1.
Brainvolve
–
Stop
Darmkanker
(http://www.brainvolve.com)
©
Steven
De
Blieck
2015,
no
unauthorized
copying,
reproduction
or
redistribution
1

2.
Brainvolve
–
Stop
Darmkanker
(http://www.brainvolve.com)
©
Steven
De
Blieck
2015,
no
unauthorized
copying,
reproduction
or
redistribution
2
About
Brainvolve
.....................................................................................................................
3
About
me
....................................................................................................................................
3
Goal
and
process
......................................................................................................................
4
Target
group
and
decisions
.................................................................................................
5
Bottlenecks
and
changes
......................................................................................................
8
Long-­‐term
advice
..............................................................................................................................
8
Internal
need
to
save
lives
...........................................................................................................................
9
Link
saving
lives
with
donating
.............................................................................................................
10
Donation
amount
..........................................................................................................................................
11
Less
painful
payment
..................................................................................................................................
11
Wanting
bigger
impact
and
esteem
by
friends
................................................................................
12
Short-­‐term
advice
...........................................................................................................................
14
References
...............................................................................................................................
16

3.
Brainvolve
–
Stop
Darmkanker
(http://www.brainvolve.com)
©
Steven
De
Blieck
2015,
no
unauthorized
copying,
reproduction
or
redistribution
3
About Brainvolve
Brainvolve
helps
you
guide
your
target
group’s
hidden
decision
process,
via
-­‐costless-­‐
technological
changes,
based
on
the
latest
behavior
science.
These
small
changes
immediately
produce
big
long-­‐
term
savings
in
your
costs
of
sales,
employee
health,
etc.
Brainvolve
also
builds
technological
solutions
based
on
the
latest
psychology
research
to
help
you
reach
company
goals
more
effectively
and
save
money.
As
an
example,
I'm
developing
a
solution
that
helps
organisations
avoid
bad
employee
health
by
using
behavioral
economics
research
in
a
digital
environment.
Contact
me
if
you
want
your
organisation
to
be
a
test-­‐case!.
About me
Hi,
my
name
is
Steven
De
Blieck.
It
is
fair
to
say
that
nobody
likes
long
texts,
so
I’ll
keep
this
as
short
as
I
can.
In
fact
this
sentence
itself
might
be
unnecessary.
I
am
specialised
in
linking
behavior
science
and
tech.
It
is
fascinating
to
see
how
far
apart
these
2
domains
are
sometimes,
and
how
this
costs
organisations
a
lot
of
money.
In
order
for
me
to
provide
this
service,
I
have
to
be
knowledgeable
in
two
domains,
computer
science
and
behavioral
science.
I
am
only
formally
educated
in
the
first
one,
through
my
university
education.
However,
I
have
read
extensively
into
the
latest
behavioral
science
research
-­‐
through
mentoring
of
a
domain
expert
-­‐
and
have
been
applying
it
in
my
previous
startup.
I
have
in
fact
become
obsessed
with
understanding
the
ins
and
outs
of
this
field.
As
a
consequence,
I’m
able
to
exhibit
the
dual
competencies
necessary
to
offer
highly
specialized
assistance.
(Oh,
by
the
way,
I
live
in
Belgium,
you
might
have
heard
of
it.)

4.
Brainvolve
–
Stop
Darmkanker
(http://www.brainvolve.com)
©
Steven
De
Blieck
2015,
no
unauthorized
copying,
reproduction
or
redistribution
4
Goal and process
The
end
goal
is
getting
Stop
Darmkanker
(SD)
more
donations
via
it’s
website.
In
order
to
do
this,
it
is
necessary
to
understand
the
target
group’s
hidden
decision
process,
so
consequently,
we
can
guide
it
towards
our
goal.
These
are
the
different
steps
we
will
go
through:

