When and why defaults influence decisions: a meta-analysis of default effects

Abstract

When people make decisions with a pre-selected choice option – a ‘default’ – they are more likely to select that option. Because defaults are easy to implement, they constitute one of the most widely employed tools in the choice architecture toolbox. However, to decide when defaults should be used instead of other choice architecture tools, policy-makers must know how effective defaults are and when and why their effectiveness varies. To answer these questions, we conduct a literature search and meta-analysis of the 58 default studies (pooled n = 73,675) that fit our criteria. While our analysis reveals a considerable influence of defaults (d = 0.68, 95% confidence interval = 0.53–0.83), we also discover substantial variation: the majority of default studies find positive effects, but several do not find a significant effect, and two even demonstrate negative effects. To explain this variability, we draw on existing theoretical frameworks to examine the drivers of disparity in effectiveness. Our analysis reveals two factors that partially account for the variability in defaults’ effectiveness. First, we find that defaults in consumer domains are more effective and in environmental domains are less effective. Second, we find that defaults are more effective when they operate through endorsement (defaults that are seen as conveying what the choice architect thinks the decision-maker should do) or endowment (defaults that are seen as reflecting the status quo). We end with a discussion of possible directions for a future research program on defaults, including potential additional moderators, and implications for policy-makers interested in the implementation and evaluation of defaults.

Nudges and signposts: The effect of smart defaults and pictographic risk information on retirement saving investment choices

“…We suggest that the default nudge was strong in our study for several reasons (Jachimowicz et al, ). First, ease: moving away from the default option in our study required making an extra mouse‐click.…”

Public Policy and Behavior Change

“…The effectiveness of policy instruments is context dependent. For instance, generally, changing a default—such as changing the default to automatically saving for retirement—is very effective (Jachimowicz et al ). However, changing the default can have negative effects when strong stakeholders oppose it (Barr, Mullainathan, and Shafir ).…”

Citizens Versus the Internet: Confronting Digital Challenges With Cognitive Tools

“…The target of these interventions is choice architectures (see Table 1 (Jachimowicz, Duncan, Weber, & Johnson, 2019). Benevolent choice architects can harness this tendency for causes serving the public good, such as increasing organ donation rates (Johnson & Goldstein, 2003; but see Arshad, Anderson, & Sharif, 2019), or the good of the individual, such as saving more money for retirement through automatic enrollment (Thaler & Benartzi, 2004).…”

“…First and foremost, it has roots in nudging and its emphasis on choice architecture but aims to share the psychological knowledge built into nudges with the individual. Self-nudging can therefore benefit from the accumulated evidence on nudges such as defaults (e.g., Jachimowicz et al, 2019) or changes in cognitive and spatial accessibility (Thaler & Sunstein, 2008). Another inspiration for self-nudging comes from research on commitment devices stemming from economic theory (Bryan, Karlan, & Nelson, 2010;Rogers, Milkman, & Volpp, 2014;Schelling, 1978) and used predominantly to solve selfcontrol problems.…”