The Think–Feel–Do Triad in Behavioral Policymaking: From Effectiveness to Social Acceptability

Document Type : Review Article

Authors

Ph.D. Student of Public Administration, Faculty of Public Administration and Organizational Sciences, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

10.22059/jppolicy.2026.106382

Abstract

In recent years, behavioral policymaking has emerged as a pivotal tool for guiding choices and enhancing the effectiveness of public policies. Despite the widespread application of nudges across diverse domains, fundamental questions remain regarding their actual effectiveness and social acceptability. Drawing on the Think–Feel–Do triad, this study employs a review method to examine behavioral interventions and reveals a significant gap between their effectiveness and public acceptance. Evidence from recent studies shows that cognitive nudges enjoy the highest level of social acceptability but the lowest effectiveness, whereas behavioral nudges demonstrate the strongest effectiveness yet face the weakest public support; Affective nudges occupy a middle ground. Complementary models such as the SHIFT framework are shown to offer promising pathways for narrowing this gap and promoting sustainable behavior change. The findings highlight the need for context-sensitive, transparent, and hybrid behavioral policies that can balance effectiveness with social legitimacy.

Keywords

References

  1. Allcott, H. (2015). Site selection bias in program evaluation. Quarterly Journal of Economics.
  2. Allcott, H., & Rogers, T. (2014). The short-run and long-run effects of behavioral interventions: Experimental evidence from energy conservation. American Economic Review, 104(10), 3003–3037. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.10.3003
  3. Arshad, A., Anderson, B., Sharif, A., & Awan, M. (2021). Comparison of organ donation and transplantation rates between opt-out and opt-in systems. JAMA Network Open, 4(6), e2118452
  4. Benartzi, S., Beshears, J., Milkman, K. L., Sunstein, C. R., Thaler, R. H., Shankar, M., Tucker-ray, W., Congdon, W. J., & Galing, S. (2017). Should Governments Invest More in Nudging ? Psychological Science, 28(8), 1041–1055. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617702501
  5. Beshears, J., Choi, J. J., Laibson, D., & Madrian, B. C. (2009). The importance of default options for retirement saving outcomes: Evidence from the United States. In J. Brown, J. Liebman, & D. Wise (Eds.), Social Security policy in a changing environment (pp. 167–195). University of Chicago Press.
  6. Bovens, L. (2009). The ethics of nudge. In T. Grüne-Yanoff & S. O. Hansson (Eds.), Preference change (pp. 207–219). Springer.
  7. Bruns, H., Kantorowicz-Reznichenko, E., Klement, K., Luistro Jonsson, M., & Rahali, B. (2018). Can nudges be transparent and yet effective? Journal of Economic Psychology, 65, 41–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2018.02.002
  8. Cabinet Office, Behavioural Insights Team. (2013). Applying behavioural insights to organ donation. London: UK Government.
  9. Cadario, R., & Chandon, P. (2019). Viewpoint: Effectiveness or consumer acceptance? Tradeoffs in selecting healthy eating nudges. Food Policy, 85(March), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodpol.2019.04.002
  10. Cadario, R., & Chandon, P. (2020). Which healthy eating nudges work best? A meta-analysis of field experiments. Marketing Science, 39(3), 465–486. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2018.1128
  11. Camilleri, A. R., Larrick, R. P., Hossain, S., & Patino-echeverri, D. (2019). associated with food but are aided by labels. Nature Climate Change, 9(1), 53–59. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0354-z
  12. Capraro, V., & Barcelo, H. (2021). The effect of messaging and gender on intentions to wear a face covering to slow down COVID-19 transmission. Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, 5(S2), 45–55
  13. Chiang, T., Mevlevioglu, G., Natarajan, S., Padget, J., & Walker, I. (2014). Inducing [sub]conscious energy behaviour through visually displayed energy information: A case study in university accommodation. Energy and Buildings, 70, 507–515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2013.10.035
  14. Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., Leth-Petersen, S., Nielsen, T. H., & Olsen, T. (2014). Active vs. passive decisions and crowd-out in retirement savings accounts: Evidence from Denmark. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 129(3), 1141–1219. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qju013
  15. DellaVigna, S., & Linos, E. (2020). RCTs to scale: Comprehensive evidence from two nudge units. Econometrica, 88(5), 1479–1514. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA17434
  16. Dubois, P., Albuquerque, P., Allais, O., Bonnet, C., Bertail, P., Combris, P., Lahlou, S., Rigal, N., Ruffieux, B., & Chandon, P. (2020). Effects of Front-of-Pack Labels on the Nutritional Quality of Supermarket Food Purchases: Evidence From a Large-Scale Randomized Controlled Trial. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3567974
  17. Egnell, M., Talati, Z., Hercberg, S., Pettigrew, S., & Julia, C. (2018). Front-of-pack Nutri-Score labelling in France: an evidence-based policy. The Lancet Public Health, 3(4), e164e165.
  18. Gamba, R. J., & Oskamp, S. (1994). Factors Influencing Community Residents’ Participation in Commingled Curbside Recycling Programs. Environment and Behavior, 26(5), 587–612. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916594265001
  19. Giebelhausen, M., Chun, H. H., Innovation, S., & Endowed, B. (2016). Adjusting the Warm Glow Thermostat: How Incentivizing Participation in Voluntary Green Programs Moderates Their Impact on Service Satisfaction. Journal of Marketing, 80(4), 56–71.
