Tid$$ 10:00)10:10' Velkommen'1l'dagen,'v.'projektgruppen' P)G' 10:10)11:00' Pause'10'min' Oplæg'om'nudge)1lgangen'1l'adfærdsforandring'+'Introduk1on'af'BeAST) modellen' KS' 11:10)11:30' Introduk1on'1l'case'og'problemiden1fika1on' KS' 11:30)12:00' Deltagerne'arbejder'med'problemiden1fika1on' Frokost'60'min' 13:00)13:20' Introduk1on'1l'diagnos1cering' KS' 13:20)13:50' Deltagerne'arbejder'med'diagnos1cering' Pause'10'min' 14:00)14:20' Introduk1on'1l'løsningsudvikling' KS' 14:20)14:50' Deltagerne'arbejder'med'løsningsudvikling' 14:50)15:00' Oplæg'om'test' KS' Pause'15'min' 15:15)15:45' Deltagerne'præsenterer/diskuterer'løsninger' Plenum' 15:45)16:00' Projektgruppens'erfaringer' P)G' KARSTEN SCHMIDT, PHD FELLOW ISSP THE INITIATIVE FOR SCIENCE, SOCIETY & POLICY INUDGEYOU TEAM (WWW.INUDGEYOU.COM) THE DANISH NUDGING NETWORK KARSTEN@INUDGEYOU.COM 1'
www.inudgeyou.com 2'
The smaller the piece the healthier consumption a choice architectural experiment in behavioral nutrition Hansen PG; Skov LR; Schmidt K; Skov KL; Mikkelsen BE; Pérez-Cueto FJA (2013) 3'
Skov LR; Schmidt K; Hansen PG; Skov KL; Mikkelsen BE; Pérez-Cueto FJA (2013) The smaller the piece the healthier consumption a choice architectural experiment in behavioral nutrition Apple vs. Cake biases Ordningseffekt - tendensen til at tage og spise mere af det der står forrest Deskriptiv norm - tendensen til at opfatte det dominerende som normsættende Enheds bias - tendensen til at opfatte en enhed af et givent produkt som den passende og optimale størrelse/mængde Barriere reduktion tendens til at reduktion af selv minimale barrierer fører til en uforbeholden stigning i handlingens attraktion 4'
Skov LR; Schmidt K; Hansen PG; Skov KL; Mikkelsen BE; Pérez-Cueto FJA (2013) The smaller the piece the healthier consumption a choice architectural experiment in behavioral nutrition Average$consump2on$per$person$measured$in$ whole$of$cake$and$apples$respec2vely$ 0.9' 0.8' 0.7' 0.6' 0.5' 0.4' 0.3' 0.2' 0.1' 0' Cake$vs.$Brownies$in$the$Opera$2013$ Cake'consump1on' Apple'consump1on' Control' Reduced'size' Skov LR; Schmidt K; Hansen PG; Skov KL; Mikkelsen BE; Pérez-Cueto FJA (2013) The smaller the piece the healthier consumption a choice architectural experiment in behavioral nutrition 5'
Grams$per$person$ 45' 40' 35' 30' 25' 20' 15' 10' 5' 0' Cake$vs.$Brownies$in$the$Opera$2013$ Standard' Interven1on' Skov LR; Schmidt K; Hansen PG; Skov KL; Mikkelsen BE; Pérez-Cueto FJA (2013) The smaller the piece the healthier consumption a choice architectural experiment in behavioral nutrition 1800' Cake$vs.$Brownies$in$the$Opera$2013$ 1600' 1400' 1200' Kilo$Jules$ 1000' 800' 600' 400' 200' 0' Total'energy'intake'per'person'(KJ)' Skov LR; Schmidt K; Hansen PG; Skov KL; Mikkelsen BE; Pérez-Cueto FJA (2013) The smaller the piece the healthier consumption a choice architectural experiment in behavioral nutrition 6'
Table over energy use for different activities Activity KJ/10 minutes Watching TV 33 Kissing 34 Doing the dishes by hand 71 Vacuuming 80 Brushing teeth 80 Playing music 85 Playing volleyball 95 Playing Frisbee 100 Source: Become your own food detective Danish Board of Product Facts Interventionsstigen Elimination af valg Indirekte regulering: negative sanktioner Indirekte regulering: positive sanktioner Holdningspåvirkning Information Adapted from Public Health: Ethical Issues Nuffield Council on Bioethics, (2007) Cambridge Publishers Ltd., p. 42 7'
