- Good morning,
thank you for coming to my presentation.
I'm Ana Caraban,
and I'm going to present a paper
that is called 23 Ways to Nudge,
that presents a systematic review
of technology-mediated nudging.
So let me start by introducing the context
of our work.
So, as many of you might know,
Personal Informatics Systems,
which are tools that help people
to collect and reflect on personal data,
such as the mental types that people work,
these tools are becoming increasingly prevalent.
However, despite the potential of these tools,
recent research has emphasized that people fail
to get insights from behavioral data
and they often discard the tools
after a couple months of use.
And one of the reasons for this failure
is that most of Personal Informatics tools
and behavior change technologies are information-centric.
So these tools raise an assumption
that people lack the knowledge
to successfully implement change in their behavior.
And if they follow the tool
to help people collect this data,
help them to review the data,
and reflect on their behaviors,
and this will lead to the behavior change.
And this emphasis on reflection
as a mean for behavior change
has been noted by the recent paper,
who found that 94 percent of behavior change technology
has been designed to tap into the reflective mind.
And only six percent tap into automatic.
However, research has been showed
that people do not make much decisions
using their reflective mind.
So, it is estimated that 95 percent
of our decisions are made intuitively
by using the reasoning and cognitive biases.
So, actually, behavior change technologies should explore
the Automatic Mind to change behaviors.
But, how can we design for the Automatic Mind?
And one way is through nudging.
So the term of nudging was introduced ten years ago.
And it described any aspect of the choice architecture
that can alters people behavior
in a predictable way without forbidding any option
or change in there incentives.
So, levering the concept of nudging,
researchers have designed small changes in the way
that choices and information are presented
with a goal or guide to decide choices.
So for instance,
one of the most popular nudges
has been introduced in a supermarket.
So usually when you go to the cash register,
you have like a vast examples
and they put there very unhealthy items
such as just cake and snacks.
And what they did was to replace
these unhealthy snacks by fruit and other healthy items.
And they found that while both options
were still available, like cake and fruit,
just positioning the healthy items near by
at eye level, it was enough to motivate people
to adopt healthy options.
So the question was how to nudge?
So over the past ten years,
a lot of researchers have been designing
and studying nudges on a lot of concepts
such as marketing and behavior change technology.
However, we still have a lot of understanding
on how to nudge.
We have a lot of understanding,
which biases people to make decision,
but we don't know how to explore this research
and cognitive bias to design behavior change technology.
And in order to answer this question,
we conducted a systemic-review of the use of nudging in HCI.
And our goal was to layout the design space of nudging.
So for this purpose,
we look at the top HCI venues
since the publication of the nudge group,
since the concept nudging emerged.
And we analyzed every paper that had
one of the following keywords,
nudge, cognitive bias, and persuasion.
All the papers presented at least
went over the technology-mediated nudge
and leveraging at least one or more cognitive bias.
So all in all, 71 papers were selected
and mostly were found in CHI.
And we were able to create this framework
that we found 23 different mechanisms of nudging.
Some demonstrate how we can design systems
using these mechanisms.
And we classified these mechanisms
in six high-level categories
that explain the what.
So describe the categories we can use to nudge.
And we leave this to the why.
So all these 23 nudging mechanisms,
they leverage 15 cognitive biases.
So this is our framework.
These are the six categories that we identify.
However, due to time limitations in this presentation,
I will only present the two first categories,
but I will encourage you to read the paper
and reach me if you have any questions.
So the first category is the facilitate.
So nudging is particularly to try to nudge people
to adapt healthy behaviors
by diminishing individual's physical or mental effort.
And this is strategy is tapping into the status-quo bias,
which denotes are tendency to resist a change.
So we usually try to adopt an option
that requires less effort
because the time and effort
for looking for another alternative is too costly.
So there are different ways to facilitate
and how to describe the different mechanisms.
So for instance, hiding consists
of making undesirable options harder to reach.
And redesigning and online shopping website
where people need to navigate between the pages
to select the items that they want to buy.
And what it did was to locate unhealthy items
in the last two pages of the website,
so this add extra effort to the user
to buy unhealthy items.
A different category is the confront.
So now using this category,
they want to pause unwanted action
and pause on reflection.
And this taps on regret aversion bias,
which is our tendency
to become more careful making decisions
when we perceive a certain level of risks.
So for instance,
they were designed to Google Play store,
so every time that one user wants to install an application
it will present the restart.
