Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made
•Télécharger en tant que PPTX, PDF•
0 j'aime•231 vues
This document examines how human decision making is often faulty and guided by psychological biases. It discusses how decisions are affected by cognitive limitations like limited attention and a focus on minimizing effort. Common biases that influence decisions are discussed such as optimism bias, availability bias, and loss aversion. The document also explores how decisions are impacted by emotions like anxiety and a preference for immediate rewards. It argues designers should consider these behavioral tendencies and design experiences that counter biases in a way that supports rather than manipulates user behavior and choices.
Recommandé
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
En vedette
En vedette (20)
Similaire à Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made
Similaire à Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made (20)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made
- 1. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made
- 2. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made Decision making as a window to all behavior The faulty nature of decision making Underlying causes Affects on user behavior and performance Design support
- 3. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made Source: CBS. This photo is used here for personal, non-commercial use.
- 4. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made Source: CBS. This photo is used here for personal, non-commercial use.
- 5. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made Illustration by Julia Suits. This illustration is used here for personal, non-commercial use.
- 6. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made We are designed to minimize effort and optimize performance… even in the most critical life decisions… For example: the #1 financial goal of Americans is having enough money to retire Just over half of adult Americans are saving anything for retirement 50% of 45-50 year olds have saved less than $25,000 for retirement CDC: 80 percent of American adults don't get recommended exercise 4 of 5 people sign up for gym memberships but don’t use them 80-95 percent of dieters regain everything they lost within three years
- 7. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made Where I am Where I want to be
- 8. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made Is it a software or hardware problem? load anxiety near-term focus
- 9. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made When faced with a difficult question, we often answer an easier one… Based on a limited pool of attentional resources, we tend to be cognitive misers heuristics and simple rules optimism bias availability bias simplify choices anchoring bias satisficing
- 10. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made Load: availability bias (“recency” effect) ๏ The demand for earthquake insurance or flood insurance goes up after an earthquake or flood ๏ After 9/11, some insurance companies offered terrorism insurance at a higher price than the same amount of insurance for death due to any reason – including terrorism (Source: http://www.casact.org/education/infocus/2011/handouts/GS1-Guszcza.pdf)
- 11. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made Load: limit options and control disclosure ๏ As designers, do we present every possibility, or control disclosure? Source: The Cheesecake Factory. This screenshot is used here for personal, non-commercial use.A restaurant that only offers one meal: steak and chips Medicare.gov “Summary of Your Search Results” 50 plans available 8 independent filters Cognitive Load Source: Medicare.gov. This screenshot is used here for personal, non-commercial use. Source: Kayak. This screenshot is used here for personal, non-commercial use. Source: Progressive. This screenshot is used here for personal, non-commercial use.
- 12. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made What happens if we don’t? confirmational bias selective omission avoidance behavior tunnel vision or cognitive narrowing
- 13. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made Emotional impact: anxiety Source: stress.lovetoknow.com/pictures-people-generalized-anxiety-disorder#3. This image is used here for personal, non-commercial use. ๏ Provide the buyer with logical, rational, simple filters ๏ Don’t enable this process to play out emotionally or irrationally in the subconscious Source: Zillow. This screenshot is used here for personal, non-commercial use.
- 14. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made Emotional impact: loss aversion Source: ESPN. This photo is used here for personal, non-commercial use.Source: ESPN. This photo is used here for personal, non-commercial use. ๏ "Losing feels worse than winning feels good." - Bill Parcells, NFL Super Bowl winning coach Source: Cohen’s Corner Sports. This photo is used here for personal, non-commercial use. Source: Franklin Templeton Investments. This image is used here for personal, non-commercial use.
- 15. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made Emotional impact: loss aversion ๏ Can you pay people to lose weight? Money is a big motivator ๏ We are motivated by immediate awards. Tying an award – a discounted health insurance premium - to a future paycheck is not very motivating ๏ HealthyWage. We are more motivated by losses than gains. We don’t want to lose something we already have, such as $720 put into a weight- loss bet. That is a motivator. ๏ Loss aversion can work if we frame what people may lose ($720) by choosing the non-desired option (not losing weight) Source: HealthyWage. This image is used here for personal, non-commercial use.
- 16. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made Emotional impact: self-facilitation Source: The Telegraph. This image is used here for personal, non- commercial use. When we make a purchase, we are making a decision
- 17. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made Behavioral economists credit this to an evolutionary bias for near-term survival We should be planning for retirement… …but, that sports car sure looks good in the driveway today
- 18. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made at time of purchase when using the product Two days later…
- 19. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made For example, while interviewing a future user for the previous slide’s product the conversation might go like this: “I can understand why you like those buttons − you know, I love buttons too, but (pause…) humor me for a moment. What if we designed a device with fewer buttons, but with a lower cost and increased ease of use?” “Here, let me show you……” In other words, I swapped out the “false value” of buttons for the real human value of investment costs − time and money.
