ARTICLE NO. 684    June 07, 2011

Why Persuasive Design Should Be Your Next Skill Set

The UX discipline has been busy. In the last two decades, it has formalized the practices of information architecture, experience design, content strategy, and interaction design. Thanks to the insatiable drive of UX practitioners to improve and define the field, it will continue to grow, and persuasive design is the next practice it will supercharge and embrace, folding its techniques into interaction design.

A Framework for Changing Behavior

Persuasive design is the process of creating persuasive technology, or “technology that is designed to change attitudes or behaviors of the users through persuasion and social influence, but not through coercion.” - Wikipedia / BJ Fogg

In other words, it is the use of psychology in design to influence behavior.

There are a few main tenets of the discipline:

  • Behaviors can be classified based on whether they are positive or negative, and how long they will be sustained. (See the behavior grid)
  • A person’s motivation and ability determine whether they will perform a behavior or not. (See this illustration)
  • Insights from psychology can be used to change someone’s motivation or ability, thus influencing the likelihood of a behavior.
  • Triggers are single design elements that change motivation or ability.
  • Triggers have a strong element of timing; they are most effective when presented when someone’s motivation or ability are already at peak levels.

From a practical perspective, persuasive design is strongly aligned with both business and user goals. It is a powerful way to influence the “desirable” part of the holy trinity of good design (useful, usable, desirable). It focuses on the context that behavior happens in, especially the motivation and ability required to prompt action.

Think of persuasive design as focused more strongly on affecting whether people do something, and interaction design dealing with how they accomplish it if they’ve decided to.

In the Wild

One need not look far to see examples of good persuasive design; they get talked about because they’re exciting. I’ve created a thread on Quora where examples of persuasive technology are continually being added. Here are some highlights:

Manicare Stop That
Manicare Stop That is a nail polish with a bitter taste, helping people break the habit of biting their nails.

Vitamin R interface
Vitamin R helps you stay on task by giving audio reminders that you’re working on something.

Ford Fusion dashboard display
Ford’s fusion dashboard with eco leaves creates a feedback loop on your driving, encouraging more eco-friendly driving.

ReadyForZero stickers
ReadyForZero is giving away stickers that go on your credit card, reminding you not to spend.

Facebook like widget
The Facebook Like feature is lightweight, in-context exchange of social capital that creates motivation, value, and engagement for multiple people with a single click.

A Steady Trend

Before looking forward, let’s take a quick look back to see how this new discipline fits into a simplified history of user experience:

  • Human-computer interaction is about paying attention to people and their relationship with computing.
  • Information architecture is about making things findable.
  • Interaction design is about making things usable.
  • Content strategy is about making things meaningful.
  • Experience design is about making things seamless.
  • Persuasive design is about making things influential.

The trend goes towards deeper meanings and bigger impacts.

Chart of relationship of user research, interaction design, and persuasive design along an impact continuum

As the design discipline gets better at the basics of understanding and enabling behavior, it moves towards creating meaningful impacts by influencing behavior. But this influence must be built on top of successes in the more basic elements of UX such as good research and seamless usability.

People Are Already Practicing Persuasive Design, but UX Lags Behind

People have created persuasive technologies since the dawn of invention. Advertisements in every shape and context persuade people to buy things. Credit cards make it trivially easy for people to take loans. Weight Watchers turns calories into simple points that can be used to track and manage a diet.

However, the UX field is only beginning to fully embrace persuasive design. This industry is far behind industries such as advertising and marketing, which have studied, tested, and honed the art of influencing people’s behavior for decades. UX practitioners are designing persuasive technologies every day, but are only beginning to formalize the education, ethics, and metrics behind creating them.

Without such structure, we will continue to see cargo cults that inappropriately use techniques, such as gamification. Foursquare, Gowalla, and other services popularized the use of game mechanics to drive user engagement. Unfortunately, many companies have strictly copied the obvious game elements, such as badges and leveling-up, without understanding the deeper psychology at work. These services have seen the power of persuasive design, but lack a true understanding of how to properly apply psychology in UX design.

Why Persuasive Technology Will Change Everything, and Already Is

With a focus on psychology, UX designers can build services that directly help people improve their lives. It’s not new; AA and Weight Watchers were around before the Internet, and they help people through difficult and long-term behavior change. Still, there are big advances to be made. Web services are starting to blur the edges between online and offline interactions. Nike+ and Fitbit track and provide insight into your exercise. ReadyForZero helps people change their behavior and get out of credit card debt. HealthMonth creates competitive / supportive groups of people who improve at the same time.

