When Nudges Speak Up: Does Transparency Help or Hurt?
Since Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein’s Nudge hit the shelves in 2008, the idea of subtly steering people toward better decisions has captivated behavioral scientists. After all, if simply placing fruit in front of chips can encourage healthier eating—affordably and effectively—why not use that trick more often?
Critics, though, argue that nudging can be paternalistic, quietly undermining people’s freedom to choose. One proposed fix is transparency. In other words, telling people they’re being nudged. But does that honesty blunt the nudge’s impact?
A 2025 study by Tobias Schütze and colleagues pushes the conversation on nudge transparency further by looking into two key measures: psychological reactance—the subtle pushback people make when they feel their freedom of choice is threatened—and response time, to see how participants fare when it comes to transparent nudges. Their findings add nuance to the debate surrounding the ethics behind nudging and challenges assumptions around nudge transparency.
About the Author
Samantha Lau
Samantha graduated from the University of Toronto, majoring in psychology and criminology. During her undergraduate degree, she studied how mindfulness meditation impacted human memory which sparked her interest in cognition. Samantha is curious about the way behavioural science impacts design, particularly in the UX field. As she works to make behavioural science more accessible with The Decision Lab, she is preparing to start her Master of Behavioural and Decision Sciences degree at the University of Pennsylvania. In her free time, you can catch her at a concert or in a dance studio.
