Nudging into Subjectification

Nudging into SubjectificationJohn Cromby

Psychology, SSEHS

OVERVIEW

Cromby, J. & Willis, M.E.H. (in press) Nudging Into Subjectification: governmentality and psychometrics. Critical Social Policy

The Story

Context

Nudge and BIT

Positive Psychology

Character Psychometrics

Signature Strengths

Subjectification

The Story

Context

Neoliberal government policies – ‘austerity’

Punitive changes to benefits system

Media and ministerial attacks on claimants

During periods of economic downturn “worklessness is typically named as a problem of character” (Clarke & Newman 2012, p.311)

Nudge and BIT

Behavioural economics: Economics, neuroscience, psychology

Human decisions: neither simply rational nor simply irrational Choice architectures, imprinting

Libertarian paternalism People can legitimately be ‘nudged’ toward goals that have

prior public consent

Whitehead et al (2011) Policy implementations of behavioural economics frequently

associate emotional decisions with particular groups Behavioural economics “enables policy makers (and an

emerging cartel of psychocrats) to foreclose discussion of what the values associated with ‘good behaviour’ should be” (Whitehead et al., 2011 p.2834, italics in original).

Positive Psychology

Test based upon the Values in Action (VIA) ‘Inventory of Character Strengths and Virtues’ - the ‘scientific backbone’ of positive psychology

Becker & Marecek (2008) show that positive psychology: Endorses ‘the American Dream’

Takes a selective view of ‘positive’ institutions

Largely ignores power relations of e.g. SES, gender, ethnicity

Held (2008): the double epistemic standard of positive psychology

Positive psychology has influenced previous UK social policy: Lord Layard and IAPT

Measuring national wellbeing


48 questions, 5 point Likert Scale:

Issues:

Reliablity and validity

Reactivity/response bias

Introspection

Quantification

Meaning


VALIDITY

"They are using the non-validated version … we had tested it a while back and it failed”: VIA, The Guardian, May 6th

REACTIVITY AND RESPONSE BIAS

social desirability responding: the tendency of respondents to answer questions in a manner that (they imagine) will be viewed favourably by others

More likely in relation to topics such as sexual behaviour, drug use, abilities and personality (Rust and Golombok, 1999)


INTROSPECTION the supposed ability to ‘look inside the self’ and objectively

report what we see behavioural economics presumes that we do not have this kind

of rational insight

QUANTIFICATION It has never been demonstrated that psychological attributes

are discrete and quantifiable in character In the natural sciences it is axiomatic that measurement

viability is demonstrated before measures are deployed Psychology sidesteps this requirement by using an ad hoc and

anomolous operational definition of measurement: “the assignment of numerals to objects or events according to rule” (Michell, 2000 p. 650)


MEANING

5 point Likert scale: very much like/unlike me

Rosenbaum & Valsiner (2011): participants completed the NEO-PI, for each question wrote down the meanings of the end points of the scale

These meanings often varied: between questions, and between participants

“it is a misplaced assumption that participants have direct access to their response and that this response is static and can be represented as a mark along a line .. rating scale data, despite being statistically manipulated, should not (and indeed cannot) be thought of as objective” (Rosenbaum & Valsiner 2011, p.61).


The VIA test:

may lack validity

is not a neutral ‘scientific’ process of quantification

does not provide objective assessments of character

“The contribution of psychometric modelling is fundamentally a political one, as it permits the assimilation of the reality of phenomena that are described in a qualitative way and can at best be partially ordered to an intuitively totally ordered reality, where the social utility rests on the need for comparison of human beings.” (Vautier et al., 2012 p. 818)

Signature Strengths

Signature Strengths

The focus on character and ‘signature strengths’

Ignores experience, skills, aptitude, knowledge

Emphasises psychological attributes of the self

How much can such an emphasis actually help people to find work?

How much help can actually be derived from these very brief, decontextualised, non-specific descriptions?

Subjectification

Foucault (2008), rather than govern by dictating rights and responsibilities, neoliberalism proceeds by: harnessing desires for independence and creativity to the

interests of business reconfiguring workers as entrepreneurs of their own skills and

abilities reconfiguring the social relations of capitalism to emphasise

competition, not between workers and capitalists, but between workers themselves

Neoliberalism therefore demands a new governmentality, a changed mode of subjectification: being subject to a power relation working to reflexively understand oneself as a particular kind of

subject

Subjectification

The VIA test as an instrument of subjectification: (coerced) personal responsibilities to: take the test

email results to benefits advisor

work on the self in light of the results:

“aim to use each of your strengths in a new way everyday for at least a week”

The VIA test as an instrument of subjectification: the nature of the test results

Subjectification Paragon Sociopath Neutral Like Me Unlike Me Random 1 Random 2 Random 3 Random 4 Random 5

Curiosity x x x x x x x x

Love of Learning x x x x x x x x

Critical Thinking x x x x x x x x

Social Intelligence x x x x x x x

Originality x x x x x

Carefulness x

Humour x

Kindness x

Fairness x x

Dedication x x

Honesty x x

Loving x

Perspective x x

Modesty x

Appreciation of Culture

x

Subjectification

Three profiles (paragon, neutral, very much unlike me) were identical

15 different ‘signature strengths’ were generated

6 of these appeared only once

4 more appeared only twice

Of the 5 strengths presented above:

3 of these appeared on 8 different profiles

another appeared on 7 profiles, the other on 5

Subjectification

Rationality:

asks questions, carefully evaluates every situation, does not jump to conclusions, considers only ‘solid evidence’

Flexibility:

enjoys exploration and discovery, takes opportunities to learn, adapts to the feelings and positions of others, able to change her or his mind

Innovation:

seeks out new ideas, can take up new positions, is ready to defy convention in order to develop new ways of working

Subjectification

‘Character Strengths and Virtues’ (2004) include:

BRAVERY: not shrinking from threat, challenge, difficulty, or pain; speaking up for what is right even if there is opposition; acting on convictions even if unpopular; includes physical bravery but is not limited to it

FAIRNESS: Treating all people the same according to notions of fairness and justice; not letting personal feelings bias decisions about others; giving everyone a fair chance

VIA Test ‘Fairness’: Treating all people fairly is one of your abiding principles. You

do not let your personal feelings bias your decisions about other people. You give everyone a chance

Conclusion

This procedure: nudges benefit claimants toward the adoption and rehearsal

of core aspects of neoliberal subjectivities responsibility, rationality, flexibility, innovativenss

inflects the discursive networks within which subjectivities are formed with a particular constellation of qualities

helps inculcate a collective self-image consonant with the demands of a precarious labour market

is probably unethical (informed consent, right to withdraw, confidentiality, anonymity, integrity)

trades in the allure of ‘science’, quantification and psychological expertise

illustrates the potential dangers of libertarian paternalism

Nudging into Subjectification

Documents

Transcript of Nudging into Subjectification