So for instance,
if one application required access to the storage,
the application will search for pictures
of the user on the phone,
and will prompt the message
this app can see and delete your pictures.
A different example is presented with one,
they designed a Google plug-in
that paused the application
of Facebook posts for ten seconds.
And they added the pictures of some friends
and they had the message,
these people and x hundred friends
can see your publication.
And the phone that why the encounter was avoided,
people actually read the contents of the post
and they deleted the content of the post before publishing.
So, all in all after doing our analysis,
we raised three main questions related with the nudges.
So the first questions was related
to the manipulation.
The second was related with effectiveness.
And the third one is through the design of these systems.
So one of the main inquisitive of nudging is
that they were manipulating people's choices.
So in order to answer this question,
we built on how percentages work
and we position all the 23 mechanisms
into different axis.
So the first one refers to the reflecting,
the mode of thinking engage.
So some nudges work by tapping
into the reflective mind
and some nudges work by tapping into the automatic.
The second axis refers to the transparency
of the nudge.
So transparent nudge are nudge
where the individual can understand
the means and indications behind the nudge.
They understand that he's being persuaded and why.
So we positioned all the 23 mechanisms in this axis.
As you might see in this quadrant,
so 52 percent, so the majority of the nudges,
they have been designed to prompt reflective choice.
So these nudges doesn't raise ethical concerns
because they tap into their reflective mind
and they're automatic.
The second most explored nudges
that tried to influence behavior.
And this may raise some ethical concerns
because it taps into the automatic mind.
However, because the transpiring people
actually can understand that they can be persuaded.
So for instance,
and in feedback we actually pay attention
so we know that we are being persuaded,
even we can understand the means of the goal of the nudge.
Lastly, we found 22 percent of nudges
they attempt to manipulate behavior.
And this kind of nudges indeed raises ethical concerns.
However, we found it's not always the case,
it is not just manipulated behaviors.
So for instance, in case of the auto policies,
we found one study where the elders
adopted an auto policy.
So they automatically enroll people
in a vaccination program
where people needed to un-enroll
in order to not get vaccinated.
And they found that 61 percent of the users,
they actually opted out from the vaccination program.
So it's very unlikely that the users did instill the nudge.
And this is positive because it highlights
that while these nudges aim to manipulate behavior,
people actually decided otherwise.
So, it still
has some freedom of choice.
So a second question was relating
with the effectiveness of the nudge.
We want to understand if different mechanisms
were related to more effective nudges.
And we found not only relation,
but we found that the effectiveness
of the nudge is related with the implementation
in a specific context.
So, one of the theories of nudging,
especially the ones that tap into automatic mind,
is the lack of educational effects.
So for instance, the first example,
the change of the default option to double-side print
to reduce the amount of paper
that people were using when printing.
And they found that while the nudge was presenting,
people actually double-side print.
However, they found that when they introduce new printers,
people didn't change default option
to print double-side.
In another example,
Rodgers includes twinkle eyes
to reveal the path to the door to the staircase,
so he wanted to motivate people
to take the stairs instead of the elevator.
And during this study, the end of the study,
they had a wiring problem and the lights stopped working.
And they found that it was enough time
for the people to reflect on their behaviors
and people were actually still taking the stairs
even when the lights were not presented.
Nudging effects may not sustain over time.
So for instance, if a user identify a placebo,
this can create feelings of distrust with the system
and graphic warnings can also lose the resonance over time.
Nudges can have unexpected effects.
So for instance, people can print more
because they carry less weight
because of double-side printing.
Some nudges works by creating friction,
this can be perceived as intrusive and create reactance.
And we found that the timing and the strength of the nudges
is also very important.
So for instance, research found that the right moment
to present the consequences of smoking
is not while people are smoking,
but way before,
so before they make this decision.
And the strength of the nudges is important.
So in the case of the auto policy
for the vaccination program,
they added a link in the email with the vaccination day
and through the link they could opt out.
And they found that it was so easy to opt out
that this lead to a high opt out rate.
Lastly, is strong preference
and habits can also have an influence on the nudge.
So for instance, the more a user smokes,
the less likely to be affected by the nudge.
Our last question aim to identify
which type of nudges should we use
in different situations.
And in order to answer this question,
we built on Fogg's behavior model,
who suggests that in order for a person
to follow out that behavior,
he or she should have sufficient motivation,
sufficient ability, and effective trigger.
So we position it all the 23 mechanisms
using Fogg's triggers.
