David Brooks has a column on how insights from "behavioral research" can be brought to bear on public policy questions such as "How do we structure sanctions against Iran to cause the greatest psychic humiliation?"
It's not entirely clear to me that achieving "the greatest psychic humiliation" should be the goal of our Iran sanctions policy. How about a goal of getting Iran to drop its nuclear weapons program, its support for terrorism, and its human rights abuses? Some people say there's a better chance of achieving that goal if you stop short of complete psychic humiliation of Iran, or at least offer an alternative to the humiliation. In other words, behavioral research is nice, but it also matters how the policymakers, or journalists, frame the questions that the behavioral researchers are supposed to help them answer. If you ask the wrong question, you still may get the wrong policy.