Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T06:07:36.391Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

It's Now Or Never! Using Deadlines as Nudges

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Eyal Zamir ,
Daphna Lewinsohn-Zamir  and
Ilana Ritov
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Incorporating behavioral insights into regulation is plausibly the most significant development in regulatory theory and practice in recent years. Behaviorally informed regulation encourages self-benefiting and socially desirable behaviors with little intrusion on autonomy. Drawing on new empirical findings, this article puts forward the hitherto overlooked possibility of employing the deadline effect as a regulatory tool. Deadlines serve as an antidote to procrastination and forgetfulness. Many empirical and experimental studies have examined the use of deadlines in marketing. This study explores the possible use of deadlines by legal policy makers. It describes two survey experiments, a randomized field experiment and a natural experiment, which suggest that deadlines may encourage self-benefiting and socially desirable behaviors, and that relaxing deadlines may discourage less desirable behavior. The article discusses the practical and normative aspects of using deadlines as a regulatory means, compared to alternative tools, such as default rules and required choices.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Social Inquiry , Volume 42 , Issue 3 , Summer 2017 , pp. 769 - 803
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Aggarwal, Praveen, and Vaidyanathan, Rajiv. 2003. Use It or Lose It: Purchase Acceleration Effects of Time‐Limited Promotions. Journal of Consumer Behavior 2:393–403.Google Scholar
Akerlof, George A. 1991. Procrastination and Obedience. American Economic Review 81:1–19.Google Scholar
Amabile, Teresa M., Conti, Regina, Coon, Heather, Lazenby, Jeffrey, and Herron, Michael. 1996. Assessing the Work Environment for Creativity. Academy of Management Journal 39:1154–84.Google Scholar
Anderson, Christopher J. 2003. The Psychology of Doing Nothing: Forms of Decision Avoidance Result from Reason and Emotion. Psychological Bulletin 129:139–67.Google Scholar
Ariely, Dan, and Wertenbroch, Klaus. 2002. Procrastination, Deadlines, and Performance: Self‐Control by Precommitment. Psychological Science 13:219–24.Google Scholar
Ayres, Ian. 2010. Carrots and Sticks: Unlock the Power of Incentives to Get Things Done. New York: Bantam Books.Google Scholar
Baldwin, Robert. 2014. From Regulation to Behaviour Change: Giving Nudge the Third Degree. Modern Law Review 77:831–57.Google Scholar
Baron, Jonathan, and Ritov, Ilana. 2004. Omission Bias, Individual Differences, and Normality. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 94:74–85.Google Scholar
Bertrand, Marianne, Karlan, Dean, Mullainathan, Sendhil, Shafir, Eldar, and Zinman, Jonathan. 2010. What's Advertising Content Worth? Evidence from a Consumer Credit Marketing Field Experiment. Quarterly Journal of Economics 125:263–306.Google Scholar
Birkimer, John C., Barbee, Anita P., Francis, Mary Lou, Berry, Melissa M., Deuser, Pamela S., and Pope, Jacqueline R. 1994. Effects of Refutational Messages, Thought Provocation, and Decision Deadlines on Signing to Donate Organs. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 24:1735–61.Google Scholar
Boussalis, Constantine, Feldman, Yuval, and Smith, Henry E. 2014. An Experimental Analysis of the Effect of Specificity on Compliance and Performance. Working Paper, December 16. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2539190 (accessed April 5, 2015).Google Scholar
Bovens, Luc. 2009. The Ethics of Nudge. In Preference Change: Approaches from Philosophy, Economics and Psychology, ed. Grüne‐Yanoff, Till and Ove Hansson, Sven, 207–19. Dodrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Bronsteen, John, Buccafusco, Christopher, and Masur, Jonathan S. 2008. Hedonic Adaptation and the Settlement of Civil Lawsuits. Columbia Law Review 108:1516–49.Google Scholar
