Policy and population behavior in the age of Big Data

Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences

Volumn 18, Issue , 2017, Pages 1-6

  Ruggeri, Kai ^a   Yoon, Hojeong ^b   Kácha, Ondřej ^a   van der Linden, Sander ^a   Muennig, Peter ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

^c Department of Medicine   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIOR CHANGE; BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE; BIG DATA; DATA ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; MEDICAL ETHICS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; POPULATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW;

EID: 85019973710     PISSN: None     EISSN: 23521546     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cobeha.2017.05.010     Document Type: Review

References (58)

1. Ruggeri, K., Editorial: psychology and policy. Front. Psychol., 8, 2017.
2. Bardach, E., Patashnik, E.M., A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem Solving. 2015, CQ Press.
3. Dye, T.R., Understanding Public Policy. 1998, Pearson.
4. Ruggeri, K., (eds.) Insights for Impact, 2017, University of Cambridge.
5. 5•• Parks, C.D., Joireman, J., Van Lange, P.A.M., Cooperation, trust, and antagonism: how public goods are promoted. Psychol. Sci. Public Interest 14 (2013), 119–165 Compilation of decades of social psychology into a framework that indicates likely outcomes across a population. Moves insights from means and majorities to complex subgroups better representing population outcomes in light of established indicators and antecedents.
6. Hansen, P.G., Jespersen, A.M., Nudge and the Manipulation of Choice: A Framework for the Responsible Use of the Nudge Approach to Behaviour Change in Public Policy. 2013, HeinOnline.
7. Fischhoff, B., Psychology and public policy: tool or toolmaker?. Am. Psychol., 45, 1990, 647.
8. Shafir, E., (eds.) The Behavioral Foundations of Public Policy, 2013, Princenton.
9. Teachman, B.A., Norton, M.I., Spellman, B.A., Memos to the President from a Council of Psychological Science Advisers. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 10 (2015), 697–700.
10. Walton, G.M., Cohen, G.L., Cwir, D., Spencer, S.J., Mere belonging: the power of social connections. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 102 (2012), 513–532.
11. Reed, M., Evely, A.C., Cundill, G., Fazey, I.R.A., Glass, J., Laing, A., Newig, J., Parrish, B., Prell, C., Raymond, C., What is social learning?. Ecol. Soc., 2010, 15.
12. Peters, E., Klein, W., Kaufman, A., Meilleur, L., Dixon, A., More is not always better: intuitions about effective public policy can lead to unintended consequences. Soc. Issues Policy Rev. 7 (2013), 114–148.
13. Johnson, E.J., Shu, S.B., Dellaert, B.G.C., Fox, C., Goldstein, D.G., Häubl, G., Larrick, R.P., Payne, J.W., Peters, E., Schkade, D., et al. Beyond nudges: tools of a choice architecture. Mark. Lett. 23 (2012), 487–504.
14. Anderson, J., Ruggeri, K., Steemers, K., Huppert, F., Lively social space, well-being activity, and urban design findings from a low-cost community-led public space intervention. Environ. Behav., 2016, 1–32.
15. Checker, M., Wiped out by the greenwave: environmental gentrification and the paradoxical politics of urban sustainability. City Soc. 23 (2011), 210–229.
16. Wolch, J.R., Byrne, J., Newell, J.P., Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice: the challenge of making cities just green enough. Landsc. Urban Plann. 125 (2014), 234–244.
17. Blanken, I., de Ven, N., Zeelenberg, M., A meta-analytic review of moral licensing. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 41 (2015), 540–558.
18. Truelove, H.B., Carrico, A.R., Weber, E.U., Raimi, K.T., Vandenbergh, M.P., Positive and negative spillover of pro-environmental behavior: an integrative review and theoretical framework. Glob. Environ. Change 29 (2014), 127–138.
19. Howlett, M., Mukherjee, I., Woo, J.J., From tools to toolkits in policy design studies: the new design orientation towards policy formulation research. Policy Polit. 43 (2015), 291–311.
20. Parks, C.D., Determinants of Cooperation in Social Dilemmas. 2014, Oxford University Press.
21. Schneider, A., Ingram, H., Behavioral assumptions of policy tools. J. Polit. 52 (1990), 510–529.
22. Schultz, P.W., Nolan, J.M., Cialdini, R.B., Goldstein, N.J., Griskevicius, V., The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychol. Sci. 18 (2007), 429–434.
23. 23• Dolan, P., Hallsworth, M., Halpern, D., King, D., Metcalfe, R., Vlaev, I., Influencing behaviour: the mindspace way. J. Econ. Psychol. 33 (2012), 264–277 Demonstrates key influences on behavior through shifting contextual or environmental elements. This appears to ‘change minds’ in domains such as health and financial decision-making, though more robust work is needed to piece together the selection of discrete findings.
24. Thaler, R.H., Sunstein, C.R., Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness. 2008, Penguin Books.
25. Amir, O., Ariely, D., Cooke, A., Dunning, D., Epley, N., Gneezy, U., Koszegi, B., Lichtenstein, D., Mazar, N., Mullainathan, S., Psychology, behavioral economics, and public policy. Mark. Lett. 16 (2005), 443–454.
26. Mcknight, K.M., Sechrest, L., Mcknight, P.E., Psychology, psychologists, and public policy. Annu. Rev. Clin. Psychol. 1 (2005), 557–576.
27. Harford, T., Behavioural economics and public policy. Financ. Times, 2014, 21.
