Nudging influenza vaccination among health care workers

Our online randomized controlled trial on 6230 healthcare workers (HCWs) tests the impact that three nudges - social norms, reminding the impact on beneficiaries, and defaults - have on the intention to vaccinate against seasonal influenza across job families. Willingness to get a flu shot was higher among subjects invited to imagine themselves working at the local health authority (LHA) with the greatest immunization coverage within their region relative to their counterparts prompted to imagine working at the LHA with the lowest coverage. Reminding the impact of flu vaccination on beneficiaries had different effects across job families, with physicians caring more benefits for themselves, nurses about patients' benefits, and technicians about family and friends. Default responses anchoring toward a high rather than a low vaccination intention increased the willingness to immunize among all HCW except physicians. Targeted nudges can be considered in developing interventions to promote influenza vaccination among HCWs.

Active choice, implicit defaults, and the incentive to choose

Home-delivered prescriptions have no delivery charge and lower copayments than prescriptions picked up at a pharmacy. Nevertheless, when home delivery is offered on an opt-in basis, the take-up rate is only 6%. We study a program that makes active choice of either home delivery or pharmacy pick-up a requirement for insurance eligibility. The program introduces an implicit default for those who don't make an active choice: pharmacy pick-up without insurance subsidies. Under this program, 42% of eligible employees actively choose home delivery, 39% actively choose pharmacy pick-up, and 19% make no active choice and are assigned the implicit default. Individuals who financially benefit most from home delivery are more likely to choose it. Those who benefit least from insurance subsidies are more likely to make no active choice and lose those subsidies. The implicit default incentivizes people to make an active choice, thereby playing a key role in choice architecture.

An online randomized trial of healthy default beverages and unhealthy beverage restrictions on children's menus

•

Healthy default beverage policies have been enacted in several U.S. municipalities.

•

Effects of such policies or beverage restrictions on children’s menus are unknown.

•

Parents viewed and ordered children’s meals from one of three menu conditions.

•

Defaults and restrictions did not reduce beverage calories ordered in our experiment.

•

More robust legislation may be needed, such as implementing healthy food defaults.

Several U.S. jurisdictions have adopted policies requiring healthy beverage defaults on children’s menus, but it is unknown whether such policies or restrictions leads to fewer calories ordered. We recruited 479 caregivers of children for an online choice experiment and instructed participants to order dinner for their youngest child (2–6 years) from two restaurant menus. Participants were randomly assigned to one type of menu: 1) standard beverages on children’s menus (Control; n = 155); 2) healthy beverages on children’s menus (water, milk, or 100% juice), with unhealthy beverages available as substitutions (Default; n = 162); or 3) healthy beverages on children’s menus, with no unhealthy beverage substitutions (Restriction; n = 162). We used linear regression with bootstrapping to examine differences between conditions in calories ordered from beverages. Secondary outcomes included percent of participants ordering unhealthy beverages (full-calorie soda, diet soda, and/or sugar-sweetened fruit drinks) and calories from unhealthy beverages. Calories ordered from beverages did not differ across conditions at Chili’s [Default: 97.6 (SD = 69.8); p = 0.82; Restriction: 102.7 (SD = 71.5); p = 0.99; Control: 99.4 (SD = 72.7)] or McDonald’s [Default: 90.2 (SD = 89.1); p = 0.55; Restriction: 89.0 (SD = 81.0); p = 0.94; Control: 96.5 (SD = 95.2)]. There were no differences in the percent of orders or calories ordered from unhealthy beverages. Though Restriction participants ordered fewer calories from full-calorie soda [(3.0 (SD = 21.6)] relative to Control participants [13.4 (SD = 52.1); p = 0.04)] at Chili’s, we observed no such difference between Default and Control participants, or across McDonald’s conditions. Overall, there was no effect of healthy default beverages or restrictions in reducing total calories ordered from unhealthy beverages for children in our experiment.

Beyond the ticked box: organ donation decision-making under different registration systems

OBJECTIVE

To explore how people experience organ donation decision-making under the conditions of an opt-in, opt-out or no-objection registration system.

DESIGN

A between-subjects experimental 3 × 2 design (registration system x preselection). Participants (N = 1312) were presented with a description of one of the three registration systems and went through a mock donor registration process. In half of the conditions, the default option of the system was visualized by a ticked box. After, participants answered questions about their perceived autonomy and perceived effective decision-making.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Perceived autonomy, perceived decision effectiveness and registration choice.

RESULTS

The preselected box did not impact any of the outcomes. Participants had higher perceived autonomy under the conditions of an opt-in system. There were no differences in effective decision-making across conditions. Registration choices did differ across conditions and educational levels. In the opt-in system, participants more often made an active decision. Lower-educated participants were more likely to choose to do nothing, while higher-educated people more often made an active decision, especially in the no-objection system.

