home - web designer · [email protected] . dave bennett: 12024150: captalogical behaviour...

Dave Bennett: 12024150: Captalogical Behaviour Systems: 1

Interaction Design - Captalogical Behaviour Systems: Using Less Energy

Abstract This paper is the report for the interaction design module of the Bsc Web Design course at the University of the West of England. It documents the design process of creating a system to change peoples behaviour and use less energy. It documents the process from research to prototype generation.

Author Keywords Interaction; design; less; energy; behaviour; change;

Introduction This project revolved around the idea of captological systems and behaviour change with specific reference to getting students to use less energy.

Paste the appropriate copyright/license statement here. This text field is large enough to hold the appropriate release statement assuming it is single-spaced in Verdana 7 point font. Please do not change the size of this text box. Every submission will be assigned their own unique DOI string to be included here.

Dave Bennett Department of Computer Science and Creative Technology University of the West of England Coldharbour Lane Bristol, UK [email protected]


Secondary Research The questions the secondary research will be answering are:

! What are good ways to change people’s behaviour?

! Which is more important, how much energy people use or how much they think they use?

! How much energy do appliances use?

! What are the different ways students save energy? WHAT ARE GOOD WAYS TO CHANGE PEOPLE’S BEHAVIOUR?

Changing people’s behaviour is a task that most of us know from personal experience is difficult. This is due to the fact that behaviour change is not a one off event but more of a gradual process. One study by the Harvard Medical school suggests there are five stages to behavioural change, each describing a specific mental process and are necessary to move on to the next stage. These are:

! Pre-contemplation: not admitting there is a problem in your behaviour.

! Contemplation: knowing there’s a problem and thinking about changing it.

! Preparation: knowing there’s a problem and thinking you can change that problem. Preparing to change.

! Action: you have just started to change your behaviour.

! Maintenance: keeping that behavioural change in place. (Harvard Medical Publications, 2009) Originally designed for alcoholics this model for behavioural change is widely accepted. Each stage can take months to complete and this leaves a lot of time for the person to lose motivation about the behaviour change. One way to help that motivation is to make the process fun. The fun theory is an idea being put into practice in Sweden that says ‘something as simple as fun is the easiest way to change people’s behaviour for the better.’ (The Fun Theory, 2011) They run a competition for ideas of how to change people’s behaviour. From this we can determine that making something fun to do has a large impact of behavioural change and addressing the issue of the change being a process instead of an event increases the probability of that behavioural change sticking.

WHICH IS MORE IMPORTANT, HOW MUCH ENERGY PEOPLE USE

OR HOW MUCH THEY THINK THEY USE?

One of the first steps to getting people’s behaviour to change is getting them to admit there is a problem with their behaviour. This often draws a comparison between their perspective of reality and reality itself. For example smokers perception of getting cancer is low however the reality is that ‘smoking caused an estimated 101,000 deaths in the UK in 2010 - almost a

Fun theory speeding solution

Their solution to the problem of people speeding was to have a lottery. If you sped, a camera would catch you and you would be fined. These fines would go into a pot and drivers who went through the camera at the correct speed would have a chance to win the pot collected from the speeders. They tested over 3 days and found a 22% reduction in speed.


fifth (18%) of all deaths from all causes.’ (Cancer Research UK, 2014) Perspective often conflicts with reality and this can be used for behavioural change. Highlighting this issue and addressing the misconceptions is vital to progressing through the stages of behavioural change.

The reverse of this negative effect of perspective versus reality is using it to create happiness. ‘The circumstances of our lives may actually matter less to our happiness than the sense of control we feel over our lives.’ (Sutherland, 2011) Giving a user a sense of control over their lives is often more important than the control itself. People are willing to forgive imperfections in a system or product if they get some sense of pleasure from the experience.

The project will use the idea of perspective versus reality to make behavioral change far easier to achieve as well as aiming to give users some sort of pleasure out of the system giving them an emotional response.

HOW MUCH ENERGY DO APPLIANCES USE AND WHAT ARE THE

DIFFERENT WAYS STUDENTS SAVE ENERGY? To address misconceptions about energy use the project requires and data set about energy to draw from. This can be difficult to acquire as energy prices differ from region to region (Evans, 2015). This would mean that the system would need to ask a lot of questions about the users and this hinders the user experience and creates a boundary that some users will not overcome to use the system. For this reason the project will use a standard dataset to give less accurate but also more useful estimates of peoples energy use. The data set that best suits the projects purposes is one that is fairly extensive and also one that is fairly simple. (Evans, 2012) This data set provides an average cost of running for various appliances per year. This data will then be converted into something tangible so that the user can visualise their spending or the money saved. Another data set the system will draw from is one of simple tips for how to save energy. This will come from The Green Age. (The Green Age, 2013) as the tips are simple and easy to complete. Primary research: The first phase of primary research involved sending a survey to people to determine some things about their perceptions of energy use and how they visualize amounts of money. Various insights were drawn from this and this allowed the system to be tailored to a specific demographic and psychographic.

