Before taking CS 247B, I often felt like the process of designing a product to help people or solve a problem was overly drawn out, with too many trivial steps and details. The idea may have stemmed from the extremely involved workload of CS 147 or my initial view of the HCI field. However, my perspective has completely shifted. CS 247B has helped me realize and recognize that each step in the design process serves a specific and important purpose, and for CS 247B specifically, how certain designs can influence behavior intentionally and unintentionally. I was unaware of the ethical dimensions present when creating a product for behavior change but can now appreciate the nuances that contribute to building a successful product that actually helps people.
When thinking back on the quarter and the work that my team and I have completed, I loved the creative aspects that were included in the large projects like the baseline study, the intervention study, and the final interactive design that we created. Our group initially decided to focus on procrastination but then found a deeper connection to improving student posture, as this is something that almost everyone struggles with and there is no real preferred solution. However, creating a posture intervention is not the easiest task, as people want something easy to use and noninvasive throughout their daily lives. This is where we had to be creative, blending the aspects of a health-tracking app but making it enjoyable through group engagement with friends. I also loved the collaborative aspect of the class and working closely with 4 other students to create something that we are truly proud of.
On an individual level, I also loved making sketchnotes. I have always loved to draw and grew up with sketchbooks that were filled with paintings, drawings, and just small doodles that I would create while bored in my classes. Here at Stanford, following my CS undergraduate degree and soon-to-be CS master’s degree, I have not had the opportunity to express that creative drawing side, and sketchnoting opened that door for me. This class helped me learn that drawing key concepts and ideas significantly helps me remember the material I’m reading. Sketchnoting is a tool that I will utilize in the future to help me better understand what I am reading.
On the other hand, I was not a huge fan of the extent to which we sticky noted and brainstormed/ideated in class. I feel like those kinds of activities require lots of free time and space to let ideas flow and come to mind, and then more time to build off those initial ideas, and that type of environment is hard to create in a classroom with time constraints. For example, there were a few times when I felt like I sat for the entire 5 minute brainstorming period and was only able to get one thought (sometimes none) down on paper. I know that this is a reality of the ideation process, that sometimes ideas do not just come freely, but I’m curious about other ways the brainstorming process could happen. Then again, there were plenty of times I was able to write down 10-15 thoughts and had no problem. This may be a personal preference, but I feel like my best brainstorming occurs when I am in a comfortable environment with no time constraints and can just sit and think. I do understand, however, that this is hard to create in a classroom and monitor if not occurring in a classroom.
One surprise that I had was how quickly ethical dilemmas become apparent when designing something like an application or product, specifically when designing for a behavioral change. For our project, for example, it became quickly apparent that we could be creating harmful group dynamics by comparing individual posture to friends’ posture. Our solution leveraged social accountability, which can be a powerful tool for positive change but also a destructive tool leading to unintended consequences. Knowing this, our product incentivizes overall group posture improvement more than individual improvement. This helps to push the whole group as one unit instead of discarding or shaming individuals who are falling behind. Additionally, if an individual is struggling to keep up with a group, they always have the option to opt out of the next round, leaving the decision up to them. We also incorporate personalized goals for each individual as posture levels vary which helps individuals feel more comfortable about how their results are compared to others.
This ethical dilemma was a big issue and discussion point for our team and is an issue that is still not fully resolved for this project. Although bad behavior is minimized through our heightened importance on everyone in the group succeeding and personalized goals, there is still the potential that a group can miss out on rewards or prizes because of one individual. This can create negative social dynamics and potentially change friendships. There will always be ethical questions to products like ours that utilize social dynamics and accountability, but the important questions will always be: How much can we minimize those consequences? Can we get rid of them completely?
Ten years from now, I don’t think I’m going to remember all the specifics about our app and the processes we took to create our product, but I’ll instead remember the kind and energetic group that I got to be a part of. You rarely get to be a part of a group where all individuals are willing to put in the work as well as be understanding and help each other out when needed.
Thinking about ethics, one of the core considerations for our project was how it promotes well-being, specifically in the context of encouraging better posture habits while avoiding unintended consequences. We focused on the self-determination aspect of well-being, encouraging autonomy by allowing users to set personalized goals instead of enforcing a universal standard and ensuring relatedness through group accountability. This gives us a special dynamic that allows individuals to personalize their path while feeling the social motivation to be a part of a group. However, as mentioned earlier, this approach still has the potential to create social dynamics, leading to pressure, guilt, and resentment if an individual feels responsible for group failure.
Now, I think much more critically about the ethical implications that occur when designing for behavior change, especially how social dynamics can create positive change as well as unintentional harm as we saw in our own product. I also see the importance and questions that are answered in each step of the design process much better than I did following CS 147. When faced with a similar situation in the future, I will take a proactive approach to lessen unintended consequences, making sure that our interventions create positive change without creating pressure or negative group dynamics. Overall, I will always have a heightened awareness of the ethical questions to be considered when designing a product for behavior change.
Lastly, I just want to say a big thank you to the teaching team! Thank you, Christina, Amy, and Melody, for making this class fun and engaging on top of teaching us the importance of critical thinking when designing for behavior change! I will miss you all next quarter.