This is grander than enabling behavior—it is changing behavior. It is also only just beginning. As the practice delves deeper into embedding psychology in design, new approaches will emerge. Researchers at Stanford, for example, have begun to develop the technique of persuasion profiling. This technique builds a profile of which psychological triggers work best for a given person, and uses these triggers to drive new behaviors in the future. In other words, beyond focusing on what content someone might prefer—say, a relevant movie on Netflix or a product on Amazon—this approach determines the how to deliver it most effectively. Where the principle of social proof may persuade one person to buy a product, the principle of competition may work better for someone else.

With Power Comes Responsibility

The ethical questions that arise when designing for behavior change cannot be understated. The UX community has searched for a common ethical framework for some time now, and the need only grows greater.

However, the evil stuff is already happening. Cigarette companies, soda companies, fast food franchises, the fashion industry, marketing agencies, and many other entities have been practicing persuasive design for decades. Often, they design for business goals at the expense of the customer’s money, health, or happiness. It appears that the evil side of the market is far more saturated than the good side. If this holds true, there is hope. Practitioners at smaller companies and non-profits will have much to gain from a greater understanding of persuasive design, whereas mega-corporations have already taken it to the limit.

Furthermore, it’s much easier to talk about the ethics of using psychology in design when everyone shares a common understanding of what that means.

What's Next?

There’s plenty to do. Fortunately, the design community is active and motivated in defining the practice.

Flesh out the frameworks

Flesh out the frameworks The existing frameworks are great beginnings. BJ Fogg’s Behavior Grid has paved the way. They provide the structure around which people understand and discuss persuasive design. Once the community uses frameworks regularly, they will certainly undergo some refinement, and new ones may arise.

Learn and educate

UX practitioners should learn all they can about this kind of design. What are the psychological principles at play? How do you understand them? How do you test them? As they improve on their understanding and discover new methods of using psychology in design, they should continue to share these advances with the community.

Develop more pattern libraries

Pattern libraries full of examples provide a fast education. They give many examples of what has already worked in various situations. Inevitably they get a bad reputation when they are overused, but this shouldn’t outweigh their usefulness as a learning tool. Stephen Anderson’s Mental Notes cards provide a fantastic set of behaviors to reference, and the Design With Intent toolkit is another useful guide.

In Summary

Persuasive design is the next step in using design to create a positive impact in the world. While it is already being practiced in many industries, the UX community has yet to fully embrace this type of design. Doing so will be the next big step in pushing the UX field forward.

More Resources

ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S)