Decision-making and behavioral biases Anchoring the common human tendency to rely too heavily, or "anchor," on one trait or piece of information when making decisions. Attentional Bias implicit cognitive bias defined as the tendency of emotionally dominant stimuli in one's environment to preferentially draw and hold attention. Backfire effect - Evidence disconfirming our beliefs only strengthens them. Bandwagon effect the tendency to do (or believe) things because many other people do (or believe) the same. Related to groupthink and herd behavior. Bias blind spot the tendency to see oneself as less biased than other people. [2] Choice-supportive bias the tendency to remember one's choices as better than they actually were. [3] Confirmation bias the tendency to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions. [4] Congruence bias the tendency to test hypotheses exclusively through direct testing, in contrast to tests of possible alternative hypotheses. Contrast effect the enhancement or diminishing of a weight or other measurement when compared with a recently observed contrasting object. [5] Denomination effect the tendency to spend more money when it is denominated in small amounts (e.g. coins) rather than large amounts (e.g. bills). [6] Distinction bias the tendency to view two options as more dissimilar when evaluating them simultaneously than when evaluating them separately. [7] Empathy gap - the tendency to underestimate the influence or strength of feelings, in either oneself or others. Endowment effect "the fact that people often demand much more to give up an object than they would be willing to pay to acquire it". [8] Experimenter's or Expectation bias the tendency for experimenters to believe, certify, and publish data that agree with their expectations for the outcome of an experiment, and to disbelieve, discard, or downgrade the corresponding weightings for data that appear to conflict with those expectations. [9] Focusing effect the tendency to place too much importance on one aspect of an event; causes error in accurately predicting the utility of a future outcome. [10] Framing effect drawing different conclusions from the same information, depending on how that information is presented. Hostile media effect - the tendency to see a media report as being biased due to one's own strong partisan views. Hyperbolic discounting the tendency for people to have a stronger preference for more immediate payoffs relative to later payoffs, where the tendency increases the closer to the present both payoffs are. [11] Illusion of control the tendency to overestimate one's degree of influence over other external events. [12] Impact bias the tendency to overestimate the length or the intensity of the impact of future feeling states. [13] Information bias the tendency to seek information even when it cannot affect action. [14] Irrational escalation the phenomenon where people justify increased investment in a decision, based on the cumulative prior investment, despite new evidence suggesting that the decision was probably wrong. Loss aversion "the disutility of giving up an object is greater than the utility associated with acquiring it". [15] (see also Sunk cost effects and Endowment effect). Mere exposure effect the tendency to express undue liking for things merely because of familiarity with them. [16] Money illusion the tendency to concentrate on the nominal (face value) of money rather than its value in terms of purchasing power. [17] Moral credential effect the tendency of a track record of non-prejudice to increase subsequent prejudice. Negativity bias the tendency to pay more attention and give more weight to negative than positive experiences or other kinds of information. Neglect of probability the tendency to completely disregard probability when making a decision