journal of Law, Economics and Organizations, Experimental Economics, Journal of Economics, Organization and Behavior, Journal of Economic Psychology, and PlosOne. She is an Associate Editor of the Italian Economic Journal.

University of Bologna profile page

Abstract:

Prof. Montinari's presentation covers three strands of her current research: the emergence of the early gender wage gap in the labor market, the impact of social norms in defining the career choices of men and women, the short and long-term effects associated to the introduction of affirmative actions

Seminar chaired by Emanuele Ciriolo