| dc.description.abstract | Nudge transparency has been proposed to protect decision makers from manipulation.
Although most research shows disclosure not to influence default effects, recent findings
suggest that disclosure may enhance default effects. The aim of the present research was to
replicate and extend this positive transparency effect. Three conditions were assessed in an
online experiment: a transparent default, a non-transparent default, and a control condition.
Participants’ feelings towards the nudge and researchers were assessed to understand the
mechanisms associated with default compliance. Transparency did not influence default effects
and none of the measures were associated with default compliance. Instead, the default setting
was found to exert pressure and both default conditions were perceived to be less fair than the
control condition. When the purpose of the default setting was disclosed, the researchers were
perceived as less ethical. These findings suggest that, even with disclosure, decision makers
are still unable to resist the influence of default settings. | |