Sutherland’s discussion of the London Underground

In Sutherlands TED talk he describes that the best improvement to customer experience of the London Underground system was the matrix boards displaying how long until the next train. This is because ‘The nature of a wait is not just dependent on its numerical quality, its duration, but on the level of uncertainty you experience during that wait.’ By giving the passenger a sense of control over the duration of the wait they are far more likely to accept that wait. (Sutherland, 2011)


The main demographic for the system will be students that live in a houses of 3 – 5 people. This is because the majority of people that answered the survey were in this demographic.

On the whole people think their energy use is the same or slightly lower than others. This was un-expected as it was assumed people thought their energy use was much lower or higher than others, however it seems people think their energy use is around average. The main features of whatever system is produced were going to address people’s misconceptions and then display tips to save energy. From this data it is clear that peoples view on their energy use is fairly accurate therefore the system will help people save energy then address misconceptions as an after thought.

People’s visualizations of different amounts of money indicated that:

• With £3 people tend to buy items that are temporary. This may mean that people consider £3 an amount of money that people consider expendable. These are the types of items the system will display to visualize this amount of money.

• £10 is still an amount of money people see as expendable however it is also an amount that can be more useful than the £3.

• £30 is considered a useful amount of money and an amount that can make a real impact to peoples daily lives. These are the most important items and the system should aim to display money using these items.

The second phase of primary research took the form of an interview with someone from the demographic. Using a mixture of scenario testing and the five whys it aimed to discover what people thought of possible systems as well as gain a deeper understanding of the demographic and their motivations.

From the results we can see that a system that is fun might work as the participants motivations included this however they stated social pressure as a big motivation.

From this it is clear that the system must include elements of ‘fun theory’ but also include a social element.

3 ideas: The next phase of the project is the idea development stage. Here are a few possible systems and their pros and cons. One idea will be taken and expanded upon.

ENERGY QUIZ AND BINGO: THIS IDEA IS AIMED AT THE

‘MAINTENANCE’ STAGE OF BEHAVIOURAL CHANGE. THIS IDEA

WILL BE A WEBSITE THAT HAS A QUIZ ABOUT SAVING ENERGY

AND A BINGO GAME WHERE THE USER MUST COMPLETE TASKS TO

SAVE ENERGY. THE QUIZ IS FOCUSED ON ADDRESSING

MISCONCEPTIONS AND WILL PULL DATA ABOUT APPLIENCES

WHERE AS THE BINGO IS FOCUSED ON PUTTING TIPS INTO

ACTION. COMPLETING BOTH WILL ENTER YOU INTO A PRIZE

DRAW TO WIN MONEY OFF YOUR ENERGY BILL. Interaction: the interaction is with the site and the energy company to make the user more aware of their usage. It uses fun theory as a way to create behaviour change.

Figure 1. A mock up of the bingo section of the energy quiz and bingo system.


Pro: provides a fun element and is easy to do removing many boundaries to behavioural change

Con: difficult to tell if the user did carry out the energy saving tips or just said they did.

SOCIAL PAIRING APP: THIS IDEA IS AIMED TO GET PEOPLE FROM

THE ‘CONTEMPLATION’ STAGE TO THE ‘ACTION’ STAGE OF

BEHAVIOURAL CHANGE. THIS IDEA IS AN APP THAT PAIRS YOU

WITH A STRANGER IN YOUR AREA WHO HAS A SIMILAR

HOUSEHOLD. BOTH USERS HAVE TARGETS THEY MUST MEET, IF

BOTH USERS MEET THE TARGETS THEN THEY GET A DISCOUNT ON

THEIR ENERGY BILLS. THE APP ALLOWS THE USERS TO

ENCOURAGE EACH OTHER AND SHARE QUOTIDIAN TIPS ON HOW

TO SAVE ENERGY SCORING POINTS FOR HOW WELL THEY ARE

DOING. Interaction: users interact with each other and the app serves as a touch point to their energy company. It uses social motivation to create a named stranger that the user does not want to disappoint as well as elements of fun theory to gamify the experience of saving energy.

Pro: the app is simple to use and uses a strong motivation for behavioural change.

Con: it requires a log in as well as both users to be in a similar demographic as well as have the same energy supplier.

SHARED SOCIAL ENERGY SPEND: THIS IDEA IS AIMED AT THE

‘CONTEMPLATION’ STAGE OF BEHAVIOURAL CHANGE. THIS WILL

BE A SYSTEM THAT CALCULATES YOUR WEEKLY ENERGY SPEND

AND SHARES THIS TO SOCIAL MEDIA. IT WILL GET DATA FROM A

SMART METER TO ENSURE THE INFORMATION IS ACCURATE. BY

LOWERING YOUR ENERGY USAGE YOU CAN BE ENTERED INTO A

PRIZE DRAW. Interaction: the system uses social pressure to change behaviour. By sharing your usage it encourages you to lower your usage as well as encouraging others to do the same.