Bubb, Ryan, and Pildes, Richard H. 2014. How Behavioral Economics Trims Its Sails and Why. Harvard Law Review 127:1593–1678.Google Scholar
Camerer, Colin F., Issacharoff, Samuel, Loewenstein, George, O'Donoghue, Ted, and Rabin, Matthew. 2003. Regulation for Conservatives: Behavioral Economics and the Case for “Asymmetric Paternalism.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 151:1211–54.Google Scholar
Carpenter, Daniel, Zucker, Evan James, and Avorn, Jerry. 2008. Drug‐Review Deadlines and Safety Problems. New England Journal of Medicine 358:1354–61.Google Scholar
Carroll, Gabriel D., Choi, James J., Laibson, David, Madrian, Brigitte C., and Metrick, Andrew. 2009. Optimal Defaults and Active Decisions. Quarterly Journal of Economics 124:1639–74.Google Scholar
Choi, James J., Laibson, David, Madrian, Brigitte C., and Metrick, Andrew. 2004. For Better or for Worse: Default Effects and 401(k) Savings Behavior. In Perspectives on the Economics of Aging, ed. Wise, David A., 81–126. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
Cialdini, Robert B. 2009. Influence: Science and Practice, 5th ed. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.Google Scholar
Conly, Sarah. 2013. Against Autonomy: Justifying Coercive Paternalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Russell, Covey. 2007. Reconsidering the Relationship Between Cognitive Psychology and Plea Bargaining. Marquette Law Review 91:213–47.Google Scholar
Davidai, Shai, Gilovich, Thomas, and Ross, Lee D. 2012. The Meaning of Default Options for Potential Organ Donors. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109:15201–05.Google Scholar
Doyle, Charles. 2012. Statutes of Limitation in Federal Criminal Cases: An Overview. Congress Research Service RL31253.Google Scholar
Edwards, Matthew A. 2007. The Law, Marketing and Behavioral Economics of Consumer Rebates. Stanford Journal of Law, Business & Finance 12:362–424.Google Scholar
European Commission—Joint Research Centre. 2013. Applying Behavioural Sciences to EU Policy‐making. http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC83284/behaviouralsciencepolicybriefonline-spreads.pdf. (accessed April 5, 2015).Google Scholar
Executive Order No. 13,563. 2011. Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review. 76 Fed. Reg. 3,821, 3,822. Archived at http://perma.cc/KV6D-GB9L, Sec. 4.Google Scholar
Feinberg, Joel. 1983. Legal Paternalism. In Paternalism, ed. Sartorious, Rolf, 3–18. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Gersen, Jacob E., and O'Connell, Anne Joseph. 2008. Deadlines in Administrative Law. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 156:923–90.Google Scholar
Gersick, Connie J. G. 1988. Time and Transition in Work Teams: Toward a New Model of Group Development. Academy of Management Journal 31:9–41.Google Scholar
Gierl, Heribert, Plantsch, Michael, and Schweidler, Janine. 2008. Scarcity Effects on Sales Volume in Retail. International Review of Retail, Distribution, and Consumer Research 18:45–61.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Daniel T., Morewedge, Carey K., Risen, Jane L., and Wilson, Timothy D. 2004. Looking Forward to Looking Backward: The Misprediction of Regret. Psychological Science 15:346–50.Google Scholar
Glover, Mark. 2007. Timely Filing in Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Cases: Does Rule 3002(C)'S Deadline Apply to Secured Creditors? Boston University Law Review 87:1231–56.Google Scholar
Grüne‐Yanoff, Till. 2012. Old Wine in New Casks: Libertarian Paternalism Still Violates Liberal Principles. Social Choice and Welfare 38:635–45.Google Scholar