CONCLUSION

Where the opt-out system potentially leads to the highest number of donors, the opt-in system seems better in terms of preserving people's autonomy and motivating people to make an active decision.

Incentives Versus Defaults: Cost-Effectiveness of Behavioral Approaches for HIV Screening

Many HIV positive individuals are still undiagnosed, which has led health systems to try many approaches to expand HIV testing. In a randomized controlled trial, we found that behavioral economics interventions (opt-out testing and financial incentives) each improved HIV testing rates and these approaches are being implemented by several hospital systems. However, it is unclear if these strategies are cost-effective. We quantified the cost-effectiveness of different behavioral approaches to HIV screening-opt-out testing, financial incentives, and their combination-in terms of cost per new HIV diagnosis and infections averted. We estimated the incremental number of new HIV diagnoses and program costs using a mathematical screening model, and infections averted using and HIV transmission model. We used a 1-year time horizon and a hospital perspective. Switching from opt-into opt-out results in 39 additional diagnoses (56% increase) after 1-year at a cost of $3807 per new diagnosis. Switching from no incentive to a $1, $5, or $10 incentive adds 14, 13, and 28 new diagnoses (20, 19, and 41% increases) at a cost of $11,050, $17,984, and $15,298 per new diagnosis, respectively. Layering on financial incentives to opt-out testing enhances program effectiveness, though at a greater marginal cost per diagnosis. We found a similar pattern for infections averted. This is one of the first cost-effectiveness analyses of behavioral economics interventions in public health. Changing the choice architecture from opt-into opt-out and giving financial incentives for testing are both cost-effective in terms of detecting HIV and reducing transmission. For hospitals interested in increasing HIV screening rates, changing the choice architecture is an efficient strategy and more efficient than incentives.

Right: Left:: East: West. Evidence that individuals from East Asian and South Asian cultures emphasize right hemisphere functions in comparison to Euro-American cultures

We present evidence that individuals from East or South Asian cultures (Japanese college students in Japan and East or South Asian born and raised college students in the USA) tend to exhibit default thinking that corresponds to right hemisphere holistic functions, as compared to Caucasian individuals from a Western culture (born and raised in the USA). In two lateralized tasks (locating the nose in a scrambled face, and global-local letter task), both Asian groups showed a greater right hemisphere bias than the Western group. In a third lateralized task, judging similarity in terms of visual form versus functional/semantic categorizations, there was not a reliable difference between the groups. On a classic, ambiguous face composed of vegetables, both Eastern groups displayed a greater right hemisphere (holistic face processing) bias than the Western group. These results support an "East - Right Hemisphere, West - Left Hemisphere" hypothesis, as originally proposed by Ornstein (1972). This hypothesis is open as to the degree to which social-cultural forces were involved in hemispheric specialization, or the opposite, or both. Our aim is to encourage a more thorough analysis of this hypothesis, suggesting both lateralization studies corresponding to documented East-West differences, and East-West studies corresponding to lateralization differences.

The limits of defaults: why french fries trump apple slices

Background

Healthy default food choices have been suggested as a way to encourage better nutrition without restricting choice. Will they work with children and their favorite foods?

Methods

A group of children, 6–8 years old, were treated to lunch at fast food restaurant on 2 days 2 weeks apart. On both days the children were served chicken nuggets and a drink. On the first day, half were given French fries unless they asked for apple slices and the other half were given apples unless they asked for fries. The order switched on the second day.

Results

When the default changed from fries to apples, 86.7 % opted out of the default to order fries.

Conclusion

Defaults may be ineffective when children have a strong preference for the less healthy option. Allowing children to take both sides may lead to healthier consumption than constructing an artificial default choice.

Consumer exposure modelling under REACH: Assessing the defaults

Consumer exposure to chemicals from products and articles is rarely monitored. Since an assessment of consumer exposure has become particularly important under the European REACH Regulation, dedicated modelling approaches with exposure assessment tools are applied. The results of these tools are critically dependent on the default input values embedded in the tools. These inputs were therefore compiled for three lower tier tools (ECETOC TRA (version 3.0), EGRET and REACT)) and benchmarked against a higher tier tool (ConsExpo (version 4.1)). Mostly, conservative input values are used in the lower tier tools. Some cases were identified where the lower tier tools used less conservative values than ConsExpo. However, these deviations only rarely resulted in less conservative exposure estimates compared to ConsExpo, when tested in reference scenarios. This finding is mainly due to the conservatism of (a) the default value for the thickness of the product layer (with complete release of the substance) used for the prediction of dermal exposure and (b) the complete release assumed for volatile substances (i.e. substances with a vapour pressure ⩾10Pa) for inhalation exposure estimates. The examples demonstrate that care must be taken when changing critical defaults in order to retain conservative estimates of consumer exposure to chemicals.