Special Offer!Use code first15 and
Get 15% off your first order
Choice architecture refers to a design of many alternatives when a person takes one option in preference of another among them. The paper considers an impact which choice architecture has on daily life, especially in light of filter bubbles and personalization, narrowing people’s experience and the essence of being nudged into choosing. The work starts with the process of discovery and concludes with an argument about the experience of being information-processed by various technologies that filter the online world for making choices. Finally, the essay draws conclusions from the ways Parser agrees with or does not agree with the discussed issues. The goal is to show how choice architecture can be used to help nudge people to make better choices without facing difficulties upon anyone of them. Choice architecture works perfectly in nudging people to consider certain decisions. Therefore, there is a fundamental need of libertarian and paternalism, which has been included in design of choice architecture to nudge consumers.
Occurrence of the concept of choice architecture is linked to a work entitled Nudge Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein. The design of choice architecture acts as a means to come up with a better way of taking one choice regardless of the others without biases, which minimizes errors and results in a bounded rationale. This choice binds a person very much, and at times, the choices might be so related that one is even unable to select the one which is the best (Cronqvist and Thaler 421).In daily life, when an individual’s willpower is depleted they are even more likely to make decisions that are based on influences from person’s environment. This issue means that the immediate environment has a big impact on the way individuals make a decision at any time. After a decision is made, if one feels drained, pressed, or overwhelmed, a person is not likely to go through much effort to make a better meal or fit in their work output. Apparently, one may end up grabbing whatever looks easiest and within the zone of reach. This factor means that if an individual takes a little time today to organize own life in a room, workplace, kitchen and other parts, based on the choice architecture, such a situation may help one to realize how significant this aspect is in making sound decisions that are orderly.
Hence, a person who creates this environment, in many terminologies that exist, is referred to as a choice architect. The art of arranging and keeping order associated with designing results in development of an idea of architecture. The central purpose of nudge is to show how choice architecture can be used to help push people to make better decisions in spite of the others without forcing certain unfavorable results. This issue implies that one has to come up with the way or pattern, in which the final decision can be reached, without creating any inconveniences. Such a process is called libertarian paternalism.
Nowadays, there is another group of leading discoveries who have created typical choice architecture elements that can divide them into those that restructure the choice set and those that explain a choice in details. Choice architecture allows limiting choice options. However, limits to making a choice may cause decrease in one’s welfare. The issue is due to the fact that if availability of choice alternatives will lead to the higher likelihood of making a better choice as the best option. Based on this idea, a significant number of options will heavily rely on the knowledge and effort necessary for weighting of every option. Apparently, the process may be arranged without bias regarding the essential needs and, as in case of personalization of choice to people’s experience, it is important that individuals should consider alternatives before finding a better a solution among many that are provided or those that people have at hand in preferences of their suitability. In other words, everyone who receives support has to have the choice and control over the shape of that support, whether statutory services are providing the support or funded by themselves. Nevertheless, this goal can be achieved in all reasonable ways to protect the support, and personalization is with a person alone. The person should take care of everything provided and this issue may lead to taking the risk. At times, the process makes an individual to be restless with the central attention directed towards protecting what they have, thereby avoiding blame. When this situation happens during making a choice, individuals may find themselves confused due to personalization. There are examples of consumers who are afraid to take decisions because of too many options rather than fewer in social-security investment and Medicare drug plans. This circumstance narrows the entire experience given the fact that individuals tend to take choices in a way it would have been done before, which is an experience of other people or obtaining the information from other sources that makes it quite insufficient (Nesterak 101).
Commercial interests, however, drive the rush in building the essential filter bubble. It has become clear that if one wants to have many people on their website, one is required to personalize the relevant information. Additionally, when one wants to make much money on advertisements, they may be forced to share the details. This factor has compelled individuals to personalize information and make it a gold rush, in which the major companies compete in order to create the most realistic enhancement of each of its personalized products.
The idea behind choice architecture is similar to the concept of manipulation, which changes outcomes without necessarily changing people’s underlying preferences. Therefore, choice architecture has received the implementation process in several public and private policy domains. According to Pariser’s argument, almost every company is trying to show what can be kept on saying they conducted some research and other data streams. For most of these companies, the issue seems a way to sail through success. Nonetheless, Pariser brings up an excellent point regarding the phenomena or items that people do not necessarily want to see and that people need to see. Another factor to be clarify may also include political accountability, corporate responsibility, and societal norms, to name a few. On the web each day, in line with Pariser’s reasoning, every company has chosen making its site to have better content and interface than the other ones (Mitchell 10). This circumstance has made people unable to select which filter bubbles are enough in choice architecture compared to the way it was done before choice engineering.
Benefit from Our Service: Save 25% Along with the first order offer - 15% discount, you save extra 10% since we provide 300 words/page instead of 275 words/page
In conclusion, today, choice architecture bounds individuals so much that the issue sometimes makes them unable to come up with a required solution to the life problem. Choice architecture limits so many options as it consumes time when one tries to make a choice, and it becomes hard to get one choice from many as most of them these search engines may resemble in terms of their value.