An Analysis of Persuasive Technology
Tool Strategies
Rilla Khaled1, James Noble2, and Robert Biddle3
School of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science
Victoria University of Wellington
3
Human Oriented Technology Lab
Carleton University
{1rkhaled},{2kjx}@mcs.vuw.ac.nz, [email protected]
1,2
Abstract
Persuasive technology is growing in popularity, yet to date, there has been
limited research in this field outside of the U.S.A. This paper introduces
ongoing research investigating whether the success of persuasive technology is
based on how closely it matches the culture of its target audience.
1
Introduction
Persuasive technology is defined as “any interactive product designed to change
attitudes or behaviours by making desired outcomes easier to achieve” (Fogg,
2003). Recently, interest in persuasive technology has increased dramatically,
yet to date, there has been limited research into persuasive technology outside
of the U.S.A.
This paper introduces research investigating whether the success of persuasive
technology is based on how closely it matches the culture of its target
audience. B.J. Fogg, the current leading persuasive technology expert, has
described seven strategies typically used by persuasive technology tools, i.e.
persuasive technologies that simplify or facilitate certain activities (Fogg,
2003). In this paper, we analyse these strategies from the context of culture.
2
Cultural dimensions
This research probes the relationship between culture and persuasive
technology, relying on cultural dimensions, which have a precedence of use
Rilla Khaled, James Noble, and Robert Biddle
within cultural usability and cross-cultural consumer research. Two important
dimensions are individualism and collectivism, defined as follows.
Individualist societies are ones in which the ties between individuals are loose:
people are expected to look only after themselves and their immediate families
(Hofstede, 1996). Individual interests outweigh group interests, and
individuals tend to be self-motivated and goal-oriented, using guilt and loss of
self-respect as motivators. Triandis (1995) adds that individualists exhibit
more attitude-behaviour consistency, perform their duties if it is advantageous
to do so, and have self-identities defined independently of specific collectives.
Collectivist societies are ones in which from birth, people are integrated into
strong, cohesive in-groups, that protect their members in exchange for
unquestioning loyalty. Group interests outweigh individual interests, and
individuals strive to maintain social harmony and tradition, adapting skills and
virtues necessary for being good group members. Shame and loss of face are
motivators (Hofstede, 1996). Triandis (1995) adds that collectivists exhibit
less attitude-behaviour consistency, enjoy doing “what is right” for their
collective, and have self-identities strongly linked to attributes of their group.
Currently, much of consumer research focuses on these dimensions, indicating
that they are believed to be the most important dimensions, thus making them
logical ones to adopt. Certain researchers have also shown that these
dimensions account for most of the variance in global differences (Hofstede,
1996, Triandis, 1995). While multiple factors will affect people’s interactions
with technology, these dimensions serve as a solid theoretical foundation for
understanding persuasion-related behavioural patterns of global audiences.
3
Problems with current research approaches
Cross-cultural consumer research shows us that the cultural background of
message recipients has a significant impact upon how they perceive and receive
various persuasive messages (Han & Shavitt, 1994, Aaker & Williams, 1998),
and that some tactics and strategies will work effectively on an audience of a
certain culture, while the same strategies may be ineffective on an audience of a
different culture (Tansey, Hyman & Zinkhan, 1990). This understanding has
not yet been integrated into persuasive technology research. Aside from
Bonanni and Cyr’s (2004) work into e-loyalty, web design, and culture, most
of the existing persuasive technology research originates from the U.S., and
focuses on products developed for the U.S. Undeniably, the U.S. is a diverse
society, and is difficult to succinctly characterise. Nonetheless, the U.S. has
certain cultural characteristics that make it unique: for examples, it has scored
as the most individualist country in the world in various studies (Hofstede,
Developing Culturally-aware Persuasive Technology
1996, Triandis, 1995). Furthermore, the type of individualism existing there
sets it apart from other western countries: hierarchy and achievement seem to
be more important in the U.S. than in other individualist societies (Triandis,
1995). It therefore seems feasible that the persuasive technology strategies,
research, and designs originating from the U.S. will be more suited towards a
U.S. audience. While designers of these technologies may not have explicitly
set out to develop strategies to suit their populations, the pervasiveness of
culture would have impacted on the strategies that emerged. Suppose now that
the users of the technology have a different culture from the original target
audience of the product. This places on the new users an even more unlikely
outcome than the difficult goal of persuasion, namely expecting them to
temporarily change their cultural beliefs to accommodate the assumptions of
the technology.
4
An initial analysis of Fogg’s tool strategies
Fogg claims that seven strategies are commonly used in persuasive technology
tools: reduction, tunnelling, customisation/tailoring, suggestion, self
monitoring, surveillance, and conditioning. Here we present an analysis of
these strategies from the context of culture.
Reduction technologies make a complex task simpler, usually by eliminating
some of the steps of a sequence required to achieve a certain goal.
Amazon.com's “one-click shopping” uses reduction: it retains user details
obtained during registration, to reduce the number of steps necessary to
perform to buy a product. This increases the benefit/cost ratio of the behaviour,
and psychological and economic theories claim that people are more likely to
repeat a behaviour if its perceived benefit/cost ratio is increased. Additionally,
the simplification of the activity increases people’s self-efficacy. The concept of
self-efficacy is tied to two notions: self-respect and self-reliance. Both of these
notions are highly valued by individualists. Reduction technologies also
facilitate goal achievement, noteworthy because individualists tend to be goaloriented. Therefore reduction technologies seem suited to individualists.
Tunnelling technologies are designed to reduce “uncertainty”, by leading users
through a predetermined sequence of actions or events, step by step, to
encourage certain behaviours. Software installers use tunnelling: aside from
asking the user at certain points during the process where to place certain files
etc., they rely very little on the user. In using a tunnelling technology, the user
gives up a level of self-determination, but since the technology directs them in
certain ways, the overall process for the user is simplified. Users come to rely
on the directedness and consistency of the technology, which in turn means
that they are more likely to commit to the encouraged behaviour/attitude. Like
Rilla Khaled, James Noble, and Robert Biddle
reduction technologies, tunnelling technologies aim to increase self-efficacy
(related to self-respect and self-reliance), and facilitate goal completion. These
are all desirable values for individualists. Furthermore, tunnelling technologies
emphasise consistency, which is also valued by individualists. Tunnelling
technologies therefore seem most suited to individualists.
Customisation/tailoring technologies are computing products that provide
users with personally relevant information, for the purpose of getting them to
change certain attitudes/behaviours, as studies have shown that people tend to
pay more attention to information they believe is customised. Quitnet.com is a
smoking cessation website that tracks members’ quitting progress and uses
customisation to supply members with personalised tips. The customisation
process enables the modification of the products to suit individual users' needs
and habits, which may be especially useful for people with highly developed
senses of what they need as individuals. The identification of the self as an
individual with individual needs is characteristic of individualist societies.
Customisation technology may therefore be most appreciated by individualists.
Suggestion technologies are premised on the idea of intervening at the “Right
Time”. People feel more motivated to perform some behaviours at certain
times over others, so suggestion technologies are designed to identify these
times and then remind users to perform the behaviours. OOS prevention
software uses suggestion: it attempts to get users to take typing breaks by
popping up on-screen messages every so often that tell users to take breaks.
While individualists tend to look to their own values and priorities to help
them decide upon courses of action to take, collectivists are more accustomed
to relying upon social norms, or opinions and suggestions of other in-group
members. Since collectivists are already used to acting upon the suggestions of
others, this may mean that they will be more willing to accept suggestions
made by persuasive technologies, especially if the persuasive technologies are
perceived as in-group members (in the style of Reeves and Nass’s (1997)
computers as team mates experiment). Therefore, suggestion technologies may
be more suited towards collectivists.
Self monitoring technologies allow people to monitor themselves to modify
their attitudes/behaviours to achieve a pre-determined goal or outcome. Typing
tutors use self-monitoring: they measure users' speed of typing, so that users
can measure how much they have improved speed-wise, or determine how
much more they would like to improve. The motivation behind using selfmonitoring technology is to take the tedium out of tracking and monitoring
performance of one behaviour, which impacts upon a larger behaviour/goal.
Thus, it increases the likelihood that users will continue to perform the
tracking, which in turn helps them attain the overall goal. Self monitoring
technologies facilitate individuals to learn more about themselves, which is
Developing Culturally-aware Persuasive Technology
important information to individualists, as their self-identities are more
autonomously defined than those of collectivists, whose self-identities are
interdependently defined in terms of in-groups (Triandis, 1995). Furthermore,
this monitoring information is aimed at facilitating goal achievement. As
mentioned earlier, individualists are often quite goal-oriented. Self monitoring
technologies are perhaps currently more suited to individualists.
Surveillance technologies allow one party to monitor the behaviour of another
party through observation: when people know they are being watched, they
behave differently. HygieneGuard, effectively a surveillance camera, is often
used in restaurant bathrooms to ensure that workers wash their hands.
Surveillance can be either covert, i.e. hidden, or overt, but when it is covert, it
tends to work more on a punishment rather than a persuasive principle, which
is why Fogg claims that persuasive surveillance technologies must be overt.
Group behaviour research shows that people who actively identify with their
group, such as collectivists, are less likely to want to disturb the group norms,
as it would disrupt normal group interaction patterns and may lead to a loss of
social approval from others (Kitayama & Burnstein, 1994). However, if
individualists accept that the surveillance serves to modify their own
behaviours, then it operates as a type of self-monitoring. Perhaps surveillance
is therefore equally effective on both individualists and collectivists.
Conditioning technologies make use of operant conditioning, often in the form
of positive reinforcement, to reinforce target behaviours when they occur.
Games use conditioning: in PacMan, when users make PacMan eat white
pellets, they gain points. To be most effective, the conditioning must occur
immediately after the performance of the behaviour, but it need not occur after
every performance of the behaviour, as the user of the technology will probably
continue to perform it repetitively in order to (eventually) benefit from the
positive reinforcement. Positive reinforcement is more commonly used as a
motivational technique in individualist societies than collectivist ones
(Triandis, 1995). Furthermore, for positive reinforcement to successfully elicit
further similar action, the users must already have some vested interest in
receiving positive feedback, in other words, they must be aware of the
connection between goal achievement and rewards. This internalised concern
about the achievement of goals is characteristic of individualists. Conditioning
technologies therefore seem better suited to individualists.
5
Conclusion and ongoing research
After a preliminary analysis, it seems that at least 5 of Fogg’s 7 persuasive
technology tool strategies seem more suited to individualists than collectivists,
Rilla Khaled, James Noble, and Robert Biddle
while only 1 strategy seems to favour collectivists. This serves as evidence for
the idea that current persuasive technology research and design caters for the
U.S. population. The ultimate goal for this research is to produce design
guidelines for culturally-aware persuasive technologies that will be suitable for
global audiences, based on individualist and collectivist behavioural patterns,
beliefs, and persuasion strategies. The information yielded by this analysis,
case studies upon persuasive websites probing implicitly used persuasion
strategies, and other cross-cultural persuasion-related literature, will be
synthesised into such guidelines. In later stages of research, the guidelines will
be empirically evaluated by developing two guideline-driven persuasive
technology prototypes, designed for East Asians, Maori, Pacific Islanders, and
New Zealanders of European extraction.
References
Aaker, J. & Williams, P. (1998). Empathy Versus Pride: The Influence of
Emotional Appeals Across Cultures. The Journal of Consumer Research
25, 3, 241 – 261.
Bonanni, C. & Cyr, D. (2004). Trust and loyalty: A cross-cultural
comparison. In Proceedings for the International Conference of Business,
Economics and Management Disciplines.
Fogg, B. J (2003). Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What
We Think and Do. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
!H!an!,! !S!.! &! !S!havitt!,! !S!. (1994).! !Persuasion !a!n!d! !c!u!l!t!u!r!e!:! !Advertising appeals in
individualistic and collectivistic societies. !J!o!u!r!n!a!l! !o!f! E
! xperimental Social
!P!s!y!c!h!o!l!o!g!y! !3!0! !,! !3!2!6 – 350.!
H!ofstede!,! !G!. (1996).! !C!u!l!t!u!r!e!s! !a!n!d! !o!r!g!a!n!i!s!a!t!i!o!n!s!:! S
! o! f! t! w
! a! r! e! ! !o!f! !t!h!e! !m!i!n!d!.!
M
! cGraw-Hill Education.
Kitayama, S. & Burnstein, E. (1994). Social Influences, Persuasion, and
Group Decision Making. In Brock, T (Ed): Persuasion: Psychological
Insights and Perspectives, Allyn and Beacon, 175 – 193.
Reeves, B., & Nass, C. (1996). The Media Equation: How People Treat
Computers, Television, and New Media Like Real People and Places.
University of Chicago Press.
Shelat, B. & Egger, F. (2002). What makes people trust online gambling
sites? In CHI ’02 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing
systems, ACM Press, 852–853.
Tansey, R., Hyman, M., & Zinkhan, G. (1990). Cultural Themes in Brazilian
and US Auto Ads: A Cross-Cultural Comparison. Journal of Advertising
19, 2, 30 – 39.
Triandis, H. (1995). Individualism and Collectivism (New Directions in Social
Psychology). Westview Press.