Hardin, Russell. 1982. Collective Action. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Hausman, Daniel M., and Welch, Brynn. 2010. Debate: To Nudge or Not to Nudge. Journal of Political Philosophy 18:123–36.Google Scholar
Howard, Daniel J., Shu, Suzanne B., and Kerin, Roger A. 2007. Reference Price and Scarcity Appeals and the Use of Multiple Influence Strategies in Retail Newspaper Advertising. Social Influence 2:18–28.Google Scholar
Inman, J. Jeffrey, and McAlister, Leigh. 1994. Do Coupon Expiration Dates Affect Human Behavior? Journal of Marketing Research 31:423–28.Google Scholar
Janakiraman, Narayan, and Ordóñez, Lisa. 2012. Effect of Effort and Deadlines on Consumer Product Returns. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22:260–71.Google Scholar
Johnson, Eric J., and Goldstein, Daniel G. 2003. Do Defaults Save Lives? Science 302:1338–39.Google Scholar
Jolls, Christine, Sunstein, Cass R., and Thaler, Richard A. 1998. A Behavioral Approach to Law and Economics. Stanford Law Review 50:1471–1550.Google Scholar
Keller, Punam Anand, Harlam, Bari, Loewenstein, George, and Volpp, Kevin G. 2011. Enhanced Active Choice: A New Method to Motivate Behavior Change. Journal of Consumer Psychology 21:376–83.Google Scholar
Kelly, Janice R., and Loving, Timothy J. 2004. Time Pressure and Group Performance: Exploring Underlying Processes in the Attentional Focus Model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 40:185–98.Google Scholar
Kennedy, Duncan. 1982. Distributive and Paternalist Motives in Contract and Tort Law, with Special Reference to Compulsory Terms and Unequal Bargaining Power. Maryland Law Review 41:563–658.Google Scholar
Kermer, Deborah A., Driver‐Linn, Erin, Wilson, Timothy D., T., and Gilbert, Daniel T. 2006. Loss Aversion is an Affective Forecasting Error. Psychological Science 17:649–53.Google Scholar
Klick, Jonathan, and Mitchell, Gregory. 2006. Government Regulation of Irrationality: Moral and Cognitive Hazards. Minnesota Law Review 90:1620–63.Google Scholar
Ledyard, John O. 1995 . Public Goods: A Survey of Experimental Research. In The Handbook of Experimental Economics, ed. Kagel, John H. and Roth, Alvin E., 111–94. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Lewinsohn‐Zamir, Daphna. 1998. Consumer Preferences, Citizen Preferences, and the Provision of Public Goods. Yale Law Journal 108:377–406.Google Scholar
Lunn, Peter D. 2012. Behavioural Economics and Policymaking: Learning from the Early Adopters. Economic and Social Review 43:423–49.Google Scholar
Lynn, Michael. 1991. Scarcity Effects on Value: A Quantitative Review of the Commodity Theory Literature. Psychology and Marketing 8:45–57.Google Scholar
Lynn, Michael. 1992. The Psychology of Unavailability: Explaining Scarcity and Cost Effects on Value. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 13:3–7.Google Scholar
Madrian, Brigitte, and Shea, Dennis. 2001. The Power of Suggestion: Inertia in 401(k) Participation and Savings Behavior. Quarterly Journal of Economics 66:1149–87.Google Scholar
Mill, John S. [1859] 1991. On Liberty and Other Essays, ed. Gray, John. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Gregory. 2005. Libertarian Paternalism is an Oxymoron. Northwestern University Law Review 99:1245–77.Google Scholar
Miyazaki, Anthony D. 1993. How Many Shopping Days Until Christmas? A Preliminary Investigation of Time Pressures, Deadlines, and Planning Levels on Holiday Gift Purchases. Advances in Consumer Research. 20:331–35.Google Scholar
Mullainathan, Sendhil, and Shafir, Eldar. 2013. Scarcity: Why Having Too Little Means So Much. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
Ochoa, Tyler T., and Wistrich, Andrew. 1997. The Puzzling Purposes of Statutes of Limitation. Pacific Law Journal 28:453–514.Google Scholar
O'Donoghue, Ted, and Rabin, Matthew. 1999. Doing it Now or Later. American Economic Review 89:103–24.Google Scholar
Oppenheimer, Daniel M., Meyvis, Tom, and Davidenko, Nicolas. 2009. Instructional Manipulation Checks: Detecting Satisficing to Increase Statistical Power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 45:867–72.Google Scholar
Pi, Daniel, Parisi, Francesco, and Luppi, Barbara. 2014. Biasing, Debiasing, and the Law. In The Oxford Handbook of Behavioral Economics and the Law, ed. Zamir, Eyal and Teichman, Doron, 143–66. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Porat, Ariel, and Strahilevitz, Lior Jacob. 2014. Personalizing Default Rules and Disclosure with Big Data. Michigan Law Review 112:1417–78.Google Scholar
Posner, Richard. 2011. Economic Analysis of Law, 8th ed. New York: Aspen Publishers.Google Scholar
Raz, Joseph. 1986. The Morality of Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Reader, Mark J., and Dollinger, Stephen J. 1982. Deadlines, Self‐Perceptions, and Intrinsic Motivation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 8:742–47.Google Scholar
Rebonato, Riccardo. 2012. Taking Liberties: A Critical Examination of Libertarian Paternalism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Ritov, Ilana, and Baron, Jonathan. 1990. Reluctance to Vaccinate: Omission Bias and Ambiguity. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 3:263–77.Google Scholar
Ritov, Ilana, and Baron, Jonathan. 1992. Status‐Quo and Omission Biases. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 5:49–61.Google Scholar
Roberts, M. Susan, and Semb, George B. 1990. Analysis of the Number of Student‐Set Deadlines in a Personalized Psychology Course. Teaching of Psychology 17:170–73.Google Scholar
Roth, Alvin E., Murnighan, J. Keith, and Schoumaker, Françoise. 1988. The Deadline Effect in Bargaining: Some Experimental Evidence. American Economic Review 78:806–23.Google Scholar
Samuelson, William, and Zeckhauser, Richard. 1988. Status Quo Bias in Decision Making. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1:7–59.Google Scholar
Schrag, Philip G., Schoenholtz, Andrew I., Ramji‐Nogales, Jaya, and Dombach, James P. 2010. Rejecting Refugees: Homeland Security's Administration of the One‐Year Bar to Asylum. William and Mary Law Review 52:651–804.Google Scholar
Selinger, Evan, and Whyte, Kyle. 2011. Is There a Right Way to Nudge? The Practice and Ethics of Choice Architecture. Sociology Compass 5:923–35.Google Scholar
Shah, Anuj K., Mullainathan, Sendhil, and Shafir, Eldar. 2012. Some Consequences of Having Too Little. Science 338:682–85.Google Scholar
Shefrin, Hersh. 2002. Beyond Greed and Fear: Understanding Behavioral Finance and the Psychology of Investing. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sheppard, Brian. 2012. Judging Under Pressure: A Behavioral Examination of the Relationship Between Legal Decisionmaking and Time. Florida State University Law Review 39:931–1001.Google Scholar
Steel, Piers. 2007. The Nature of Procrastination: A Meta‐Analytic and Theoretical Review of Quintessential Self‐Regulatory Failure. Psychological Bulletin 133:65–94.Google Scholar
Strickler, Yancey. 2001. Shortening the Maximum Project Length. Kickstarter Blog, June 17. https://www.kickstarter.com/blog/shortening-the-maximum-project-length (accessed April 5, 2015).Google Scholar
Struve, Catherine T. 2010. Time and the Courts: What Deadlines and Their Treatment Tell Us About the Litigation System. DePaul Law Review 59:601–31.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 2011. Empirically Informed Regulation. University of Chicago Law Review 78:1349–1429.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 2013. Deciding by Default. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 162:1–57.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 2014a. Choosing Not to Choose. Duke Law Journal 64:1–52.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R. 2014b. Nudges.Gov—Behaviorally Informed Regulation. In The Oxford Handbook of Behavioral Economics and the Law, ed. Zamir, Eyal and Teichman, Doron, 719–47. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sunstein, Cass R., and Thaler, Richard H. 2003. Libertarian Paternalism is Not an Oxymoron. University of Chicago Law Review 70:1159–1202.Google Scholar
