Before and After this Course
Before coming to Stanford, I did a masters in Behavioural Science at the London School of Economics. I had a theoretical understanding of behavior change but no practical experience implementing and evaluating behavioral nudges. For this reason, I was excited to take this course and experience first-hand the challenges to modifying behavior I had spent a year learning about. In particular, I was eager to apply these theories and frameworks in the context of product design, which is my chosen career.
After taking this class, I am eager to avoid all behavior change entirely.
Behavior change is hard. And it is also inevitable in my line of work. I would be hard pressed to find work in the product design space that does not have some element of behavior change.
Because of this, I intend to be extremely selective of which behaviors I endeavor to change. Overall, behavior change is a complex and multifaceted process that involves individual, social, and environmental factors, which makes it extremely difficult to do effectively. I’m interested in contexts where there are other additional levers of change (like financial returns or organizational pressure). In most cases, there are many, many forces working against you. In the future, I aim to only push on behaviors where other major forces are aligned in favor of the behavior change I seek. If this is not the case, I believe my effort is better spent elsewhere.
My Experience in the Course
My biggest takeaway from this class was the methods for “thinking apart, converging together.”
I think best on my own and have a hard time generating ideas on the fly. But when I generate ideas on my own, I have a hard time merging these thoughts with the rest of my team. We used this pattern in nearly every assignment that we did, which gives me a repertoire of tools that spans the entire design process. I will use these methods in future teamwork settings – both in the upcoming final quarter at Stanford and in my professional life.
Ethical Considerations
Manipulation
If you endeavor to change someone’s behavior, you necessarily believe they should not act this way. And in order to be successful in changing behavior, you have to be opinionated. With all that said, what gives me the right to believe that someone should not act in a particular manner? A quick glance at social media shows that people have no shortage of beliefs around how others should act. What differentiates me – a student in 247B – from everyone else? What gives me the right to create experiences that actually might lead to the change I wish to see? What transforms imagined beliefs to something I should act on?
You cannot be a product designer without (regularly) aiming to change behavior. Indeed, nearly every product is premised on some sort of behavior change. Our Apple watches want us to get a certain number of steps per day; Netflix wants us to watch their shows; and social media platforms want us to keep scrolling. With well-placed nudges, a crisp value-add, and an understanding of context, you can change behavior! But should you?
Any time you set out to change behavior, there is potential for manipulation and coercion. As designers, we must be mindful of the power dynamics at play in our interactions with the people who use our products. Indeed, so many projects in this class had to do with lowering screen time and social media use. After this class, many of us will go on to design more products, found companies, and invest in future entrepreneurs. Is it possible that, in 20 years, students in 247B will be designing interventions to reduce the effect of a product that someone in my year created?
Design for Well-Being
When building out the prototype of RiseRight throughout the course of this class, I struggled with the notion of shaming when it comes to designing for healthy behaviors. A stylized example is a fitness app that encourages users to exercise more. While the intention may be to promote healthy habits, the app may also reinforce harmful body image ideals. It may also make users feel inadequate if they can’t keep up with the behavior change the app pushes. This is a slippery slope that can lead to a cycle of shame and guilt, ultimately hindering the user’s ability to make positive changes in their life. Was the impact of the app net neutral? Was it net negative?
Our intervention in this course was aimed at reducing screen time in the mornings. I found myself questioning whether it was my place to tell someone how their morning routine should go. Who am I to tell someone that they shouldn’t doom scroll first thing in the morning? What gave me that right? What if the behavior makes them happy, or at least brings them autonomy? What if it’s none of my business? And how do I avoid feelings of shame in the design, branding, and execution of my app?
I leave this class asking the following: is it possible to encourage healthy habits without creating a culture of shame and guilt around non-adherence? Is it even possible to reach the rosy ideal where we create empowering interventions that have a positive impact without chipping away at autonomy and personal preferences? I’m not entirely sure what this would look like or if it’s even possible.