  20. Green, T., & Peloza, J. (2014). Finding the right shade of green: The effect of advertising appeal type on environmentally friendly consumption. Journal of Advertising, 43(2), 128–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2013.834805
  21. Grüne-Yanoff, T., & Hertwig, R. (2016). Nudge versus boost: How coherent are policy and theory? Minds and Machines: Journal for Artificial Intelligence, Philosophy and Cognitive Science, 26(1-2), 149–183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-015-9367-9
  22. Hagmann, D., Ho, E. H., & Loewenstein, G. (2019). Nudging out support for a carbon tax. Nature Climate Change, 9(6), 484–489. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-019-0474-0
  23. Hallsworth, M., List, J. A., Metcalfe, R. D., & Vlaev, I. (2017). The behavioralist as tax collector: Using natural field experiments to enhance tax compliance. Journal of Public Economics, 148, 14–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2017.02.003
  24. Hanssens, D. M., Pauwels, K. H., Srinivasan, S., Vanhuele, M., & Yildirim, G. (2014). Consumer attitude metrics for guiding marketing mix decisions. Marketing Science, 33(4), 534–550. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2013.0841
  25. Hansen, P. G., & Jespersen, A. M. (2013). Nudge and the manipulation of choice: A framework for the responsible use of the nudge approach to behaviour change in public policy. European journal of risk regulation, 4(1), 3-28.
  26. Hart, P. S., & Nisbet, E. C. (2012). Boomerang Effects in Science Communication : How Motivated Reasoning and Identity Cues Amplify Opinion Polarization About Climate Mitigation Policies. Communication Research, 39(6), 701–723. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211416646
  27. Hollands, G. J., Shemilt, I., Marteau, T. M., Jebb, S. A., Kelly, M. P., Nakamura, R., ... & Ogilvie, D. (2015). Portion, package or tableware size for changing selection and consumption of food, alcohol and tobacco. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2015(9), CD011045. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011045.pub2
  28. Hood, C., & Margetts, H. Z. (2007). The tools of government in the digital age. Palgrave Macmillan.
  29. John, P. (2018). How far to nudge? Assessing behavioural public policy. Edward Elgar Publishing.
  30. Johnson, E. J., & Goldstein, D. (2003). Do defaults save lives? Science, 302(5649), 1338–1339. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1091721
  31. Kahan, D. M., Peters, E., Dawson, E. C., & Slovic, P. (2017). Motivated numeracy and enlightened self-government. Behavioural Public Policy, 1(1), 54–86. https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2016.2
  32. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
  33. Klesse, A.-K., Levav, J., & Goukens, C. (2016). The Recycled Self: Consumers’ Disposal Decisions of Identity-Linked Products. Journal of Consumer Research, 1–62.
  34. Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the Gap : Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro- environmental behavior ? Mind the Gap : why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior ? Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 236–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350462022014540
  35. Krause, R. M. (2009). Developing conditions for environmentally sustainable consumption : drawing insight from anti-smoking policy. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 33, 285–292. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.2009.00769.x
  36. Kurz, T., Gardner, B., Verplanken, B., & Abraham, C. (2015). Habitual behaviors or patterns of practice ? Explaining and changing repetitive climate-relevant actions. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews. Climate Change, 6(February). https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.327
  37. Lally, P., Van Jaarsveld, C. H., Potts, H. W., & Wardle, J. (2010). How are habits formed: Modelling habit formation in the real world. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40(6), 998–1009. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.674
  38. Lehman, P. K., & Geller, S. (2004). Behavior and social issues. Behavior and Social Issues, 13(1), 13–32. https://ojphi.org/ojs/index.php/bsi/article/view/33/61
  39. Loewenstein, G., & Chater, N. (2017). Putting nudges in perspective. Behavioural Public Policy, 1(1), 26–53. https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2016.7
  40. Madrian, B. C., & Shea, D. F. (2001). The power of suggestion: Inertia in 401(k) participation and savings behavior. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(4), 1149–1187. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355301753265543
  41. Marx, S. M., Weber, E. U., Orlove, B. S., Leiserowitz, A., Krantz, D. H., Roncoli, C., & Phillips, J. (2007). Communication and mental processes : Experiential and analytic processing of uncertain climate information. Global Environmental Change, 17(1), 47–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.10.004
  42. Mckenzie-mohr, D. (2000). Promoting Sustainable Behavior : An Introduction to Community-Based Social Marketing. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 543–554.
  43. Milkman, K. L., Patel, M. S., Gandhi, L., Graci, H. N., Gromet, D. M., Ho, H., ... & Duckworth, A. L. (2021). A megastudy of text-based nudges encouraging patients to get vaccinated at an upcoming doctor’s appointment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(20), e2101165118
  44. Ministère des Solidarités et de la Santé. (2021). Nutri-Score follow-up report after three years of implementation. Paris: Government of France.