- 20. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made Design to support “real people” rather than a mythological, rational, logical, agent Consider these behaviors in our interactions with users in the field Seek to counter these persistent psychological forces without venturing too far down the slippery slope of nudging
- 21. Faulty by Design: A Psychological Examination of How Our Decisions Are Guided and Made Faulty by Design ๏ Dr. Bill Gribbons Director of the Graduate Human Factors Program, Bentley University Twitter: @wgribbons ๏ Bob Thomas Director of User Experience, Liberty Mutual Insurance Twitter: @bobthomas
Notes de l'éditeur
- Are we making good decisions when it comes to thing to buy, including big-ticket items, like a car or a house? Classical economics says we are good at it. It holds that we’re all rational human beings, We’re all driven by self-interest and know exactly what we want, We think about the pros and cons of everything before we make a decision, including a purchase decision. I know WHY I bought that house I know everything covered on my car insurance policy. I have a 401K strategy. ----- Meeting Notes (6/2/16 00:33) ----- Are we making good decisions when it comes to thing to buy, including big-ticket items, like a car or a house? Are we good at it?
- But these assumptions break down because we don’t make decisions consciously. We’re emotional and irrational. Think gut reactions. ----- Meeting Notes (6/2/16 00:34) ----- But these assumptions break down because we don’t make decisions consciously. We’re emotional and irrational. Think gut reactions.
- Kahmeman, System 1: Feeling or intuition. Fast automatic. Survival. System 2: rational though. Slow, ponderous. Calculating a tip. Kahneman claims that most of our “thinking”(95%) is actually done through System 1: quick, by instinct. Why is this important? Because companies today understand that most users don’t know the ‘HOW” and “WHY” behind their purchase decisions – including buying a house, paying for a car insurance policy, selecting options in our 401K plans. System 1 helps us survive, and we’ve evolved to do that. We’re not optimized for System 2, where we labor over every decision. We think we may be using System 2 most of the time, but we really aren’t –and that makes us wrongly overly confident in our decision making. So we as UX professionals have to optimize for System 2 through design. We have to design for the way real people think and support it in the real world. That is, we as UX professionals, have to augment people’s thinking – or lack thereof – with scaffolding or design supports that help our customers make the best decisions for themselves
- Quote is from Rothman R L, Housam R, Weiss H, Davis D, Gregory R, Gebretsadik T, Elasy T A. Patient understanding of food labels: The role of literacy and numeracy. Am J Prev Med. 2006;31(5), 391-8.; Kutner M, Greenberg E, Jin, Y, Paulsen C. The health literacy of America’s adults: Results from the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics 2006:483. EXAMPLE: DEFAULT CHOICES FOR 401K PLANS We design for logical, rational users. We’re bad at it. We need to devise solutions for real users to make up for our bad decision making. Rational is not the norm. Let’s stop blaming the user. This is natural behavior. CDC: 80 percent of American adults don't get recommended exercise 4 of 5 people sign up for gym memberships but don’t use them 80-95 percent of dieters regain everything they lost and then some within three years 80% of the New Years Resolutions crowd drops off by the second week of February. Meaning only 20% remain, and the rate of sign-ups tapers off by February (almost all of that initial spike, save for maybe 1-2% of total volume for the year.) Gyms typically sell memberships with the expectation that a mere 18% of people will actually use them. Meaning there is a 1/5 chance you'll use yours consistently for longer than a month.
- Confidence: humans are not good at making decisions. But people are overly confident about their decisions. People won’t give you truthful info. How much information is there.
