This grant funds a series of experiments designed by University of California, Berkeley economist Dmitry Taubinsky, to examine the welfare effects of nonfinancial policy interventions (NPIs). NPIs, more commonly known as “nudges,” are policy interventions designed to increase the attractiveness of prosocial behaviors through means other than decreasing the financial cost of that behavior. Examples include informational labels on products, salient reminders, default options, and praise and public recognition for desired behavior. Because nudges involve motivating people using nonfinancial means, quantifying the costs and benefits of NPIs is conceptually challenging. What if some people really liked what they were doing before they were nudged? What if some people don’t like being nudged at all, regardless of whether what is suggested would be good for them? What’s needed is a larger theoretical framework for evaluating the costs and benefits of nudges, a framework that includes the larger psychological costs that nudging may impinge on those who find themselves subject to it. In a series of experiments, Taubinsky will begin to develop such a framework, focusing on three issues.  First, what is the proper way to measure whether information nudges are well targeted in the sense that they change the behavior of people making the biggest mistakes? Second, what is the proper way to measure the psychological costs and benefits of motivating behavior by leveraging shame and pride through public recognition?  And third, what is the proper way to measure the discomfort that some people experience when moral suasion and other social factors create demands to act in prosocial ways? Grant funds will allow Taubinsky to field a series of experiments on each topic, along with a detailed analysis of his findings. Three peer-reviewed articles are anticipated.

Funds from this grant support the launch of a large-scale longitudinal field study aimed at understanding the “scientific productivity function,” the process that transforms research inputs (including grants, expertise, and equipment) into research outputs (including papers, patents, and students). Designed by Kyle Myers of Harvard Business School, Karim Lakhani, founding director of the Laboratory for Innovation at Harvard, Jerry and Marie Thursby, and with input from Dashun Wang, founding director of the Center for Science of Science and Innovation at Northwestern’s Kellogg School of Management, the effort will survey working scientists across the United States about how they conduct their work. Questions will focus on tracking and measuring four major determinants of scientific productivity: researcher preferences; resource allocation; management practices; and collaborative vs. competitive behaviors. In order to make sure the survey reaches a large, diverse, and representative sample of both physical and social scientists, the team has partnered with professional societies like the American Association for the Advancement of Science to help administer and promote it. The collected data will provide useful and necessary groundwork for the rigorous study of the determinants of scientific productivity that can be used to inform public discussion and policy about the most effective ways to support science and science-driven innovation.