  45. Nickerson, D. W., & Rogers, T. (2010). Do you have a voting plan? Implementation intentions, voter turnout, and organic plan making. Psychological Science, 21(2), 194–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797609359326
  46. Noar, S. M., Francis, D. B., Bridges, C., Sontag, J. M., Ribisl, K. M., & Brewer, N. T. (2016). The impact of strengthening cigarette pack warnings: Systematic review of longitudinal observational studies. Social Science & Medicine, 164, 118–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.06.011
  47. (2019). Tools and ethics for applied behavioural insights: The BASIC toolkit. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9ea76a8f-en
  48. OECD (2025). MIND SHIFT, GREEN LIFT: SIX BEHAVIOURAL SCIENCE TRENDS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
  49. Peloza, J., White, K., & Shang, J. (2013). Good and Guilt-Free : The Role of Self-Accountability in Influencing Preferences for Products with Ethical Attributes. 77(January), 104–119.
  50. Pichert, D., & Katsikopoulos, K. V. (2008). Green defaults: Information presentation and pro-environmental behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 28(1), 63–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2007.09.004
  51. Peters, E., Västfjäll, D., Slovic, P., Mertz, C. K., Mazzocco, K., & Dickert, S. (2006). Numeracy and Decision Making. Psychological Science, 17(5), 407–413. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01720.x
  52. Rebonato, R. (2012). Taking liberties: A critical examination of libertarian paternalism. Palgrave Macmillan.
  53. Scannell, L., & Gifford, R. (2013). Personally Relevant Climate Change : The Role of Place Attachment and Local Versus Global Message Framing in Engagement. Environment and Behavior, 45(1), 60–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916511421196
  54. Schultz, P. W., Nolan, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Goldstein, N. J., & Griskevicius, V. (2007). The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychological Science, 18(5), 429–434. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01917.x
  55. Spielmann, N. (2021). Green is the New White: How Virtue Motivates Green Product Purchase. Journal of Business Ethics, 173(4), 759–776. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04493-6
  56. Sunstein, C. R. (2015). Nudges, agency, and abstraction: A reply to critics. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 6(3), 511–529. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13164-015-0266-z
  57. Sunstein, C. R. (2016). The ethics of influence: Government in the age of behavioral science. Cambridge University Press.
  58. Szaszi, B., Palinkas, A., Palfi, B., Szollosi, A., & Aczel, B. (2018). A Systematic Scoping Review of the Choice Architecture Movement: Toward Understanding When and Why Nudges Work. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 31(3), 355–366. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.2035
  59. Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2009). Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness. Penguin Books.
  60. Thaler, R. H. (2018). Nudge, not sludge. Science, 361(6401), 431-431. Chicago
  61. Van der Werff, E., Steg, L., & Keizer, K. (2014). I Am What I Am, by Looking Past the Present: The Influence of Biospheric Values and Past Behavior on Environmental Self-Identity. In Environment and Behavior (Vol. 46, Issue 5). https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916512475209
  62. Verplanken, B., & Holland, R. W. (2002). Motivated decision making: Effects of activation and self-centrality of values on choices and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(3), 434–447. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.3.434
  63. Walker, I., & Thomas, G. O. (2015). Old Habits Die Hard : Travel Habit Formation and Decay During an Office Relocation. Environment and Behavior, 47(10), 1089–1106. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916514549619
  64. White, K., Habib, R., & Hardisty, D. J. (2019). How to SHIFT consumer behaviors to be more sustainable: A literature review and guiding framework. Journal of Marketing, 83(3), 22–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022242919825649 White, K., Macdonnell, R., & Dahl, D. W. (2011). It’s the mind-set that matters: The role of construal level and message framing in influencing consumer efficacy and conservation behaviors. Journal of Marketing Research, 48(3), 472–485. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.48.3.472
  65. White, K., & Simpson, B. (2013). When Do ( and Don ’ t ) Normative Consumer Behaviors ? American Marketing Association, 77(March), 78–95.
  66. Wilhite, H., & Ling, R. (1995). EPIEKG¥ BUILDIPIG Measured energy savings from a more informative. Energy and Buildings, 22, 145–155.
  67. Wolsko, C., Ariceaga, H., & Seiden, J. (2016). Red, white, and blue enough to be green: Effects of moral framing on climate change attitudes and conservation behaviors. In Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. Elsevier B.V. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.02.005
  68. World Health Organization (WHO). (2019). Development of a new front-of-pack nutrition label in France: the five-colour Nutri-Score. Public Health Panorama, 5(4), 712–725.
  69. Zaval, L., Markowitz, E. M., & Weber, E. U. (2015). How Will I Be Remembered ? Conserving the Environment for the Sake of One ’ s Legacy. Psychological Science, 26(2), 231–236. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614561266.
Iranian Journal of Public Policy
Volume 12, Issue 1
March 2026
Pages 244-259

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics