Why does the Person behave the way they do?
Is what they say they do in line with their actual behaviour?
What environmental factors may influence their behaviour?
What social factors may influence their behaviour?
Which past experiences may influence their behaviour?
It's not what people do, it's why they do what they do that matters. If you don't understand the motivations of the person then you can't meet them where they are.
Psychologist Jonathan Haidt uses a great analogy to illustrate Daniel Kahneman’s System 1 and System 2 thinking. System 2 is the conscious remembered self. System 1 is our present self. The analogy highlights that as much as rational System 2 would like to think it’s the one in control, in reality emotionally impulsive System 1 will do what it likes because it’s so much more powerful. We are all driven by System 1 but we will never know our present selves.
Whether it’s in characterisation or designing for people, it’s important to remember that what people say they do, and how they rationalise their own behaviour, is not necessarily what is motivating their behaviour. We are our remembered self.
People will not change their behaviour to fit a rationale. Don't try to highlight what is irrational with irrational people, instead frame what is not necessary.
7 Behavioural Sciences Concepts
Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman discovered a range of behaviours that highlight System 1 and System 2 thinking. Some to consider are:
Prospect Theory: People make decisions based on potential gains or losses relative to a reference point, rather than absolute outcomes. They are more sensitive to losses than to gains, known as loss aversion.
Loss Aversion: The disutility of losing is greater than the utility of gaining the same amount. In other words, people experience more pain from a loss than pleasure from an equivalent gain.
Endowment Effect: People tend to value things they own more highly than identical things they don’t own. This ties into loss aversion, as giving up something you own is perceived as a loss.
Framing Effect: People’s choices are influenced by how a situation or information is framed. For example, a decision can be framed in terms of gains (survival rate) or losses (mortality rate), and the framing affects how people respond.
Anchoring: When making decisions, people rely heavily on the first piece of information they encounter (the “anchor”), even if it is irrelevant. This can bias subsequent judgments or choices.
Availability Heuristic: People tend to judge the probability of events based on how easily examples come to mind. For example, people may overestimate the frequency of dramatic events (like plane crashes) because they are more memorable or widely reported.
Status Quo Bias: People tend to prefer things to stay the same, resisting change even when it may benefit them. This is related to both loss aversion (fear of losing what they currently have) and a desire for comfort and familiarity.
7 Applied Behavioural Sciences Concepts
Richard Thaler has been particularly influential in applying the insights from Tversky and Kahneman to influence behaviour in positive ways:
Nudge Theory: A nudge is a subtle intervention or change in the environment that can lead people to make better decisions without restricting their freedom of choice. Nudges guide behaviour in a predictable way while preserving autonomy, often by making certain options easier or more appealing without eliminating alternatives.
Libertarian Paternalism: Libertarian paternalism is the philosophy behind nudging. It suggests that it’s possible to influence people’s choices (paternalism) while still preserving their freedom to choose (libertarianism). The idea is to guide decisions in ways that improve well-being without coercion.
Choice Architecture: Choice architecture refers to the design of the environments in which people make decisions. How options are presented (their order, visibility, defaults) can significantly influence the decisions people make. Nudging is one application of choice architecture.
The Planner-Doer Model: This model describes the internal conflict between two “selves” in decision-making: the planner and the doer. The planner is rational, forward-thinking, and wants to make decisions that are good for the long term (System 2). The doer, on the other hand, is more impulsive and focused on immediate gratification (System 1).
Social Proof and Herd Behaviour: People often look to the behaviour of others to determine what is correct or socially acceptable, particularly in uncertain situations. This leads to herd behaviour, where individuals conform to group behaviour even if it’s irrational.
Sludge: The concept of sludge refers to excessive friction or barriers that make it difficult for people to achieve their goals. This is the opposite of a nudge. Reducing sludge can help make decision-making smoother and more efficient.
Status Quo Bias and Default Effects: People tend to stick with the default option when making decisions, often because they want to avoid effort or because they perceive the default as the safer or better choice. Thaler and Sunstein emphasise the importance of default settings in policy design.