Pro: the system requires little to no user input. This removes almost all boundaries to behaviour change.

Con: by having no input it may mean that the user does not think about their energy usage and can just ignore that it is being shared to social media.

The idea that will be expanded on is the social pairing app due to its more specified target stage of behavioural change as well as its multiple interactions and touch points.

Prototype and testing: The prototype for this app will best suit a mock up as well as a scenario of use. Due to its complex user structure, two users must interact with the app for it to work. This would be difficult to convey with a mock up alone however the mock up goes a long way t determine exactly what each user will see and feel when using the app.

Figure 2. A mock up of the social pairing app

Figure 3. A mock up of the shared social energy spend


A good test for the app would use the mock up and get an actual user to use the app in laboratory conditions. Getting the user to think out loud and studying their response to the app allows any major bugs to be worked out. After this a beta test using real participants would be required.

To beta test the app an energy supplier is required. They will provide not only the end goal of money off the users bills but also the users them selves. For the app to work both users need to be in the same demographic and the energy supplier holds this information. They will also be able to run trails and beta testing on multiple users without much extra cost.

Reflection on solution and design process The solution goes some way to changing peoples behaviour to use less energy. From research, both secondary and primary, it seems that the app would successfully convert users in the ‘contemplation’ stage of behavioural change to the ‘action’ stage using a mixture of social pressure and some elements of fun theory. The app is part of a larger system that is controlled by the energy company itself. This has the added benefit of providing a test environment with participants as well as being able to provide the goal of money off their energy bill.

The app displays how far each user is away from their goal and gives the option to give encouragement or to share an energy saving tip. Tips will appear on the app weekly giving the user a prompt to save energy and think about their user. It also displays information about the users progress and how much money the user has saved using a combination of currency and tangible things.

The app could be improved in various ways however. For example at the current stage it does not address users misconceptions about their energy use other than simply displaying data about their history. It also does not use the data set of appliance energy use instead using basic data about how much the users bills have been. This data can often be in accurate due to estimated meter readings.

The design process used worked well and the research phase of the project turned up some good insights. Some assumptions were made before this phase and they were addressed before the solution was created making a much better and more accurate solution. The mixture of survey data and interview data gave a broad knowledge as well as a deep understanding of the issue and how to combat it.

Overall the project went well, however if the opportunity to re-do it arose there would be more focus on primary research than secondary. This would take the form of a more structured survey as well as multiple user interviews.

References [1] The Green Age (2013) Top 10 Energy Saving Tips for Students. Available from: http://www.thegreenage.co.uk/top-10-energy-saving-tips-for-students/ [Accessed 12 March 2015].

[2] Cancer Research UK (2014) Tobacco statistics. Available from: http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-info/cancerstats/causes/tobacco-statistics/ [Accessed 12 March 2015].

[3] Evans, T. (2015) Energy bills postcode lottery revealed. Available from: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-

Figure 4. A mock up of the social pairing app with colour as well as real images that could be used to represent money.

Pairing app scenario of use

One scenario of use could be a short video depicting one user not doing very well and the other sharing a tip to encourage them to do better. This video could be a short one however would be an effective way to depict the app’s use. The prototype will include this scenario of use however the video itself may be reserved for future work due to time constraints on this project.


1712350/Energy-bills-postcode-lottery-revealed.html [Accessed 12 March 2015].

[4] Evans, T. (2012) How much do household gadgets cost to run? 16% of electricity bills wasted by appliances left on standby. Available from: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-2164842/How-household-gadgets-cost-run-16-electricity-bills-wasted-appliances-left-standby.html [Accessed 12 March 2015].

[5] Norman, D. (2003) Don Norman: 3 ways good design makes you happy | Talk Subtitles and Transcript. Available from: http://www.ted.com/talks/don_norman_on_design_and_emotion/transcript?language=en#t-170623 [Accessed 12 March 2015].

[6] Harvard Health Publications (2009) Why it’s hard to change unhealthy behavior — and why you should keep trying - Harvard Health. Available from: http://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/why-its-hard-to-change-unhealthy-behavior [Accessed 12 March 2015].

[7] Sutherland, R. (2011) Rory Sutherland: Perspective is everything | Talk Video. Available from: https://www.ted.com/talks/rory_sutherland_perspective_is_everything?language=en [Accessed March 2012].

[8] The Fun Theory (2011) The Fun Theory. Available from: http://www.thefuntheory.com/ [Accessed 12 March 2015].

[9] White, M. (2011) How to save money on your energy bills. Available from: http://www.savethestudent.org/accommodation/how-to-save-money-on-your-winter-bills.html [Accessed 12 March 2015].

home - web designer · [email protected] . dave bennett: 12024150: captalogical behaviour...

Documents