Before taking this class, I assumed that behaviour change relies on willpower and self-control. If I fell short of a goal I had set for myself or didn’t manage to successfully develop a new habit, I would simply criticize myself and think the solution was to simply try harder next time. However, through all of the readings and sketchnotes, one consistent theme emerged: the importance of creating an environment and the conditions needed for habits to thrive. This includes context cues that lead to the intended behaviour, stacking new habits to be done after something you already do, and using changes (e.g. moving to a new city) to crystallize new habits. I also thought that UI/UX design is more about artistic merit, i.e. making appealing and aesthetic interfaces. However, through this class I learned that great design proceeds a deep understanding of human behaviour and habits, and social science research plays a significant role in product creation.
One thing I loved about the course was the research-driven nature of the assignments. Rather than jumping into creating a solution, we learned to conduct thorough research across multiple iterations, from the assumption tests to the competitor insights to the intervention study. At each stage, I loved learning to synthesize multiple forms of insights to not only ideate for our own project, but also to better understand the space we were operating in. For instance, research on competitor platforms illustrated how many apps focused on outdoor activity made tradeoffs regarding gamification and intrinsic motivation, solo adventures and social accountability.
As a Symbolic Systems major coterming in CS HCI, I routinely saw a strong connection between our project and work I did in other classes. Specifically, I was concurrently in PSYCH 1 and another Psychology class on Judgment and Decision-Making, and in both of these classes, I deeply learned about the mechanisms and research regarding topics such as loss aversion, emotion, affective forecasting, as well as research design methods. While working on our project, I considered how, for instance, incorporating a streak-based component to outdoor activity can increase engagement while also inducing pressure due to loss aversion. I particularly loved applying knowledge from these classes in a technology and software design context.
Regarding what is unresolved about the project, one thing I am curious about is the effectiveness of nudges in encouraging recreational outdoor activity long-term. After the novelty of getting pinged to go outside fades, will users continue to return to the platform and rely on the text messages? If not, will they have developed the habit to go outside regardless, to a degree that leads them to intentionally create time in their calendar for it? And if not, I’m curious both about what would be needed to get there, and what kinds of additional features our platform can offer over time to retain users and boost their engagement. Finally, another question I have is whether personalized nudges will be enough to distinguish our platform’s role in encouraging the target behaviour, given that users receive many messages a day. I’d love to see how tailored messaging plays a role in this.
10 years from now, I believe I will most clearly remember the methodological approach we took to going from ideation to creation. Next time I want to create something in any domain, I will start by researching the space, then building an initial prototype that can be tested for further insights. I will get actual people involved in the process similar to how we did with our studies, rather than theorizing and iterating on my own. I will also remember the importance of making product features that are not only functional, but that also leverage a deep understanding of human values and behaviour.
Our project uses behavioural nudges, where users upload their calendar and receive personalized text nudges telling them to go outdoors during times when they are free. By sending these messages during times where the user is free and likely available, it increases the likelihood that they will go outdoors. These are acceptable nudges because they retain user autonomy, and align with their existing goals. Specifically, users can adjust the frequency, tone, and content of the nudges they receive, adding an element of personalization that incentivizes engagement. Furthermore, many students already want to go outside but struggle due to busy schedules, stress, or the topic not being top of mind when they are free. The nudges simply bring the option to their attention, and they can opt out of messages at any time. However, these mechanisms could become manipulative if overused or poorly timed; for example, frequent or persistent messages could feel intrusive or create pressure, especially during high-stress periods like exams, and could push users to disengage. Additionally, if the app uses overly persuasive or guilt-inducing language, it may shift from supporting behavior to coercing it.
Now that I view behaviour change from the lens of cues, habit stacking, and other contextual factors, next time I want to develop a new habit, I will focus on leveraging this knowledge rather than relying on willpower alone. For instance, I will stack it and do the new behaviour after a habit I already do and in the same environment, or will do it at the same time every day to create consistency. Furthermore, next time I want to design user experiences and interfaces, I will start by understanding the human and psychological factors at play that create a seamless experience rather than solely considering the aesthetics.
Overall, this experience has helped me grow in my understanding of what leads to effective habit formation and behaviour change and develop skills in product, competitive, and user research. I further refined my ability to be an effective team member and take ownership of significant projects over time, which I will continue to apply in all future teams I work with.