So we have facilitators triggers to try
to increase people's ability to persuade behavior.
Sparks that increase people motivation to a behavior.
And signal triggers that attempt
to remind you of the behavior.
So you can see that most of the nudges
are designed to increase motivation.
So all in all, our systematic review allows
to contribute with the framework
that links the why with the how
and the what of nudging.
We were able to identify six reasons
that can lead to the failure
of a technology-mediated nudge.
And we analyze the ethical risks
of the nudge that were identified in the review.
And as a takeaway, we wanted to highlight
that we found that 50 percent of the studies
that we reviewed had a duration of one day.
So we don't have much understanding
of the long-term consequences of these nudges.
And more importantly,
we observe that only seven studies inquire
into the fate of the nudge after the removal.
So, we highly encouraged individuals and researchers
to please to take these things into consideration
with the design technology mediating nudges.
Thank you for your time.
(applause)
- [Man] Thank you Ana.
Questions please come to the front.
- [Alex] Thanks great talk,
Alex Kale, University of Washington.
So, I'm wondering...
How you would, based on your systematic review,
how can we apply
this prior work on nudging theoretical perspective
that you've laid out to tools
that maybe don't have to do so much with trying
to get people to adjust their
sort of activities that affect their health status,
but say in the context of...
The workplace.
For instance,
in my work I've been thinking about researchers
and sort of trying to,
how do you enforce sort of best practices in research
and I'm sort of wondering
if nudging could be sort of a potential way to do that.
So I'm wondering if you could comment on the implacability
of this theoretical perspective
to designing interfaces say for the workplace.
- I will say that everything that we do is about nudging,
so even like the location of the bathrooms
in the this place is nudging us.
So I would say that nudging could be applied
in your context in your research.
But I'm not sure I understand,
what was your questions.
- [Alex] That's fine.
- Because I can't hear,
it's hard to understand.
- [Alex] Thank you.
- [Wey Yu] My name is Wey Yu
from National University of Singapore.
I really really like this presentation,
thank you so much.
My question is actually the distinction
between automatic and reflective processing.
So do you see nudges being able to take advantage
of the more reflective state of human mind?
You don't nudge people to deliberate.
For instance, from all these studies you have reviewed,
can you give me maybe a few examples
and how you think about that?
- So for instance, it was a lot of,
we wanted to show also to the graph on the axis
there's been a lot of conflict between nudges
and the reflective mind,
either transpiring nudges and the automatic mind.
So you are asking if--
- [Wey Yu] Have you seen nudges that actually prompt people
to be more thoughtful, mindful?
- No, I have seen one
that explores subliminal messages
and I think that made people more relaxed,
but in that context we haven't found one
that I remember, no.
- [Nu Long] Okay, thank you for your talk.
I Nu Long from University from Konstanz, Germany.
I noticed there were some taxonomies
for health behavior change intervention.
For example, the BCT taxonomy.
I think you might know that.
Also, the persuasive system design.
So I see your work,
I might take it as another taxonomy.
So, have you compared your taxonomy,
that you have several categories
to further intervention.
Have you compared your concepts or design space
with the existing taxonomies?
So is there overlap
or do you find some more new techniques
or concepts,
which didn't exact in the existing taxonomies?
Thank you.
- So we built on how percentages work,
so he already had his axis based on the reflective,
automatic mind, and the transparent, not transparent,
but their focus on the marketing
and public policy.
So we believed that we extended this
to the more technological context.
And we have indeed compared some of the categories
that we have.
So for instance, we did niche's model
and there are some categories that might overlap,
but we classified these categories
based on why they work.
So the cognitive values is,
so it's hard to make the decisions
between nudges and the specific categories.
And also some nudges can be designed in different ways,
so it's real hard to position it in one specific category.
So I will say that the GI can overlap other taxonomies.
- [Man] And I was just wondering if you were able
to say something about,
so the papers that you reviewed,
what kind of theories did they use themselves?
So did they just use the term nudge
or did they rely on other psychological theories
to build these nudges in the first place?
- No, actually I think only four of the papers
they refer to the term nudging.
So we found that all of them used the persuasive strategies,
but they actually do not build on this concept of nudging.
They don't actually refers on why this work.
So the concept is so vast
and the literature is so vast
that it's hard to narrow down to specific nudging technique,
but no we haven't because only three or four really related
and mentioning the nudging strategies.
- [Man] Okay, let's thank our speaker once again.
(applause)