under uncertainty. [18] Normalcy bias the refusal to plan for, or react to, a disaster which has never happened before. Omission bias the tendency to judge harmful actions as worse, or less moral, than equally harmful omissions (inactions). [19] Outcome bias the tendency to judge a decision by its eventual outcome instead of based on the quality of the decision at the time it was made. Planning fallacy the tendency to underestimate task-completion times. [13] Post-purchase rationalization the tendency to persuade oneself through rational argument that a purchase was a good value. Pseudocertainty effect the tendency to make risk-averse choices if the expected outcome is positive, but make risk-seeking choices to avoid negative outcomes. [20] Reactance the urge to do the opposite of what someone wants you to do out of a need to resist a perceived attempt to constrain your freedom of choice. Restraint bias the tendency to overestimate one's ability to show restraint in the face of temptation. Selective perception the tendency for expectations to affect perception. Semmelweis reflex the tendency to reject new evidence that contradicts a paradigm. [21] Social comparison bias the tendency, when making hiring decisions, to favour potential candidates who don't compete with one's own particular strengths. [22] 8'
nudge Et nudge er en samlebetegnelse for forsøg på at påvirke menneskers valg og adfærd i forudsigelige retninger uafhængigt af 1) at begrænse deres valgmuligheder, eller 2) ændre afgørende ved handlingsalternativernes omkostninger (herunder økonomi, tid, besvær, social sanktioner, o. lign.) baseret på antagelsen at kognitive bias påvirker individuel og sociale beslutninger og adfærd, og som gør brug af disse som integrerede dele af sådanne forsøg. Hansen, PG & Jespersen, AM (2013) Nudge & The Manipulation of Choice A Framework for the Responsible Use of the Nudge Approach to Behaviour Change in Public Policy, The European Journal of Risk Regulation, Volume 1, 2013, 3-28 Adfærds) økonomi' Kogni1v' Psykologi' Anvendt' nudge' adfærds)' forskning' Social' Psykologi' Hansen, PG (Forthcoming 2014) The New Policy ABC: Applied Behavioural science. 9'
ADFÆRDSINDSIGTER DUAL PROCESS THEORY 1. Sloman'S.A.'(1996)'The'empirical'case'for'two'systems'of'reasoning.'Psychological+Bulle/n,'119,'3)22.' 2. Kahneman'D.'(2003)'A'perspec1ve'on'judgement'and'choice.'American+Psychologist.'58,'697)720.' 3. Evans,'J.'(2003).'"In'two'minds:'dual)process'accounts'of'reasoning".'TRENDS+in+Cogni/ve+Sciences'7'(10).' 4. Stanovich,'K'E.;'West,'R'F.'(2000).'"Individual'difference'in'reasoning:'implica1ons'for'the'ra1onality'debate?".'Behavioural+and+ Brain+Sciences'23:'645 726.' 5. Stupple,'E.;'Waterhouse'(2009).'"Nega1ons'In'Syllogis1c'Reasoning:'Evidence'for'a'Heuris1c')'analy1c'Conflict".'The+Quarterly+ Journal+of+Experimental+Psychology'62'(8).' 10'
34 x 52 = Det automatiske system, der er ubevidst, intuitivt og næsten omkostningsfrit. Det refleksive system der er bevidst, analytisk og kræver en masse koncentration. 11'
Shiv, B. & A. Fedorikhin (1999) Heart and Mind in Conflict: the Interplay of Affect and Cognition in Consumer Decision Making, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 26, No. 3 (December 1999) (pp. 278-292) 12'
SAVE MORE TOMORROW Thaler, R & Benatzi, S (2004) Save More Tomorrow: Using Behavioral Economics to Increase Employee Saving, Journal of Political Economy, 2004, vol. 112, no. 1, pt. 2 13'
Tabsaversion $50 now $80 1 year value time Hyperbolic discounting Pelle'Guldborg'Hansen ' 14'
15'
Footprints$Fiolstræde$ 100%' 90%' 80%' 70%' 60%' 50%' 40%' 30%' 20%' 10%' 0%' 19,3'%' 9,1'%' Control' 26,3'%' 4,9'%' Treatment' Dustbins' Liler' Unacc.' 16'