Comments

Add a new comment

Because of problems with spam comments, HTML in comments is not permitted. URLs are allowed, but they will not be rendered as clickable links.
Interactive TV UI has already designed following Persuasive Principle like IPTV, OTT STB.
I thought this is what Apple did...
The UX Designer should remove obstacles so the user can accomplish a task or goal. It's not UX's job to influence behavior. Persuasion is pure marketing, not UX.
Hey Loren, This is a great article, totally my cup of tea. I think one large arena that designers continue to ignore is the old-school direct-response model. As designers we can call them "triggers" or whatever, but in response it's really driving the user home to where you (or they in UX) want to be, the "call to action". Yes, there are definitely psychological influences, the ad world can educate us on that, with creating desire. For us, it's driving them home as quickly as you can without too many distractions. It's so funny to me how many designers and web designers continue to ignore those old learnings. We focus so much on getting a user through, ensuring all functionality is there, or if the page is compliant, etc. we need to re-visit old ad methods with the basic questions. There's a reason why scary a.m. infomercials and lame black and white text-only online advertising still generate the cash. No matter what we do, it's still the copy, it's still the blue underline. Flash ads are great, but I've never seen one convert yet--unless it's a 20min. mini movie, where users can multi-task while you're still giving them the pitch. Persuasive Design = Direct Response Design. Little eyeball testing and test and learn goes a long way. As a designer it's a tough nut to swallow, but once you get it and get ok with it you can design-test against the lame controls. Design-test into the lame old layouts that continue to win. Thanks for sharing, good read! -Nicola
Persuasive Design crosses a grey, fuzzy line for me, and I'm not entirely comfortable with the concept. That said, Human Factors International (HFI) has been on the leading edge of this research for some time. Their publications, videos, and workshops are well worth adding to our sources of information.
Really great article. I love how you sum up all the different names and tentacles for what we do. I'm all for using psychological principals in any kind of product design, but it seems to me that another word for Persuasive Design is Marketing. The nail biting stuff and credit card examples are good marketing more than anything else, I think. The car dashboard feedback...now that really is interesting. But is persuasive design truly to be only taken literally? The product is actually telling me something that I should change? Or is that just good feedback, which has been offered by UX forever. But now the feedback is more external, it's not just about the UI or product. It's about YOU. Kinda creepy, now that I think of it.
Am I the only one that finds what this article suggests a bit creepy? Designing things to persuade? You mean everything should be an AD? Why not designing things to help people have independent thought? Or designing something to make people question authority? Oh wait, that seems to be the opposite of what this article suggests. Move along, nothing to see here.
I am new to web design, and my deepest interest is in User Experience design. Thanks to Stephen Anderson's tweets I was directed to this article. I'm still learning what's out there, and I love reading about all the different ideas surrounding this concept. Thanks to Loren Baxter and all of you who posted above!
Very interesting article/post. I love the concept of using design, which is about communication, to influence people and move ideas. What I find most interesting is that this is not a new idea. In fact, it's been around for about three decades. It's called Social Marketing. "Social marketing was "born" as a discipline in the 1970s, when Philip Kotler and Gerald Zaltman realized that the same marketing principles that were being used to sell products to consumers could be used to "sell" ideas, attitudes and behaviors. Kotler and Andreasen define social marketing as "differing from other areas of marketing only with respect to the objectives of the marketer and his or her organization. Social marketing seeks to influence social behaviors not to benefit the marketer, but to benefit the target audience and the general society." Yes, there are many difference, but at the core is the desire to influence and change human behavior. This is a very difficult task and I'm happy to discover that folks in the UX community are discussing the importance and the possibilities of these ideas.
I've always found Fogg's definition of persuasive technology ('change attitudes or behaviours...without coercion or deception') difficult to swallow, and I think that distinguishing between 'good' and 'evil' captology doesn't help. It makes an implicit moral claim that, as you say yourself, the UX discipline has no common foundation for. There are many (most, even) who feel that being responsible for a user's experience entails an ethical responsibility for their wellbeing, too. But I find no basis for that. If a user doesn't feel wronged (and what other data do we have, in UCD?), who are we to suggest they have been? Knowing how to providing a great user experience and knowing what's best for a user are two separate things. As UX practitioners, we seek to satisfy the users' needs, wants, desires -- but to what extent, and by what ethical criteria, are we entitled to put them there in the first place? I don't think this is an academic question. But I don't think it's a UX question, either. And it's certainly something we should be asking ourselves before assuming we know better than marketers.
& then persuasive comments...
Great stuff. Holy biscuits on the cargo cult reference.
By adopting these kinds of principles we really do 'grow' and mature our thinking towards how people use the products that we produce on the web. The kind of results you can produce with these ideas in mind could be massively beneficial! Thanks Loren!
Hi there! [QUOTE] you're actually persuading people to act according to their motivation [/quote] Neal, I followed your link and got an insight on this afirmation. Don't you think it resembles to this: "trough subliminal messages you can control people's minds"? I recall this being a trend on 80's-90's marketing, a myth based upon hasty interpretations of psychological theories. I refuse to see the human being as a mechanism, a robot who complies and follows blindly. Maybe because of my upbringing. Also there are some examples of lack of responsiveness in highly controlled environments for human testing. A cynic user is the best proof of this. Developers and crowd theorist try to indent on both sides, either triggering action and refraining compulsion, from the same approach which I think is a epistemological mistake. It's quite difficult to encompass in a coherent argument both terms, especially when we talk about human beings and their behavior. I fell this kind of knowledge (persuasive design, tech and profiling) is still green -do I explain myself?- and the instrumentation of the theories is quite obvious for the "unpacked". If the same gag is continuously told losses "catch" really soon. Do we agree? Loren, thanks for the post. I'll gladly deepen on the crucial terms. Saludos cordiales

Hi Robert,

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. You're right - this kind of design is done all the time, consciously or not. I think we can improve the intentionality behind which we practice designing for behavior, and additionally deepen the understanding with which we do so. Those are some fine scientific studies and hard data you referenced in your blog post, proving the power of minutely simple changes in design that influence behavior.

Behavioral economoics is another fascinating area of study that we should all learn about, and merits its own piece of writing.

Cheers,
Loren

Hi Loren, It's great that you're getting into persuasive psychology, but I think if you broaden the concept a little you'll see it's actually used a lot. For one, if you're doing user research and you're designing according to that research, you're not just enabling behaviors you're actually persuading people to act according to their motivation. Take for instance an e-commerce process where you include the appropriate testimonials and trust logos to decrease the amount of anxiety the user has as they go through the process. Those techniques are there to persuade the user. The Eisenbergs recommended this approach in 2005 with their book Call to Action and of course BJ Fogg has been working on this since much further back including his work in captology and trust building on the web. It's true that I haven't seen a lot of interaction designers or information architects working with persuasive psychology, but the online marketing agencies I've worked with are all using it in their user experience designs, leveraging decades of marketing principles from experts like Robert Cialdini. Check out a recent blog post on how it's used in facebook here: http://userexperience.robertjneal.com/2011/persuasion-patterns-on-facebook/ Also worth leveraging in your UX designs is Ariely's research in behavioral economics. I do hope to see more research based UX designs as the profession moves forward and I'm glad to see new people are being exposed to how we can use good research to inform our UX designs. Best, Robert J Neal
  • Showing 1-16 of 16