5.
Brainvolve
–
Stop
Darmkanker
(http://www.brainvolve.com)
©
Steven
De
Blieck
2015,
no
unauthorized
copying,
reproduction
or
redistribution
5
Target group and
decisions
The
first
and
most
important
step
is
to
draw
the
target
group’s
hidden
decision
sequence:
Above,
we
can
see
the
decision
sequence
of
a
person
making
the
decision
wether
or
not
do
donate
money
to
SD.
The
blue
and
gray
squares
are
states.
The
blue
ones
are
the
internal
states
of
the
person,
the
gray
ones
are
external
states
(in
this
case,
the
website
which
the
person
is
interacting
with).
The
arrows
that
connect
these
states
are
the
different
decision
and
actions
we
want
the
individual
to
make.
This
process
is
divided
into
different
steps,
based
on
the
latest
research
in
neuro-­‐economics.
Decision
sequence

6.
Brainvolve
–
Stop
Darmkanker
(http://www.brainvolve.com)
©
Steven
De
Blieck
2015,
no
unauthorized
copying,
reproduction
or
redistribution
6
Now,
where
the
real
potential
lies,
is
how
these
different
steps
in
each
decision
process
are
made.
Our
brain
is
not
able
to
make
all
our
decisions
consciously,
we
would
quickly
become
overloaded.
In
fact,
we
are
only
aware
of
a
small
percentage
of
our
decisions.
Even
stronger,
when
we
make
a
decision,
the
neurons
in
our
brain
fire
seconds
before
we
become
aware
of
it.1
It’s
like
our
brain
decides
for
us
and
lets
us
know
later
on.
Our
decisions
can
be
made
using
2
processes,
System
1
and
System
2.
This
is
called
“dual-­‐process”
theory
and
was
first
layed
out
by
Nobel-­‐prize
winning
psychologist
Daniel
Kahneman2
The
fact
that
he
won
his
Nobel
prize
in
economics
–
not
psychology
-­‐
just
shows
how
much
impact
this
theory
can
have,
if
put
to
good
use.
System
1
makes
most
of
our
decisions
and
is
impulsive,
automatic,
unconsious
and
intuitive.
As
an
example,
when
you
tied
your
shoes
this
morning,
you
probably
did
not
think
about
the
different
steps
this
requires,
what
costs
this
would
involve
for
you
etc.?
Let
me
give
you
another
example.
Read
this
text:
3
+
4.
I’m
pretty
confident
the
number
“7”
popped
into
your
head.
Now,
did
you
make
an
active
decision
to
do
a
calculation?
Did
you
think
about
algebraic
rules
from
primary
school?
Probably
not.
It
just
happened
to
you,
this
is
System
1.
On
the
other
hand,
there
is
System
2.
As
an
example,
please
tell
me
the
amount
of
occurunces
of
the
letter
“a”
on
this
page.
Unless
you
have
some
kind
of
compulsion
to
count
letters,
you
probably
had
to
shift
your
focus
at
the
beginning
of
this
page,
scan
word
by
word,
and
incremenent
an
internal
counter
when
you
saw
an
“a”.
You
had
to
do
this
consciously,
an
answer
did
not
suddenly
pop
into
your
mind,
this
is
System
2.
This
is
a
schematic
represenation
of
the
two
systems:
3
Dual
processes
of
decision-­‐making

7.
Brainvolve
–
Stop
Darmkanker
(http://www.brainvolve.com)
©
Steven
De
Blieck
2015,
no
unauthorized
copying,
reproduction
or
redistribution
7
The
logo
of
this
company
(seen
below)
is
not
a
rabbit
and
a
turtle
by
mere
coincidence,
nor
is
it
a
product
of
psychedelic
drug
use.
They
represent
the
2
systems.
The
rabbit
is
the
fast
System
1.
It’s
active
most
of
the
time.
The
turtle
is
the
much
slower
System
2.
It
sits
on
top
of
the
rabbit
and
can
order
it
to
slow
down.
This
is
what
happens
in
the
brain
as
well:
when
the
turtle
kicks
in,
we
see
in
activation
in
the
neurons
of
the
dorsolateral
prefrontal
cortex,
responsible
for
cognitive
control.
This
results
in
an
inhibition
of
the
neurons
in
the
nucleus
accumbens
and
orbitofrontal
cortex,
regions
used
in
the
rabbit
way
of
thinking.
Next,
we’ll
determine
bottlenecks
in
the
decision
sequence.
Brainvolve
logo