HVORDAN GØR MAN? nudge Et nudge er en samlebetegnelse for forsøg på at påvirke menneskers valg og adfærd i forudsigelige retninger uafhængigt af 1) at begrænse deres valgmuligheder, eller 2) ændre afgørende ved handlingsalternativernes omkostninger (herunder økonomi, tid, besvær, social sanktioner, o. lign.) baseret på antagelsen at kognitive bias påvirker individuel og sociale beslutninger og adfærd, og som gør brug af disse som integrerede dele af sådanne forsøg. Hansen, PG & Jespersen, AM (2013) Nudge & The Manipulation of Choice A Framework for the Responsible Use of the Nudge Approach to Behaviour Change in Public Policy, The European Journal of Risk Regulation, Volume 1, 2013, 3-28 17'
Interventionsstigen Elimination af valg Indirekte regulering: negative sanktioner Indirekte regulering: positive sanktioner Holdningspåvirkning Information Adapted from Public Health: Ethical Issues Nuffield Council on Bioethics, (2007) Cambridge Publishers Ltd., p. 42 The BASEline Model Analysis$(diagnosis)$ '! Psykologiske'hypoteser'! Diverse'former'for' hypotesetests' Eksperiment$ '! Prototype'! Laboratorie'eksperiment'! Felteksperiment'! Udrulning' B' A' S' E' Behavioural$mapping$$ '! Problemiden1fika1on'! Adfærdsreduk1on'! Adfærdskortlægning' Solu2on$mapping$ '! Research'! Tilpasning'! E1k' 18'
Tid$$ 10:00)10:10' Velkommen'1l'dagen,'v.'projektgruppen' P)G' 10:10)11:00' Pause'10'min' Oplæg'om'nudge)1lgangen'1l'adfærdsforandring'+'Introduk1on'af'BeAST) modellen' KS' 11:10)11:30' Introduk1on'1l'case'og'problemiden1fika1on' KS' 11:30)12:00' Frokost'60'min' Deltagerne'arbejder'med'problemiden1fika1on' 13:00)13:20' Introduk1on'1l'diagnos1cering' KS' 13:20)13:50' Pause'10'min' Deltagerne'arbejder'med'diagnos1cering' 14:00)14:20' Introduk1on'1l'løsningsudvikling' KS' 14:20)14:50' Deltagerne'arbejder'med'løsningsudvikling' 14:50)15:00' Oplæg'om'test' KS' Pause'15'min' 15:15)15:45' Deltagerne'præsenterer/diskuterer'løsninger' Plenum' 15:45)16:00' Projektgruppens'erfaringer' P)G' The BASEline Model Analysis$(diagnosis)$ '! Psykologiske'hypoteser'! Diverse'former'for' hypotesetests' Eksperiment$ '! Prototype'! Laboratorie'eksperiment'! Felteksperiment'! Udrulning' B' A' S' E' Behavioural$mapping$$ '! Problemiden1fika1on'! Adfærdsreduk1on'! Adfærdskortlægning' Solu2on$mapping$ '! Research'! Tilpasning'! E1k' 19'
The BASEline Model Analysis$(diagnosis)$ '! Psykologiske'hypoteser'! Diverse'former'for' hypotesetests' Eksperiment$ '! Prototype'! Laboratorie'eksperiment'! Felteksperiment'! Udrulning' A' B' A' S' E' Behavioural$mapping$$ '! Problemiden1fika1on'! Adfærdsreduk1on'! Adfærdskortlægning' Solu2on$mapping$ '! Research'! Tilpasning'! E1k' Touch$point$ Adfærd$ Data$ 20'
PROBLEM- IDENTIFIKATION Table over energy use for different activities Activity Organisatorisk'problem' Watching TV 33 Kissing 34 Doing the dishes by hand 71 Vacuuming 80 Brushing teeth 80 Playing music 85 Playing volleyball 95 Playing Frisbee 100 KJ/10 minutes Adfærdsproblemer' Adfærdsmønstre''' Source: Become your own food detective Danish Board of Product Facts 21'
Smokeless Terminals Hansen PG; Schmidt K; Andersen, L; Skov KL (2013) ORGANISATORISK PROBLEM (OPGAVE 1) 22'
ADFÆRDSPROBLEMER (OPGAVE 2) 23'
24'
25'
EVALUERE KRITERIER (OPGAVE 3) Er adfærden uhensigtsmæssig? Touch point? Skalérbarhed? Særlige grunde? ' 26'
VÆLGE ET PROBLEM/ ARBEJDSOMRÅDE 27'
DATA 28'
Hvor kommer rygerne fra? 15% 85% ½ Typer og fordeling af transgressioner 37% 12% ' 3% 48% 29'
31% 12% Lidt bagage Ingen bagage Personale Meget bagage 27% 30% fysisk'understølelse' 82% 44% 30'
