We had a lively debate and discussion during the event. Thank you to all those who were able to attend live. If you weren’t able to make it, you can view the recording here. (The link is the same as the registration link. After you register/login, you’ll be taken to the video.)
* * *
What do you think?
What are your perspectives on the debate? Has the i-frame vs. s-frame debate influenced your work? Where do you agree, and where do you disagree? What related questions are you grappling with? Where do you think the applied behavioral science goes next?
Share your perspective via our “letter to the editor” form.
* * *
Five questions to consider
In advance of the event, I asked each of our five guests to prepare a question for the group. We didn’t get to all of them during the discussion, so I thought it might be valuable to share them with everyone. The questions can serve as leaping off points to advance your own thinking and for your discussions with colleagues.
Here they are:
1. Systems-level change (from Nick): How can behavioral science most effectively help with system-level (s-frame) change?
2. Inadvertent harm of the i-frame vs. s-frame argument (from Michael): From where you sit, do you think the i-frame vs. s-frame argument could inadvertently diminish interest in applying behavioral science to public policy?
3. Equity (from Crystal): How does an equity focus complicate (or settle?) the i-frame/s-frame question?
4. The case of gambling (from George): Considerable research suggests that online gambling is causing extensive harm, particularly to poor and young people. How can behavioral insights inform interventions at both the individual level and the system level? And which level do you expect to be more effective?
5. The next generation of behavioral scientists (from Chiara): How does this debate translate into action, such as the training and mentoring of the next generation of behavioral scientists?