8.
Brainvolve
–
Stop
Darmkanker
(http://www.brainvolve.com)
©
Steven
De
Blieck
2015,
no
unauthorized
copying,
reproduction
or
redistribution
8
Bottlenecks and changes
Long-term advice
So
the
decisions
we
want
people
to
make
are
the
following:
We
will
look
how
we
can
influence
the
rabbit
(System
1)
way
of
making
decisions
to
solve
bottlenecks
in
the
decision
sequence.
These
are
decisions
the
targets
should
be
making
but
aren’t.
The
automatic
mode
of
our
brain
tends
to
make
shortcuts,
also
called
“heuristics”,
in
our
decision
making.
This
because
letting
the
turtle
(System
2)
do
the
work
would
require
too
much
effort.
These
shortcuts
have
been
hard-­‐coded
by
evolutionary
processes,
because
they
have
often
helped
us
in
making
quick
correct
decisions.
As
an
example,
if
a
friend
does
you
a
favor,
you
automatically
feel
the
urge
to
repay
that
favor.
This
is
called
“reciprocity”.4
From
an
evolutionary
perspective,
this
rule
of
thumb
has
been
key
to
survival.
There
is
no
conscious
thought
involved
in
the
process,
our
brain
just
tells
us
that
this
is
the
best
thing
to
do
in
most
cases.
However,
most
cases
is
not
the
same
as
always,
and
these
heuristics
can
cause
us
to
make
mistakes
in
our
thinking,
also
called
“cognitive
biases”.
As
an
example,
many
times
when
making
a
decision,
we
follow
the
behavior
what
many
other
similar
to
us
do.
A
lot
of
times
this
turns
out
to
be
good
for
us
too,
but
sometimes
it’s
just
not.
There
is
an
incredible
amount
of
research
into
these
rules
of
thumb
we
take.
If
you
understand
them,
you
can
use
them
ethically
to
guide
people’s
autopilot
in
the
required
direction.
And
I
emphasise
“ethically”.
If
we
would
use
these
to
persuade
people
into
doing
something
they
really
not
want
to
do,
it
would
backfire,
because
people
will
be
unhappy
and
will
never
do
business
with
you
again
(probably,
they
will
let
their
friends
know
as
too).
What
follows
now
are
bottlenecks
and
the
related
small
changes
to
the
website
I
propose,
that
can
have
a
big
influence
on
our
targets’
decision
making.
Often
these
Decision
sequence

9.
Brainvolve
–
Stop
Darmkanker
(http://www.brainvolve.com)
©
Steven
De
Blieck
2015,
no
unauthorized
copying,
reproduction
or
redistribution
9
changes
trigger
these
rules
of
thumb
in
our
decision
making
(System
1).
But
bare
in
mind
that
it
is
of
equal
importance
to
also
target
the
turtle
(System
2).
The
website
needs
to
be
able
to
convince
both
our
automatic
and
effortful
decison
processes.
Internal need to save lives
On
the
current
website,
we
see
that
the
visitors
get
asked
immediately
to
make
a
gift.
Very
few
things
trigger
the
pain
centre
in
our
brain
more
than
spending
money.
Donating
is
not
the
end
goal
but
the
means
to
an
internal
need
of
the
donator.
We
have
to
dig
deeper
why
people
are
willing
to
donate
money.
Research
shows
that
mostly,
this
is
because
it
makes
people
feel
good
or
because
they
have
a
personal
connection
to
the
disease.
Also,
very
few
people
don’t
want
their
altruism
to
be
known,
so
it’s
important
to
tap
into
people’s
need
for
self-­‐actualisation
and
respect
by
others.
I
propose
a
popup
when
entering
the
website
that
urges
people
to
help
save
a
life:
Notice
how
the
call-­‐to-­‐action
button
is
red.
This
immediately
draws
our
attention
because
from
an
evolutionary
perspective,
red
was
often
a
warning
sign
of
dangerous
predators.
(don’t
overuse
is,
as
the
power
is
in
the
contrast
with
the
rest
of
the
site).
The
photo
of
the
patients
increases
the
likeability,
as
these
people
could
be
similar
to
someone
you
know.
We
like
to
say
“yes”
to
someone
we
like.
5
Also,
I
have
mentioned
that
“it
only
takes
a
minute”.
This
is
a
very
effective
technique
to
ask
a
small
commitment,
everyone
has
a
minute
to
spare.
Once
you
give
an
initial
commitment,
your
System
1
wants
to
be
consistent
with
it.
Note
that
it’s
best
to
change
the
red
button
in
the
right
corner
of
the
website
to
“Help
save
a
life!
It
only
takes
a
minute.”