28. 28•• Hallsworth, M., List, J.A., Metcalfe, R.D., Vlaev, I., The behavioralist as tax collector: Using natural field experiments to enhance tax compliance. J. Public Econ., 2017, 14–31.
29. Kim, G., Trimi, S., Chung, J., Big-Data applications in the Government Sector. Commun. ACM, 57, 2014.
30. Weber, E.P., Reality and better mousetraps: a research agenda for new environmental governance institutions. Soc. Nat. Resour. 21 (2008), 91–93.
31. Cheng, A.S., Daniels, S.E., Getting to we: examining the relationship between geographic scale and ingroup emergence in collaborative watershed planning. Hum. Ecol. Rev. 12 (2005), 30–43.
32. Oliver, K., Innvar, S., Lorenc, T., Woodman, J., Thomas, J., A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers. BMC Health Serv. Res., 14, 2014.
33. Murad, M.H., Asi, N., Alsawas, M., Alahdab, F., New evidence pyramid. Evid. Based Med. 21 (2016), 125–127.
34. Barbero, M., Coutuer, J., Jackers, R., Moueddene, K., Renders, E., Stevens, W., Toninato, Y., Peijl van der, S., Versteele, D., Big Data Analytics for Policy Making. 2016.
35. Michael, K., Miller, K.W., Big data: new opportunities and new challenges. Computer 46 (2013), 22–24.
36. Bertot, J.C., Gorham, U., Jaeger, P.T., Sarin, L.C., Choi, H., Big data, open government and e-government: issues, policies and recommendations. Inf. Polity 19 (2014), 5–16.
37. Back, M.D., Stopfer, J.M., Vazire, S., Gaddis, S., Schmukle, S.C., Egloff, B., Gosling, S.D., Facebook profiles reflect actual personality, not self-idealization. Psychol. Sci. 21 (2010), 372–374.
38. Sagiroglu, S., Sinanc, D., Big data: a review. International Conference on Collaboration Technologies and Systems. IEEE, 2013, 42–47.
39. 39• Schintler, L.A., Kulkarni, R., Big data for policy analysis: the good, the bad, and the ugly. Rev. Policy Res. 31 (2014), 343–348 Outlines critical domains that have not been robustly studied in terms of Big Data and its role in policy. Presents specific challenges and ways to address systematically, which is often left vague in publications on the topic.
40. Brennan T: Night of the living deador'back to the future’? electric utility decoupling, reviving rate-of-return regulation, and energy efficiency. 2008, [no volume].
41. Bentley, R.A., O'Brien, M.J., Brock, W.A., Mapping collective behavior in the big-data era. Behav. Brain Sci. 37 (2014), 63–76.
42. Taylor, L., Schroeder, R., Is bigger better? The emergence of big data as a tool for international development policy. GeoJournal 80 (2015), 503–518.
43. Lazer, D., Kennedy, R., King, G., Vespignani, A., The parable of Google Flu: traps in big data analysis. Science 343 (2014), 1203–1205.
44. Just, R.E., Hueth, D.L., Schmitz, A., The Welfare Economics of Public Policy: A Practical Approach to Project and Policy Evaluation. 2005, Edward Elgar Publishing.
45. Kaplow, L., Shavell, S., Any non-welfarist method of policy assessment violates the Pareto principle. J. Polit. Econ. 109 (2001), 281–286.
46. Sutherland, W.J., Spiegelhalter, D., Burgman, M.A., Twenty tips for interpreting scientific claims. Nature 503 (2013), 335–337.
47. Deluca, P., Davey, Z., Corazza, O., Furia, L., Farre, M., Flesland, L.H., Pezzolesi, C., Identifying emerging trends in recreational drug use; outcomes from the Psychonaut Web Mapping Project. Prog. Neuropsychopharmacol. Biol. Psychiatry 39 (2012), 221–226.
48. Bell, S., Morse, S., Towards an understanding of how policy making groups use indicators. Ecol. Indic. 35 (2013), 13–23.
49. Reinhard, M.A., Schindler, S., Raabe, V., Stahlberg, D., Messner, M., Less is sometimes more: how repetition of an antismoking advertisement affects attitudes toward smoking and source credibility. Soc. Influence 9 (2014), 116–132.
50. 50•• Matz, S.C., Gladstone, J.J., Stillwell, D., Money buys happiness when spending fits our personality. Psychol. Sci., 2016, 1–11 A major study demonstrating how simple decisions were changed based only on the way advertising messages were delivered. In a simple experiment, advertising through social media simply adjusted messages for extroverts and introverts, which dramatically increased interest in purchasing a product. The ability to target individuals with extreme precision through advertising– and no change in product – has tremendous implications for uses and policies.
51. Zwitter, A., Big data ethics. Big Data Soc., 2014, 1.
52. Demchenko, Y., Grosso, P., Laat, C., Membrey, P., Addressing big data issues in scientific data infrastructure. International Conference on Collaboration Technologies and Systems, 2013, 48–55.
53. Richards NM, King JH: Big data ethics. 2014, [no volume].
54. Rose, G., Sick individuals and sick populations. Int. J. Epidemiol. 14 (1985), 32–38.
55. Kohavi, R., Crook, T., Longbotham, R., Online experimentation at Microsoft. 2009.
56. 56• Muennig, P., Caleyachetty, R., Rosen, Z., Korotzer, A., More money, fewer lives: the cost effectiveness of welfare reform in the United States. Am. J. Public Health 105 (2015), 324–328 Study demonstrated that broad-level insights that lacked more precise information about behaviors and context missed out on key results. By integrating information from additional sources of data (vis-à-vis Big Data), significant subgroups were possible to identify, all of which are critical to policy.
57. Lindblom, C.E., The science of “muddling through”. Public Admin. Rev., 1959, 79–88.
58. Beal, D., Rueda-Sabeter, E., Yong, S.E., Heng, S.L., The Private-Sector Opportunity to Improve Well-being. 2016, The Boston Consulting Group.