KONTEKSTER Sol Læ for vind Andre rygere' Vægge' Hjørner' Bænke' Terror sten' Skodder' Askesteder' Skraldespande' 31'
ADFÆRDSMØNSTER?'?'?'?' 32'
CASE' Touch$point$ Adfærd$ Data$ 33'
Tid$$ 10:00)10:10' Velkommen'1l'dagen,'v.'projektgruppen' P)G' 10:10)11:00' Pause'10'min' Oplæg'om'nudge)1lgangen'1l'adfærdsforandring'+'Introduk1on'af'BeAST) modellen' KS' 11:10)11:30' Introduk1on'1l'case'og'problemiden1fika1on' KS' 11:30)12:00' Frokost'60'min' Deltagerne'arbejder'med'problemiden1fika1on' 13:00)13:20' Introduk1on'1l'diagnos1cering' KS' 13:20)13:50' Pause'10'min' Deltagerne'arbejder'med'diagnos1cering' 14:00)14:20' Introduk1on'1l'løsningsudvikling' KS' 14:20)14:50' Deltagerne'arbejder'med'løsningsudvikling' 14:50)15:00' Oplæg'om'test' KS' Pause'15'min' 15:15)15:45' Deltagerne'præsenterer/diskuterer'løsninger' Plenum' 15:45)16:00' Projektgruppens'erfaringer' P)G' DIAGNOSTICERING 34'
The BASEline Model Analysis$(diagnosis)$ '! Psykologiske'hypoteser'! Diverse'former'for' hypotesetests' Eksperiment$ '! Prototype'! Laboratorie'eksperiment'! Felteksperiment'! Udrulning' B' A' S' E' Behavioural$mapping$$ '! Problemiden1fika1on'! Adfærdsreduk1on'! Adfærdskortlægning' Solu2on$mapping$ '! Research'! Tilpasning'! E1k' Decision-making and behavioral biases Anchoring the common human tendency to rely too heavily, or "anchor," on one trait or piece of information when making decisions. Attentional Bias implicit cognitive bias defined as the tendency of emotionally dominant stimuli in one's environment to preferentially draw and hold attention. Backfire effect - Evidence disconfirming our beliefs only strengthens them. Bandwagon effect the tendency to do (or believe) things because many other people do (or believe) the same. Related to groupthink and herd behavior. Bias blind spot the tendency to see oneself as less biased than other people. [2] Choice-supportive bias the tendency to remember one's choices as better than they actually were. [3] Confirmation bias the tendency to search for or interpret information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions. [4] Congruence bias the tendency to test hypotheses exclusively through direct testing, in contrast to tests of possible alternative hypotheses. Contrast effect the enhancement or diminishing of a weight or other measurement when compared with a recently observed contrasting object. [5] Denomination effect the tendency to spend more money when it is denominated in small amounts (e.g. coins) rather than large amounts (e.g. bills). [6] Distinction bias the tendency to view two options as more dissimilar when evaluating them simultaneously than when evaluating them separately. [7] Empathy gap - the tendency to underestimate the influence or strength of feelings, in either oneself or others. Endowment effect "the fact that people often demand much more to give up an object than they would be willing to pay to acquire it". [8] Experimenter's or Expectation bias the tendency for experimenters to believe, certify, and publish data that agree with their expectations for the outcome of an experiment, and to disbelieve, discard, or downgrade the corresponding weightings for data that appear to conflict with those expectations. [9] Focusing effect the tendency to place too much importance on one aspect of an event; causes error in accurately predicting the utility of a future outcome. [10] Framing effect drawing different conclusions from the same information, depending on how that information is presented. Hostile media effect - the tendency to see a media report as being biased due to one's own strong partisan views. Hyperbolic discounting the tendency for people to have a stronger preference for more immediate payoffs relative to later payoffs, where the tendency increases the closer to the present both payoffs are. [11] Illusion of control the tendency to overestimate one's degree of influence over other external events. [12] Impact bias the tendency to overestimate the length or the intensity of the impact of future feeling [13] 35'
