One connector, four scholarly indexes, real DOIs and legal free PDFs. Works in Claude and ChatGPT.
Paste it into Claude or ChatGPT as a custom connector. 3-day free trial.
Nick Chater A, George F. Loewenstein
An influential line of thinking in behavioral science, to which the two authors have long subscribed, is that many of society's most pressing problems can be addressed cheaply and effectively at the level of the individual, without modifying the system in which the individual operates. We now believe this was a mistake, along with, we suspect, many colleagues in both the academic and policy communities. Results from such interventions have been disappointingly modest. But more importantly, they have guided many (though by no means all) behavioral scientists to frame policy problems in individual, not systemic, terms: To adopt what we call the "i-frame," rather than the "s-frame." The difference may be more consequential than i-frame advocates have realized, by deflecting attention and support away from s-frame policies. Indeed, highlighting the i-frame is a long-established objective of corporate opponents of concerted systemic action such as regulation and taxation. We illustrate our argument briefly for six policy problems, and in depth with the examples of climate change, obesity, retirement savings, and pollution from plastic waste. We argue that the most important way in which behavioral scientists can contribute to public policy is by employing their skills to develop and implement value-creating system-level change.
Formatted from the source metadata, not typed by hand. For a whole reference list, use the citation generator or ask your assistant through Find Research.
A, N. C., & Loewenstein, G. F. (2022). The i-frame and the s-frame: How focusing on individual-level solutions has led behavioral public policy astray. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 46, e147. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x22002023
A, Nick Chater, and George F. Loewenstein. "The i-frame and the s-frame: How focusing on individual-level solutions has led behavioral public policy astray." Behavioral and Brain Sciences, vol. 46, 2022, pp. e147, https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x22002023.
A, Nick Chater, and George F. Loewenstein. "The i-frame and the s-frame: How focusing on individual-level solutions has led behavioral public policy astray." Behavioral and Brain Sciences 46 (2022): e147. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x22002023.
A N. C., Loewenstein G. F. The i-frame and the s-frame: How focusing on individual-level solutions has led behavioral public policy astray // Behavioral and Brain Sciences. — 2022. — Vol. 46. — P. e147. — URL: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x22002023
@article{a2022iframe,
title = {{The i-frame and the s-frame: How focusing on individual-level solutions has led behavioral public policy astray}},
author = {Nick Chater A and George F. Loewenstein},
journal = {Behavioral and Brain Sciences},
year = {2022},
volume = {46},
pages = {e147},
doi = {10.1017/s0140525x22002023},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x22002023}
}TY - JOUR AU - A, Nick Chater AU - Loewenstein, George F. TI - The i-frame and the s-frame: How focusing on individual-level solutions has led behavioral public policy astray JO - Behavioral and Brain Sciences VL - 46 SP - e147 PY - 2022 DA - 2022/09/05 DO - 10.1017/s0140525x22002023 UR - https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x22002023 ER -
Add Find Research to Claude or ChatGPT and ask in plain language. The assistant reads this record, finds the papers around it and cites only what it actually found:
Setup takes about a minute: add the connector, then start the free trial.
Record from OpenAlex; open-access location from Unpaywall and the indexes. Find Research links only to legal copies.