Impact of digital nudges on users of sofware-as-a-services
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15170/MM.2023.57.KSZ.01.05Keywords:
digital nudge, online decision-making, conversion rate, software as a services, web analytics dataAbstract
THE AIMS OF THE PAPER
The aim of this research is to explore how and to what extent online users perceive digital nudges and how they affect their subscriptions. A further aim of the research is to study the relationship between the company using digital nudges and the website users.
METHODOLOGY
The convertibility of digital nudges and their impact on exit rates was investigated through a secondary analysis of web analytics data using an example of an integrated web analytics software. A group interview was conducted with users of the software with different nudges perception and impact. Through the interviews, the research provides a deeper insight into the extent to which users are aware of the use of each type of nudge, as well as how disturbing the use of each type of nudge is to them.
MOST IMPORTANT RESULTS
The results show that users of the software as a services are positively affected by non-manipulative nudges, but the analysis of perceptions of different digital nudges showed large variations. The results suggest that the use of digital nudges significantly increases conversion without reducing exit rates. The study found that nudges based on loss aversion bias resulted in the highest conversion, but also elicited the most negative responses.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Although there has been research on nudges in many disciplines, digital nudge research is still in its infancy. Beyond the subject and methodology, the study of the software as a service is an actuality, as it is a rapidly developing sector that has a preference for digital nudges.
The study makes suggestions for the optimal use of digital nudges. It uses a methodology that can be easily applied in practice, the analysis of web analytics data, to guide practitioners in their analysis of nudges.
References
Battaglio Jr, R.P., Belardinelli, P., Bellé, N., Cantarelli, P. (2019), ”Behavioral Public Administration ad fontes: A Synthesis of Research on Bounded Rationality, Cognitive Biases, and Nudging in Public Organizations”, Public Administration Review, 79 (3), 304–320. doi: 10.1111/puar.12994.
Blumenthal, J. A. - Turnipseed, T. L. (2011), ”The Polling Place Priming (PPP) Effect: Is Voting in Churches (Or Anywhere Else) Unconstitutional”, BUL Rev., 91, 561.
Brown, C. (2019), ”Digital nudges for encouraging developer actions”, IEEE/ACM 41st International Conference on Software Engineering: Companion, ICSE-Companion 2019. IEEE, 202–205. doi: 10.1109/ICSE-Companion.2019.00082.
Chong, D. - Druckman, J. N. (2007), ”Framing theory”, Annual Review of Political Science, 10(1), 103–126. doi: 10.1146/annurev.polisci.10.072805.103054.
Demarque, C., Charalambides, L., Hilton, J. D., Waroquier, L. (2015), ”Nudging sustainable consumption: The use of descriptive norms to promote a minority behavior in a realistic online shopping environment”, Journal of Environmental Psychology. Elsevier Ltd, 43, 166–174. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2015.06.008.
Eigenbrod, L., Janson, A. - Leimeister, J. M. (2018), ”How Digital Nudges Influence Consumers – The Role of Social and Privacy Nudges in Retargeting”, Twenty-Sixth European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS2018), Portsmouth, UK, 2018, 1–14. doi: 10.5465/ambpp.2018.11298abstract.
Friis, R., Skov, L. R., Olsen, A., Appleton, K. M., Saulais, L., Dinnella, C., Hartwell, H., Depezay, L., Monteleone, E., Giboreau, A., Perez-Cueto, F.J.A. (2017), ”Comparison of three nudge interventions (priming, default option, and perceived variety) to promote vegetable consumption in a self-service buffet setting”, PLoS ONE, 12(5), 1–16. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0176028.
Giesen, J.C.A.H., Geyskens, K., Goukens, C. and Havermans, R.C. (2013), ”Changing the default. How to promote healthier food choices”, Appetite. Elsevier Ltd, 71(2013), p. 475. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2013.06.026.
Mirsch, T. - Lehrer, C. - Jung, R. (2017), ”Digital Nudging: Altering User Behavior in Digital Environments”, Proceedings der 13. Internationalen Tagung Wirtschaftsinformatik (WI 2017), 634–648.
Mols, F., Haslam, S.A., Jetten, J. and Steffens, N.K., (2014), ”Why a nudge is not enough: A social identity critique of governance by stealth”, European Journal of Political Research, 54(1), 81–98. doi: 10.1111/1475-6765.12073.
Prainsack, B. (2020), ”The value of healthcare data: to nudge, or not?”, Policy Studies. 41(5), 547–562. doi: 10.1080/01442872.2020.1723517.
Room, G. (2016), ”Room, Graham. "Nudge or nuzzle? Improving decisions about active citizenship”, Policy studies, 37(2), 113–128. doi: 10.1080/01442872.2015.1115829.
Saghai, Y. (2013), ”Salvaging the concept of nudge”, Journal of Medical Ethics, 39(8) 487–493. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2012-100727.
Samuelson, W. - Zeckhauser, R. (1988), ”Status quo bias in decision making”, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1(1), 7–59. doi: 10.1007/BF00055564.
Szántó, R. - Dudás, L. (2017), „A döntési helyzetek tudatos tervezésének háttere. A nudge fogalma, módszerei és kritikái”, Vezetéstudomány / Budapest Management Review, 48(10), 48–57. doi: 10.14267/veztud.2017.10.06.
Thaler, R. H. - Sunstein, C. R. (2008), Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness. London: Penguin.
Tversky, A. - Kahneman, D. (1985), ”The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice”, Environmental Impact Assessment, Technology Assessment, and Risk Analysis, 107–129. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-70634-9_6.
Wang, T., Oh, L. Bin, Wang, K., & Yuan, Y. (2013). User adoption and purchasing intention after free trial: An empirical study of mobile newspapers. Information Systems and E- Business Management, 11(2), 189–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-012-0197-5
