Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-fwgfc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T13:24:29.198Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“More effective” is not necessarily “better”: Some ethical considerations when influencing individual behaviour

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 August 2023

Rebecca C. H. Brown Open the ORCID record for Rebecca C. H. Brown [Opens in a new window]
Rebecca C. H. Brown*
Affiliation:
Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK rebecca.brown@philosophy.ox.ac.uk; https://www.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/people/dr-rebecca-brown
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Chater & Loewenstein make a persuasive case for focusing behavioural research and policy making on s- rather than i-interventions. This commentary highlights some conceptual and ethical issues that need to be addressed before such reform can be embraced. These include the need to adjudicate between different conceptions of “effectiveness,” and accounting for reasonable differences between how people weight different values.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 46 , 2023 , e151
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

Brown, R. C., & Savulescu, J. (2019). Responsibility in healthcare across time and agents. Journal of Medical Ethics, 45(10), 636–644.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cavallero, E. (2019). Opportunity and responsibility for health. The Journal of Ethics, 23(4), 369–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, B., De Marco, G., Levy, N., & Savulescu, J. (Eds.). (forthcoming). Responsibility and healthcare. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Segall, S. (2009). Health, luck, and justice. Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar