Response to Merz

Pepijn Al*, Jamie Brehaut, Charles Weijer

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademic

Abstract

Jon Merz raises two objections to our article on the ethics of behavioral influences in trial recruitment. In this response, we defend our article against these objections. We argue that Merz’s critique rests on a misunderstanding of our article, defend the daily life standard as a guardrail for leveraging cognitive biases, and argue that rejecting all behavioral influences is not a helpful nor a sustainable answer to their increasing use in trial recruitment.

Original languageEnglish
Article number649
JournalTrials
Volume24
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 6 Oct 2023

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Response to Merz'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this