A targeted motivational nudge—selected with machine learning—gets pessimistic job seekers in France to search harder and improves short-term reemployment, while standard occupation recommendations mostly raise applications but not hires.

Main Finding

A large-scale RCT (n = 52,465) with France Travail shows that tailoring digital job-search assistance to job seekers’ underlying behavioral constraints outperforms a one-size-fits-all occupational recommendation. A novel motivational intervention targeted at “pessimistic” job seekers (identified via ML predictions of belief profiles) increased search effort, raised reservation wages, and improved reemployment outcomes along predicted margins. Standard occupational recommendations mainly reallocated attention across occupations (increasing applications, especially to suggested occupations) but produced little aggregate reemployment gain and worked mostly for workers whose binding constraint was attention allocation rather than effort/aspiration.

Key Points

• Diagnostic approach: The authors first classify job seekers into belief/behavior profiles (notably a large “pessimistic” group) using prior surveys + realized outcomes; then use ML trained out-of-sample to predict these profiles and target interventions.
• Two treatment strategies:
  • Occupational recommendation (benchmark): suggests alternative occupations close to the job seeker’s target.
  • Motivational intervention: aimed at pessimists — encourages greater search effort and higher aspirations, discloses peer effort/wage benchmarks, and suggests targeting higher-paying jobs within current occupations rather than broadening occupation set.
• Main experimental results:
  • Motivational arm:
    • Increases search effort by 0.9 hours/week (effect concentrated among low-effort workers).
    • Raises reservation wages by 1.9% (effect concentrated among those below the disclosed peer wage benchmark).
    • Improves reemployment: for initially low-effort individuals, reemployment probability up by 2.9 percentage points; for those with initially low reservation wages, probability of accepting wage above baseline reservation wage up by 5.3 percentage points.
  • Occupational recommendation arm:
    • Raises number of applications, especially to suggested occupations: +11% to posted vacancies overall, +21% to suggested occupations.
    • Behavioral effects concentrated among job seekers who already perceived opportunities outside their target occupation (i.e., activated existing perceptions).
    • No measurable improvement in aggregate reemployment outcomes (though some subgroups experienced gains, including a shift toward fixed-term contracts and increases in spontaneous applications among pessimists who largely ignored suggested occupations).
• Mechanisms:
  • Limited measured belief updating: large behavioral responses occurred without substantial revision of elicited beliefs about arrival rates or wage distributions.
  • Occupational recommendations work primarily by lowering attention/selection costs (activating existing perceptions), not by creating new beliefs.
  • Motivational intervention works by shifting aspiration/reference points (effort and target wages) for those below disclosed norms, not by correcting beliefs about objective opportunity distributions.
• Design feature: The motivational disclosure used ML targeting to avoid demotivating people already above benchmarks (i.e., disclosure was applied selectively to below-benchmark pessimists).

Data & Methods

• Data sources:
  • Repeated France Travail surveys eliciting subjective reemployment probabilities across horizons, perceived application success across occupations, perceived returns to search effort, self-reported weekly search hours, and reservation wages.
  • Rich administrative records on realized reemployment (three-month window, administrative hiring records) and other outcomes (contracts, wages).
• Sample: Large randomized experiment conducted with France Travail, N = 52,465 (pre-registered AEARCTR-0012218).
• Targeting:
  • A belief-typing algorithm built on pre-2023 survey waves (Crépon et al., 2025 companion paper) identifies coherent multivariate belief profiles (e.g., pessimists).
  • Predictive ML models trained out-of-sample on prior data + administrative covariates are used to classify experimental participants and target the motivational arm.
• Treatments:
  • Occupational recommendation: personalized, close-occupation suggestions delivered via digital channel.
  • Motivational intervention: tailored message including peer effort norms and peer wage benchmarks, encouragement to increase effort and target better-paying jobs within current occupations.
• Empirical strategy:
  • Random assignment across arms; comparisons of self-reported behaviors (hours, reservation wages, applications) and administrative outcomes (reemployment probability, contract type, wages).
  • Heterogeneity analyses by baseline beliefs/effort/reservation wage relative to disclosed benchmarks.
  • Interpretation via a behavioral search framework distinguishing two margins: attention margin (set of occupations considered) and aspiration margin (effort and reservation wage within that set).

Implications for AI Economics

• Practical use of ML + subjective expectations: The paper demonstrates how ML classifiers trained on survey-admin + admin outcomes can scalably identify psychological/behavioral types (e.g., pessimists) and target interventions more effectively than blanket recommendations. For AI economists, this is a clear example of ML-enabled personalization improving policy nudge targeting.
• Recommender systems should diagnose behavioral frictions, not just preferences: Standard “expand-choice” or occupation-similarity recommendations map to reducing attention costs. But if users’ binding constraints are motivational (low effort/aspiration), recommender systems that only broaden options will have limited impact. AI systems should infer the relevant margin (attention vs aspiration vs another constraint) before choosing the intervention modality.
• Designing nudges with limited belief-updating in mind: Behavioral responses often occur via activation of attention or shifts in aspiration references rather than by updating probabilistic beliefs. AI-driven information-design should therefore prioritize signals that alter reference points or social norms (peer benchmarks, effort norms) for low-aspiration users, and prioritize salience/visibility for users constrained on attention.
• Avoiding “voltage drop” at scale via need-based targeting: The study shows that apparent nudge ineffectiveness among low-motivation users can reflect mis-targeting rather than intrinsic unresponsiveness. ML-enabled segmentation allows assigning the right nudge to the right user, improving aggregate performance of platform nudges.
• Ethical and operational cautions for AI deployment:
  • Risk of demotivation: disclosing peer benchmarks can harm (or demotivate) those already above norms if mis-targeted; targeting must therefore be precise and transparent.
  • Fairness and interpretability: labeling users as “pessimistic” and delivering different messages raises fairness, consent, and transparency issues; platforms must consider ethical constraints and regulatory requirements.
  • Strategic responses and general equilibrium: shifts in job-seeker behavior (e.g., more applications to certain segments, greater selectivity) may affect employer responses and market dynamics; models and policy evaluations should consider these feedbacks.
• Research directions for AI economists:
  • Dynamic personalization: explore bandit/RL-style adaptivity to learn which intervention margin works for each user over time and optimize assignment.
  • External validity and market heterogeneity: test whether the diagnostic + targeted-intervention approach replicates across different countries, labor market tightness, or platform contexts (gig vs formal hiring).
  • Long-run welfare and employer responses: quantify longer-term career trajectories, wage growth, and potential employer sorting induced by targeted nudges.
  • Mechanism-aware recommender design: incorporate models that explicitly represent attention vs aspiration frictions into recommendation objectives and evaluation metrics.
• Methodological takeaway: Combining subjective expectation elicitation, ML classification of behavioral types, and randomized evaluation provides a powerful toolkit for AI-driven policy design. This approach enables more granular, mechanism-specific interventions that can substantially improve the match between nudge type and individual constraint, raising both efficacy and cost-effectiveness when deployed responsibly.