HVORFOR? no. 1 Out of focus Central vs. perifer fokus 36'
Central vs. perifært fokus 37'
Fokus og DPT Affordance hvad noget er til 38'
39'
Natural mapping Naturlig afbildning 40'
Intuitiv kodning & forcing functions 41'
Nudge: Psykologiske aspekter af handling 42'
BJ'Fogg s'ac1on'model' High'mo1va1on' Mo1va1on' handlingsfelt' Low'mo1va1on' Low'ability' Ability' High'ability' Trigger 43'
Triggers 44'
BJ'Fogg s'ac1on'model' High'mo1va1on' Mo1va1on' handlingsfelt' Low'mo1va1on' Low'ability' Ability' High'ability' Ability: Barrierer 45'
The smaller the piece the healthier consumption a choice architectural experiment in behavioral nutrition Hansen PG; Skov LR; Schmidt K; Skov KL; Mikkelsen BE; Pérez-Cueto FJA (2013) Skov LR; Schmidt K; Hansen PG; Skov KL; Mikkelsen BE; Pérez-Cueto FJA (2013) The smaller the piece the healthier consumption a choice architectural experiment in behavioral nutrition 46'
BJ'Fogg s'ac1on'model' High'mo1va1on' Mo1va1on' handlingsfelt' Low'mo1va1on' Low'ability' Ability' High'ability' 47'
Motivation SAVE MORE TOMORROW 48'
Thaler, R & Benatzi, S (2004) Save More Tomorrow: Using Behavioral Economics to Increase Employee Saving, Journal of Political Economy, 2004, vol. 112, no. 1, pt. 2 Tabsaversion 49'
$50 now $80 1 year value time Hyperbolic discounting Pelle'Guldborg'Hansen ' Smokeless Terminals Hansen PG; Schmidt K; Andersen, L; Skov KL (2013) 50'
51'
52'
Sol Vind Andre rygere' Vægge' Hjørner' Bænke' Terrors ten' Skodder' Askesteder' Skraldespande' 53'
CASE' Tid$$ 10:00)10:10' Velkommen'1l'dagen,'v.'projektgruppen' P)G' 10:10)11:00' Pause'10'min' Oplæg'om'nudge)1lgangen'1l'adfærdsforandring'+'Introduk1on'af'BeAST) modellen' KS' 11:10)11:30' Introduk1on'1l'case'og'problemiden1fika1on' KS' 11:30)12:00' Frokost'60'min' Deltagerne'arbejder'med'problemiden1fika1on' 13:00)13:20' Introduk1on'1l'diagnos1cering' KS' 13:20)13:50' Pause'10'min' Deltagerne'arbejder'med'diagnos1cering' 14:00)14:20' Introduk1on'1l'løsningsudvikling' KS' 14:20)14:50' Deltagerne'arbejder'med'løsningsudvikling' 14:50)15:00' Oplæg'om'test' KS' Pause'15'min' 15:15)15:45' Deltagerne'præsenterer/diskuterer'løsninger' Plenum' 15:45)16:00' Projektgruppens'erfaringer' P)G' 54'
LØSNINGSUDVIKLING The BASEline Model Analysis$(diagnosis)$ '! Psykologiske'hypoteser'! Diverse'former'for' hypotesetests' Eksperiment$ '! Prototype'! Laboratorie'eksperiment'! Felteksperiment'! Udrulning' B' A' A' S' E' Behavioural$mapping$$ '! Problemiden1fika1on'! Adfærdsreduk1on'! Adfærdskortlægning' Solu2on$mapping$ '! Research'! Tilpasning'! E1k' 55'
Handlinger BJ'Fogg s'ac1on'model' High'mo1va1on' Mo1va1on' handlingsfelt' Low'mo1va1on' Low'ability' Ability' High'ability' 56'
Trigger 57'
Trigger: Implementationintentions 58'