- Heuristics and simple rules of thumb Heuristics are based on evidence and patterns Extended warranties are always bad Probability (availability bias): but your vacuum cleaner broke one week after your warranty expired
- Bill mentioned Load. pros and cons, we assess risks by how easy any examples come to mind Our assessments of risk can be biased by really memorable or recent personal experiences. We try to recall whether or not those risks are real recent plane crash in the news. 1 in 11 million probability. take out extra life insurance. Or drive. cognitive load issue. We put more weight on what is most recent, but it’s a small and not very representative sample. We are bad at calculating probability. Dark patterns. But insurance companies may know when someone is over buying – and may exploit this or trigger this availability bias in us. And RyanAir. So as consumers, we should take a look at and do business with those companies that help us make better decisions. And if we work as UX professionals for those companies, we need to help our customers and, in this age of social media, be more transparent or run the risk of going out of business. And I say this from experience. I work in the insurance industry, where people view us in the same regard as used-car dealers. If we don’t design solutions that help people make decisions, they’ll just move on to another company
- THE BEST WAY TO DEAL WITH LOAD. You don’t consider every possibility. Cheesecake factory, 20 page menu, The more options available, the higher expectations we have, and that can lead us to Buyer’s remorse. Medicare. So controlled disclosure is helpful. So are filters, or ways to reduce the number of options being displayed. But filters before you see the search results? Not helpful! Kayak. Buying car insurance is difficult And in the face of complexity, we may refuse to add car insurance coverages that may benefit us. I can choose the one for me But is this type of nudging good? Is it objective? In this case, Progressive has actually presented these choices, in this particular order, and has recommended the best choice to make. This is a behavioral economics theory, called relative choice, which reduces load. A behavior-based design is nudging people. We’re framing the choices for people and influencing people, maybe without them being aware of it. Sometimes companies do it in our best interests, and sometimes in theirs So is all nudging good? As we say in UX, it depends. Maybe it would be better to give people choices and let them decide without selecting the best choice for them
- Heuristics and simple rules of thumb Heuristics are based on evidence and patterns Extended warranties are always bad Probability (availability bias): but your vacuum cleaner broke one week after your warranty expired
- Anxiety consumes a lot of our resources. Without our minds controlling it, we would become paralyzed with inaction and just shut down. So the mind suppresses it. Tunnel vision: we consider fewer options. We don’t want to look at conflicting ideas and opinions. Let’s take buying a house. Maybe you’re buying a house you can’t afford. So the mind tells you, I’m only going to look at info that I can confirm, or avoid, or maybe omit. Because otherwise there‘s too much anxiety around so many possibilities So you tell yourself: Maybe I can’t afford that house, BUT you really want that house. Why? Is it a good investment? You don’t know, maybe you don’t care. It’s on the beach! That’s what you really care about. So you tell yourself… home values will appreciate. Our decision making is faulty, it has huge consequences for major purchases But there are design principles that can help us. For example, what Zillow does is it presents us with information, disclosing it in smaller categories, bit by bit, … and we can choose to look at it, or not look at it, and then make our decision. And Zillow helps us by progressively disclosing a little bit of info at a time. So this is a positive use of the availability bias, in that it makes recent information available to us in small doses, increasing the likelihood of our making a good decision.
- Loss Aversion is another emotional issues that weighs heavy on us. Nobody likes to lose. We place more psychological weight on LOSS than on a Gain. Especially when it comes to money. In the stock market, it means once the market starts tanking, we’ll panic and SELL! – probably at the wrong time. And not get back into that stock until after it goes up again. Bill Parcells, a coach in the National Football League, sums it up well: “Losing feels worse than winning feels good.” Sometimes it comes down to how you frame things. Do you frame your product or service as a loss or a gain? When you frame it in a positive way, more people opt in for it. Advertising meat as 80% lean will work. Advertising it as 20% fat, not so much.
- Companies can help us to leverage our aversion to loss when to comes to our health. People are motivated by getting an award immediately,” Telling people to look for a few extra bucks in a future paycheck due to a discounted health insurance premium, isn't very sexy, or motivating Healthy Wages: Here's how one wager worked: A customer put down about $60 a month, aiming to lose close to 100 pounds. If he achieved his goal, he'd double his money. And if he failed to meet his weight-loss goal, he'd lose his money, which would be donated to a charity. This customer’s aversion to losing the money he’d put into the bet turned out to be a powerful motivator. And this "loss aversion" is part of what makes this model successful. people [can be] more motivated by losses than gains. People don't want to lose something they already have. People feel loss aversion when they remember what they already have – in this case $720 – and what they’ll lose as a result of their actions Loss aversion can work if we frame what people may lose – in this case, $720 – by choosing the undesirable option (not losing weight)
- Our emotions drive us to make irrational purchases, like a Happy Meal when we’re not hungry or a Mocha Frappuccino when we’re not thirsty. We want to control ourselves but need support. So we’ll accept the controls that a financial company or a bank may facilitate for us One bank in the UK, HSBC, reminds customers to spend less and save more – by relying on their customers’ spending history Their mobile app will track customers’ income and spending, and give them a reminder before they go on a spending spree (self-control facilitation) It will also compare customers’ financial behavior with other customers who have similar incomes to offer tips on how to save more (social proof) So by helping us with our purchases, this bank is helping us make decisions
- We need to design for the way real people think and behave. We need to optimize for system 2, rational thought, and support our customers’ decision-making abilities through design Because our emotions and irrational thoughts are wrongly guiding us, we have to consider how people are making decisions using our products when we’re researching users in the field And finally, we need to counter all of these psychological forces by helping our customers make decisions for themselves, without framing or recommending the choices for them. And if we understand people’s thinking and behaviors, we can either exploit them with dark patterns or build transparent experiences that help people make the right decisions for themselves