Tan, Soo‐Jiuan, and Hwang Chua, Seow. 2004. “While Stocks Last!” Impact of Framing on Consumers' Perception of Sales Promotions. Journal of Consumer Marketing 21:343–55.Google Scholar
Taylor, Michael. 1987. The Possibility of Cooperation. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Thaler, Richard H., and Sunstein, Cass R. 2009. Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness, rev. ed. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Tversky, Amos, and Shafir, Eldar. 1992. Choice under Conflict: The Dynamics of Deferred Decision. Psychological Science 3:358–61.Google Scholar
Utset, Manuel A. 2010. Procrastination and the Law. In The Thief of Time: Philosophical Essays on Procrastination, ed. Andreou, Chrisoula and White, Mark D., 253–74. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ward, Ronald, and Davis, James. 1978. Coupon Redemption. Journal of Advertising Research 18 (4): 51–55.Google Scholar
Weisbord, Reid Kress. 2012. Wills for Everyone: Helping Individuals Opt Out of Intestacy. Boston College Law Review 53:877–952.Google Scholar
Willis, Lauren E. 2013. When Nudges Fail: Slippery Defaults. University of Chicago Law Review 80:1155–29.Google Scholar
Wistrich, Andrew J. 2008. Procrastination, Deadlines, and Statutes of Limitation. William and Mary Law Review 50:607–67.Google Scholar
Wright, Joshua D., and Ginsburg, Douglas H. 2012. Behavioral Law and Economics: Its Origins, Fatal Flaws, and Implications for Liberty. Northwestern University Law Review 106:1033–88.Google Scholar
Zamir, Eyal. 1998. The Efficiency of Paternalism. Virginia Law Review 84:229–86.Google Scholar
Zamir, Eyal. 2015. Law, Economics, and Morality: The Role of Loss Aversion. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zamir, Eyal, and Medina, Barak. 2010. Law, Economics, and Morality. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zamir, Eyal, and Teichman, Doron, eds. 2014. The Oxford Handbook of Behavioral Economics and the Law. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, Adam S. 2010. Funding Irrationality. Duke Law Journal 59:1105–76.Google Scholar
Dodd‐Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Pub. L. No. 111‐203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010).Google Scholar
Fed. R. App. P. 4Google Scholar
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12.Google Scholar
New York Dep't of Motor Vehicles, Application for Driver License or Non‐Driver ID Card (Form MV‐44). http://dmv.ny.gov/forms/mv44.pdf (2014) (accessed April 5, 2015).Google Scholar
N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law § 30.10 (Consol. 2014).Google Scholar
8 C.F.R. §§ 208.4, 1208.4 (2014).Google Scholar
18 U.S.C.S. § 3282.Google Scholar
21 C.F.R. 10.30(e)(2), 17.45(c) (2014).Google Scholar
28 U.S.C.S. §§ 2401, 2501 (2014).Google Scholar
26 U.S.C.S. § 6072(a).Google Scholar
Dodd‐Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, Pub. L. No. 111‐203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010).Google Scholar
Fed. R. App. P. 4Google Scholar
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12.Google Scholar
New York Dep't of Motor Vehicles, Application for Driver License or Non‐Driver ID Card (Form MV‐44). http://dmv.ny.gov/forms/mv44.pdf (2014) (accessed April 5, 2015).Google Scholar
N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law § 30.10 (Consol. 2014).Google Scholar
8 C.F.R. §§ 208.4, 1208.4 (2014).Google Scholar
18 U.S.C.S. § 3282.Google Scholar
21 C.F.R. 10.30(e)(2), 17.45(c) (2014).Google Scholar
28 U.S.C.S. §§ 2401, 2501 (2014).Google Scholar
26 U.S.C.S. § 6072(a).Google Scholar