10.
Brainvolve
–
Stop
Darmkanker
(http://www.brainvolve.com)
©
Steven
De
Blieck
2015,
no
unauthorized
copying,
reproduction
or
redistribution
10
Link saving lives with donating
The
most
difficult
step
is
possibly
to
convince
people
that
donating
is
something
that
they
need
to
do.
Often
people
don’t
donate
because
they
think
only
a
very
small
percentage
of
the
money
will
actually
go
to
the
helping
of
the
people
in
need.
They
often
think
the
organisation
gets
most
of
the
money.
It
is
very
important
to
mention
where
the
money
will
go
to
and
especially
how
it
will
impact
individuals.
A
good
phrase
would
be:
“Your
money
will
help
us
make
campaings
that
raise
awareness
for
colon
cancer.
Just
imagine
that
your
donation
could
save
your
father
or
uncle.”
(also
add
an
image
of
a
patient
looking
them
into
the
eyes
–
if
you
have
their
permission).
This
has
the
added
benefit
of
tapping
into
people’s
loss
aversion.
We
strongly
overvalue
avoiding
losses
compared
to
acquiring
gains.
This
was
first
proposed
by
psychologist
Daniel
Kahneman
in
his
prospect
theory6:
When
you
ask
people
to
“imagine”
themself
doing
something,
you
ask
them
to
look
in
the
mirror
.
When
we
see
ourselves
doing
something,
we
want
to
act
in
a
socially
acceptable
way.7
In
this
case,
this
would
be
donating.
According
to
self-­‐determination
theory,
people
have
a
strong
need
for
autonomy
in
their
decision-­‐making.
That’s
why
adding
this
sentence
has
been
shown
to
double
donations
in
real-­‐life
settings:
“but
you
are
free
to
accept
or
refuse.”
This
makes
people
feel
way
more
intrinsically
motivated
to
donate.
To
increase
trust,
I
advice
to
use
light
blue
with
low
contrast
on
the
donation
page8.
Simply
adding
“donating
=
loving”
has
also
been
shown
to
increase
donations.”
Prospect
theory

11.
Brainvolve
–
Stop
Darmkanker
(http://www.brainvolve.com)
©
Steven
De
Blieck
2015,
no
unauthorized
copying,
reproduction
or
redistribution
11
Donation amount
The
first
donation
amount
people
currently
see
is
the
lowest
one,
and
people
will
use
this
as
a
reference
point
to
compare
with
the
other
amount.
This
is
called
anchoring.
It’s
best
to
set
the
first
donation
amount
to
something
very
high.
For
instance,
if
the
first
amount
is
€100,
then
20€
does
not
seem
that
much
anymore.
Often,
people
are
under
the
false
assumption
that
a
little
donation
won’t
help,
so
they
don’t
donate.
Research
shows
that
simply
adding
“even
an
euro
can
help”
can
have
huge
results.9
You
might
think
that
this
would
result
in
more
people
donating,
but
that
they
would
donate
a
lot
less.
This
is
not
the
case.
By
asking
people
a
small
commitment,
they
are
actually
willing
to
make
a
big
one.
It
is
good
not
to
show
eurosigns
on
the
page,
as
triggers
individualism
in
people,
and
they
will
donate
less.
This
has
been
studied
with
restaurant
menus.10
Right
now,
you
have
to
put
in
your
details
twice
when
donating,
once
on
your
page
and
once
on
PayPal’s
page.
I
would
advise
removing
this
from
your
page,
as
you
can
easily
get
this
information
from
your
Paypal
account.
People
don’t
like
to
give
their
data
away,
and
certainly
not
twice.
It
is
good
to
split
the
donating
into
two
steps,
like
it
is
now.
Because
people
will
want
to
be
consistent
with
what
they
previously
have
done.
So
if
they
complete
the
first
step,
there
is
a
big
chance
they’ll
complete
the
second
one
as
well.
So
the
first
one
has
to
be
really
small
(without
much
data
to
be
put
in).
Less painful payment
According
to
the
Hofstede
cultural
index,
Belgium
is
the
second
most
uncertainty
avoidant
country
in
the
world
(for
more
info,
take
a
look
at
http://geert-­‐
hofstede.com/belgium.html).
Uncertainty
avoidancy
means
the
extent
to
which
the
members
of
a
culture
feel
threatened
by
ambiguous
or
unknown
situations
and
have
created
beliefs
and
institutions
that
try
to
avoid
these.
Online
payments
are
an
extremely
uncertain
situation.
People
of
a
country
that’s
so
uncertainty
avoidant
as
Belgium
have
to
be
really
reassured
that
the
payment
is
safe
and
nothing
will
happen
with
their
data
(remember
we
are
way
more
focused
on
avoiding
losses
than
acquiring
gains).
The
solution
to
this
is
actually
very
simple.
Adding
a
logo
of
the
payment
security
provider
together
with
a
text
“payment
secured
by
...”
can
persuade
a
lot
of
people.
The
fact
that
we
are
used
to
all
big
sites
mentioning
this
makes
us
ever
more
averse
of
sites
not
doing
this.
Taking
in
consideration
all
of
the
above,
I
propose
the
following
donation
page:

12.
Brainvolve
–
Stop
Darmkanker
(http://www.brainvolve.com)
©
Steven
De
Blieck
2015,
no
unauthorized
copying,
reproduction
or
redistribution
12
Wanting bigger impact and esteem by friends
It
is
important
to
ask
people
to
spread
the
word
about
their
just-­‐made
donation
on
social
media.
If
we
tailor
the
sharing
message
so
it
is
very
persuasive,
this
can
get
us
a
lot
of
donations.
It
is
also
an
extra
reward
for
the
donator
to
have
his/her
heroic
efforts
being
viewed
by
friends.
For
instance,
just
adding
the
picture
of
a
superhero
can
have
a
big
effect.
The
message
that
gets
shared
on
social
media
can
be
set
in
the
html
code
of
your
website
by
using
opengraph
and
twitter
card
header
tags:
more
info
about
that
here:
https://blog.kissmetrics.com/open-­‐graph-­‐meta-­‐tags/
I
would
propose
the
following
text
that
gets
shared:
“I
helped
save
people
from
colon
cancer.
Want
to
help
me?
It
only
takes
a
minute.
[link
to
donation
page]”
It
is
better
to
thank
someone
for
their
commitment
than
to
thank
them
for
their
donation,
certainly
if
you
want
people
to
keep
being
persistent
with
their
commitment.

13.
Brainvolve
–
Stop
Darmkanker
(http://www.brainvolve.com)
©
Steven
De
Blieck
2015,
no
unauthorized
copying,
reproduction
or
redistribution
13
This
is
how
the
sharing
page
would
look
like
ideally:

14.
Brainvolve
–
Stop
Darmkanker
(http://www.brainvolve.com)
©
Steven
De
Blieck
2015,
no
unauthorized
copying,
reproduction
or
redistribution
14
Short-term advice
Now
we
will
look
at
a
campaign
that
can
really
boost
donations
in
a
short
term.
Sometimes
it
is
just
not
enough
that
a
donation
saves
lives,
people
want
an
extra
incentive.
Competition
is
a
great
way
to
do
this.
It
is
fun
plus
we
also
like
to
compare
ourselves
with
others.
It
would
be
good
if
we
could
divide
donators
into
groups
that
would
battle
each
other
to
have
the
most
donations
together
(although
we
will
frame
this
as
“who
cares
most
about
others”).
This
has
been
tested
in
real-­‐life
with
2
groups
based
on
gender
with
incredible
results.
Time
to
test
this
online!
We
have
the
“advantage”
that
the
Belgian
provinces
are
somewhats
divided
and
are
rivals.
We
can
use
this
to
our
advantage.
Each
of
the
Flemish
provinces
can
have
an
own
donation
page,
these
can
stay
exactly
the
same
as
they
are
now.
We
only
need
to
add
one
“main
page”
that
lets
you
choose
your
province.
A
donation
meter
can
be
added
here
(normalised
by
the
number
of
inhabitants)
with
simple
Wordpress
plugins
(such
as
this
one:
https://wordpress.org/plugins/fundraising-­‐
thermometer-­‐plugin-­‐for-­‐wordpress/screenshots/
).
It
is
of
equal
importance
to
let
all
the
people
of
the
Flemish
provinces
now
about
the
“most
caring
province”
competition.
Stop
Darmkanker
has
a
lot
of
celebrities
supporting
them.
What
we
could
do
is
getting
at
least
one
celebrity
role
model
for
every
province.
They
can
promise
to
do
a
challenge
if
their
province
wins
(e.g.
if
Tom
Waes
wants
to
do
a
challenge,
this
will
get
a
lot
of
attention).
We
can
make
a
teaser
video
for
each
of
these
celebrities
and
the
challenges
they
promise
to
do
if
they
win.
Since
we
like
celebrities,
and
we
certainly
like
them
in
unusual
situations,
video’s
like
this
can
really
work.
Most
celebs
have
a
lot
of
social
media
followers
(I
wich
I
had
those!),
so
these
videos
can
be
spread
very
fast
(of
course
with
a
link
to
the
competition
page).
I
have
experience
in
making
films
myself
so
it
would
be
fun
and
learnful
for
me
to
help
put
these
together!
Last
but
not
least,
it
is
important
to
set
quite
a
short
timelimit
on
the
competition.
If
we
let
the
competition
run
for
a
month,
people
will
simply
procrastinate
their
decision
and
eventually
just
won’t
donate.
I
propose
to
let
it
run
for
2
weeks
max.
The
main
page
would
look
something
like
this:

15.
Brainvolve
–
Stop
Darmkanker
(http://www.brainvolve.com)
©
Steven
De
Blieck
2015,
no
unauthorized
copying,
reproduction
or
redistribution
15

16.
Brainvolve
–
Stop
Darmkanker
(http://www.brainvolve.com)
©
Steven
De
Blieck
2015,
no
unauthorized
copying,
reproduction
or
redistribution
16
References
1
Chun
Siong
Soon
et
al.,
“Unconscious
Determinants
of
Free
Decisions
in
the
Human
Brain,”
Nature
Neuroscience
11,
no.
5
(2008):
543–45.
2
Amos
Tversky
and
Daniel
Kahneman,
“Judgment
under
Uncertainty:
Heuristics
and
Biases,”
Science
185,
no.
4157
(September
27,
1974):
1124–31,
doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124.
3
Daniel
Kahneman,
“A
Perspective
on
Judgment
and
Choice:
Mapping
Bounded
Rationality,”
The
American
Psychologist
58,
no.
9
(September
2003):
697–720,
doi:10.1037/0003-­‐066X.58.9.697.
4
Robert
B.
Cialdini,
“Influence:
The
Psychology
of
Persuasion,”
1993
5
Robert
B.
Cialdini,
“Influence:
The
Psychology
of
Persuasion,”
1993
6
Daniel
Kahneman
and
Amos
Tversky,
“Prospect
Theory:
An
Analysis
of
Decision
under
Risk,”
Econometrica
47,
no.
2
(March
1,
1979):
263–91,
doi:10.2307/1914185.
7
Arthur
L.
Beaman
et
al.,
“Self-­‐Awareness
and
Transgression
in
Children:
Two
Field
Studies,”
Journal
of
Personality
and
Social
Psychology
37,
no.
10
(1979):
1835–46,
doi:10.1037/0022-­‐3514.37.10.1835.
8
Nathalie
Nahai,
Webs
of
Influence:
The
Psychology
of
Online
Persuasion
(FT
Press,
2013),
http://www.websofinfluence.com
9
Robert
B.
Cialdini
and
David
A.
Schroeder,
“Increasing
Compliance
by
Legitimizing
Paltry
Contributions:
When
Even
a
Penny
Helps.,”
Journal
of
Personality
and
Social
Psychology
34,
no.
4
(1976):
599.
10
Sybil
S.
Yang,
Mauro
M.
Sessarego,
and
others,
“$
or
Dollars:
Effects
of
Menu-­‐Price
Formats
on
Restaurant
Checks,”
2009,
http://scholarship.sha.cornell.edu/chrpubs/169/?utm_source=scholarship.sha.corn
ell.edu%2Fchrpubs%2F169&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages.