More from the Author

• Article | Behavioural Public Policy | November 2019

  When and Why Defaults Influence Decisions: A Meta-analysis of Default Effects

  Jon M. Jachimowicz, Shannon Duncan, Elke U. Weber and Eric J. Johnson

  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.

  Keywords: choice architecture; defaults; default effects; Decision Making; Behavior; Analysis;

  Citation:

  Jachimowicz, Jon M., Shannon Duncan, Elke U. Weber, and Eric J. Johnson. "When and Why Defaults Influence Decisions: A Meta-analysis of Default Effects." Behavioural Public Policy 3, no. 2 (November 2019): 159–186.  View Details

  CiteView Details Read Now

  Related

• Article | Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes | July 2019

  The Gravitational Pull of Expressing Passion: When and How Expressing Passion Elicits Status Conferral and Support from Others

  Jon M. Jachimowicz, Christopher To, Shira Agasi, Stéphane Côté and Adam D. Galinsky

  Prior research attributes the positive effects of passion on professional success to intrapersonal characteristics. We propose that interpersonal processes are also critical because observers confer status on and support those who express passion. These interpersonal benefits of expressing passion are, however, contingent on several factors related to the expresser, perceiver, and context. Six studies, including entrepreneurial pitches from Dragons’ Den and two preregistered experiments, establish three key findings. First, observers conferred status onto and increased their support for individuals who express passion; importantly, expressing passion affected how admired—but not how accepted—someone was. Second, these effects were weaker when passion was expressed in an inappropriate manner/context and when observers disagreed with the target of expresser’s passion. Third, in competitive contexts, expressing passion became threatening and decreased the support individuals received from others. These results demonstrate that passion’s effects travel, in part, through the gravitational pull exerted by expressing passion.

  Keywords: passion; admiration; support; Emotions; Communication; Perception; Status and Position; Success; Situation or Environment; Competition;

  Citation:

  Jachimowicz, Jon M., Christopher To, Shira Agasi, Stéphane Côté, and Adam D. Galinsky. "The Gravitational Pull of Expressing Passion: When and How Expressing Passion Elicits Status Conferral and Support from Others." Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 153 (July 2019): 41–62.  View Details

  CiteView DetailsFind at Harvard Register to Read

  Related

• Article | Behavioral Scientist

  The Passion Paradox: A Conversation with Brad Stulberg

  Jon M. Jachimowicz

  Citation:

  Jachimowicz, Jon M. "The Passion Paradox: A Conversation with Brad Stulberg." Behavioral Scientist (April 9, 2019).  View Details

  CiteView Details Read Now

  Related