<p>Nudging and the Chinese social credit system (SCS) are two widely discussed measures that utilize digital technology and behavioral science to shape and modify people’s behavior. But these two approaches differ in many perspectives. Nudging is envisioned to address challenging policy issues and lauded for its effectiveness. In contrast, the SCS is seen as highly controversial and regarded as an instance of social surveillance. With reference to the Fogg Behavior Model (FBM), this paper aims to examine how nudging and the SCS are strategically designed in different ways to influence individuals’ behavior in the public sector. Our analysis draws upon comprehensive interviews conducted with a sample of 30 university students and researchers from Germany and China. We employed a scenario-based approach involving digital nudges and SCS measures in domains of law enforcement and prosocial conduct. Our interviews reveal how people think conceptually about these two data-driven intervention methods. For Chinese citizens, who are supposed to be more familiar with the SCS, we also explore whether they see a difference between the two approaches and how they understand the fundamental differences. The application of the FBM analysis uncovers disparities in behavioral influence mechanisms between these two approaches for behavioral change.</p>