Abstract:
Achieving successful behavior change via nudging is hard. This is particularly true when choice architects attempt to change behavior that is collectively harmful but individually beneficial. In this paper, we review the state-of-the-art of the behavior change literature to assess both robust evidence on the motives for lying and promising interventions to curb lying. Existing literature points to combining simple behavioral interventions (e.g., normnudging) with interventions that contain pecuniary consequences (e.g., norm enforcement via punishment). In this context, we also discuss the idea of 'meta-nudging': rather than pursuing the classical approach to nudge targeted behavior directly, one may instead want to nudge behavior indirectly by targeting those who are in positions of power and have the ability to enforce norm adherence of others. Research suggests that delegating the enforcement of norm prescriptions can be a promising approach to nudge honesty.