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN FOR MOTIVATION AND INTENTION IMPLEMENTATIONS IN BEHAVIOR CHANGE Sample & Basic design Experimental conditions Predicted effects Unrelated literature Baseline Control 248 Undergraduates over a 2 week period Motivation pamphlet Motivation Equal to baseline Motivation + Implementation pamphlet Implementation Higher tendency to exercise Some participants were not included, as they did not complete the questionnaires. No difference in previous exercise tendency inudgeyou' 'Nudge'101' Participants were randomly assigned to groups Self reported behavior and intentions S.'Milne,'S.'Orbell,'P.'Sheeran'(2012);'Combining'mo1va1onal'and'voli1onal'interven1ons'to'promote'exercise'par1cipa1on:'Protec1on' mo1va1on'theory'andimplementa1on'inten1ons;'bri1sh'journal'of'health'psychology'2002,'7,'pp'163)184' 100% 90% Percentage of group that exercised 91% N = 248 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 38% 35% 20% inudgeyou' 'Nudge'101' Control' Mo1va1on' Mo1va1on'+' Implementa1on' inten1ons' S.'Milne,'S.'Orbell,'P.'Sheeran'(2012);'Combining'mo1va1onal'and'voli1onal'interven1ons'to'promote'exercise'par1cipa1on:'Protec1on' mo1va1on'theory'andimplementa1on'inten1ons;'bri1sh'journal'of'health'psychology'2002,'7,'pp'163)184' 59'
BJ'Fogg s'ac1on'model' High'mo1va1on' Mo1va1on' handlingsfelt' Low'mo1va1on' Low'ability' Ability' High'ability' Ability: Barrierer 60'
61'
62'
BJ'Fogg s'ac1on'model' High'mo1va1on' Mo1va1on' handlingsfelt' Low'mo1va1on' Low'ability' Ability' High'ability' Motivation: Holdninger 63'
ADFÆRDSINDSIGTER III VANER & RUTINER 64'
ROUTINE' FEEDBACK' TRIGGER' SUCCESS' FEEDBACK' Smokeless Terminals Hansen PG; Schmidt K; Andersen, L; Skov KL (2013) 65'
10$m$ Salience (synlighed) Intuitiv kodning 66'
Affordance (Fysisk understøttelse) Feedback Salience (synlighed) Intuitiv kodning 67'
Affordance (fysisk understøttelse) Subs2tu2ng$injunc2on$for$prohibi2on$decreases$inconsiderate$ smoking$by$more$than$50%$in$a$field$experiment$ 60.00%' 56.28%' 50.00%' 40.00%' 30.00%' 26.46%' 20.00%' 10.00%' 0.00%' Pre)' N=$1695 $ $$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$N$=$1489$$ Subs/tu/on+was+achieved+by+three+layered+nudgeIinterven/on+based+on+intui/ve+coding,+reIarrangement+of+ environmental+affordances+and+publicly+salient+(spotlight+effect)+injunc/on+zones.'+++' Source:'Hansen,'Schmidt,'Andersen'and'Skov'(forthcoming)'' Post)' 68'
CASE' Tid$$ 10:00)10:10' Velkommen'1l'dagen,'v.'projektgruppen' P)G' 10:10)11:00' Pause'10'min' Oplæg'om'nudge)1lgangen'1l'adfærdsforandring'+'Introduk1on'af'BeAST) modellen' KS' 11:10)11:30' Introduk1on'1l'case'og'problemiden1fika1on' KS' 11:30)12:00' Frokost'60'min' Deltagerne'arbejder'med'problemiden1fika1on' 13:00)13:20' Introduk1on'1l'diagnos1cering' KS' 13:20)13:50' Pause'10'min' Deltagerne'arbejder'med'diagnos1cering' 14:00)14:20' Introduk1on'1l'løsningsudvikling' KS' 14:20)14:50' Deltagerne'arbejder'med'løsningsudvikling' 14:50)15:00' Oplæg'om'test' KS' Pause'15'min' 15:15)15:45' Deltagerne'præsenterer/diskuterer'løsninger' Plenum' 15:45)16:00' Projektgruppens'erfaringer' P)G' 69'
Tid$$ 10:00)10:10' Velkommen'1l'dagen,'v.'projektgruppen' P)G' 10:10)11:00' Pause'10'min' Oplæg'om'nudge)1lgangen'1l'adfærdsforandring'+'Introduk1on'af'BeAST) modellen' KS' 11:10)11:30' Introduk1on'1l'case'og'problemiden1fika1on' KS' 11:30)12:00' Frokost'60'min' Deltagerne'arbejder'med'problemiden1fika1on' 13:00)13:20' Introduk1on'1l'diagnos1cering' KS' 13:20)13:50' Pause'10'min' Deltagerne'arbejder'med'diagnos1cering' 14:00)14:20' Introduk1on'1l'løsningsudvikling' KS' 14:20)14:50' Deltagerne'arbejder'med'løsningsudvikling' 14:50)15:00' Oplæg'om'test' KS' Pause'15'min' 15:15)15:45' Deltagerne'præsenterer/diskuterer'løsninger' Plenum' 15:45)16:00' Projektgruppens'erfaringer' P)G' TEST 70'
DATAINDSAMLING FORSØGSDESIGN 71'
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) Post-test-only RCT 1) Set up an experimental group and a control group using random assignment. 2) The experimental group gets the treatment ; the control group gets no special treatment. 3) Give post-tests to both groups and compare results. 72'