Archive
April, 2009 Monthly archive

Bonjour / Goeiendag to visitors from Design for Persuasion: while you’re here, you might also like to download a free poster [PDF] which has 12 of the Design with Intent patterns on it in a handy reference form. Thanks for stopping by!

The Architectural Lens draws on techniques used to influence user behaviour in architecture, urban planning and related disciplines such as traffic management and crime prevention through environmental design (see also the Security lens).

While the techniques have been developed in the built environment, many of the ideas can also be applied in interaction and product design, even in software or services; they are effectively about using the structure of systems to influence behaviour.

Positioning & layout

“I wonder why they laid it out like that”

■ Arrange elements to affect how people use them—it can involve simply positioning elements (functions, buttons, etc) in sequence, hiding elements so they are only available for interaction in that sequence, or designing paths to converge or diverge intentionally

■ The layouts of supermarkets, shopping malls and offices can influence the paths taken by users, exposing them to the shelves, shops and colleagues in a strategic order or hierarchy

Bathroom mirror layout - photos by Meagan Call Bathroom mirror layout - photos by Meagan Call

Examples: In this service station bathroom (above), the mirrors have been moved from behind the sinks to an intentionally awkward position near the door, so users don’t spend too long in front of them. See this discussion by Meagan Call.

Chicane layouts (below) force drivers to yield priority to oncoming traffic, reducing speeds.

Chicane road layout

Constraining behaviourThis pattern is mainly about constraining user behaviour…
Enabling behaviourbut can also enable a user by making it easier to use/experience things in the ‘right’ order.

Material properties

“It’s much more comfortable if you use it this way rather than that way”

■ Use materials individually or in combination, chosen for particular properties which influence or affect user behaviour—e.g. comfortable chairs to encourage visitors to sit down, uncomfortable café seating to discourage long stays

■ A change in properties, such as the sudden roughness of rumble strips on the road, can signal to a user that a change in behaviour is appropriate

Rough textured paving dividing pedestrian and cycle paths in Oulu, Finland

Examples: Rough-textured paving (above) can act as a subtle barrier
between the cycle and pedestrian tracks: stray over the line on a bike and you’ll feel it.

This bench on the Paris Métro (below) is intentionally too uncomfortable to act as anything other than a very temporary perch: it prevents sleeping or loitering.

Uncomfortable 'bench' on Paris Metro

Constraining behaviourThis pattern is mainly about constraining user behaviour…
Motivating behaviourbut can also motivate a user, e.g. by ‘rewarding’ certain behaviour with comfort

[column width="47%" padding="6%"]

Segmentation & spacing

“One at a time, please”

■ Break up a system into multiple elements, spaced strategically to influence how a user can interact with them

■ Often used so users can interact with only one element at a time, or to make sure they share a system with others. Removing spacing, or integrating segmented elements, can also be used intentionally

Segmented seats on the Paris Metro

Example: These individual seats replace a bench on the Paris Métro – meaning that someone cannot lie down or occupy more than one.

[/column][column width="47%" padding="0%"]

Orientation

“Slanty design”

■ Use angled elements in a system to influence interaction, e.g. by making it easier or more difficult for some actions to occur than others. Also known as ‘slanty design’ (Russell Beale).

■ Can also be used to ‘funnel’ users, e.g. staggered pedestrian crossings making sure users face oncoming traffic

New Pig cigarette bin with angled top

Example: Sloping lids on cigarette bins to discourage placing of litter on top

[/column][column width="47%" padding="6%"]

Removal

“You can’t use it if it isn’t there”

■ Simply remove system elements or cues which allow or encourage particular behaviours you don’t want to happen, or which would allow a user to proceed without thinking

■ Can also increase the transparency of a system, making it easier for users to see the consequences of their (and others’) actions

Shared Space at Seven Dials in London. Photo by cheddarcheez

Example: The ‘naked roads’/'shared space’ approach of removing road markings and signage to influence more careful driving in urban areas, e.g. here at Seven Dials near Covent Garden in London

[/column][column width="47%" padding="0%"]

Movement & oscillation

“It’s brought right in front of you”

■ Dynamic system elements which move to guide users through a process or present things/functions to users in the order they should experience them – e.g. a conveyor belt in a factory or sushi bar

■ Can also be used to discourage users loitering, or blocking others’ paths, e.g. in a popular museum exhibit

Moving walkway at Heathrow

Example: A moving walkway (or an escalator), aside from making it easier for pedestrians to get about, also prevents them blocking the path of others

[/column][end_columns]

Photos by Dan Lockton, except service station bathroom by Meagan Call, cigarette bin from a printed version of the New Pig ‘pigalog’, and Seven Dials photo by Cheedarcheez, used under a Creative Commons by-nc-nd licence.

____________________
The Design with Intent Toolkit v0.9 by Dan Lockton, David Harrison and Neville A. Stanton
Introduction | Behaviour | Architectural lens | Errorproofing lens | Persuasive lens | Visual lens | Cognitive lens | Security lens

dan@danlockton.co.uk

Read More

The different patterns (initially just those featured on the poster) have each been given a badge (or two) showing whether they have the effect of enabling, motivating, or constraining user behaviour:

Enabling behaviour

Enabling behaviour
Enabling ‘desirable’ behaviour by making it easier for the user than the alternatives

Motivating behaviour

Motivating behaviour
Motivating users to change behaviour by education, incentives and changing attitudes

Constraining behaviour

Constraining behaviour
Constraining users to ‘desirable’ behaviour by making alternatives difficult or impossible

 
This way of classifying the patterns can be useful to think about when you’re coming up with concepts and evaluating them. What are you trying to achieve in terms of influencing behaviour? How would you react, as a user, faced with the design? Would it influence your behaviour? Why?

Much work in Persuasive Technology has taken the approach of motivating behaviour, with attitude change usually a precursor, but BJ Fogg’s reduction and tunnelling (Fogg, 2003) are arguably also about enabling particular behaviours by making them simpler (see also Maeda, 2006). Buckminster Fuller’s ‘trimtab’ concept—“modify[ing] the environment in such a way as to get man moving in preferred directions” (Krausse & Lichtenstein, 2001)—also accords with the enabling approach and provides a link to the wider field of design for social benefit. Human factors strategies aimed at influencing behaviour in a health and safety context often employ a constraining approach.

The approach used in practice—and hence the patterns and concepts chosen for further development—may, of course, be dictated by the client or other stakeholders rather than being the designer’s decision.

P.S. If you can come up with better icons (the ‘Constraining’ one does look rather intestinal), or your own classifications, please do let us know in the comments below…


Next: the patterns

[column width="30%" padding="5%"]

Architectural lens

[/column][column width="30%" padding="5%"]

Errorproofing lens

[/column][column width="30%" padding="0%"]

Persuasive lens

[/column][column width="30%" padding="5%"]

Visual lens

[/column][column width="30%" padding="5%"]

Cognitive lens

[/column][column width="30%" padding="0"]

Security lens

[/column][end_columns]

____________________
The Design with Intent Toolkit v0.9 by Dan Lockton, David Harrison and Neville A. Stanton
Introduction | Behaviour | Architectural lens | Errorproofing lens | Persuasive lens | Visual lens | Cognitive lens | Security lens

dan@danlockton.co.uk

Read More

■ How to influence user behaviour
■ 12 inspirational design patterns in poster form (plus 35 more)
■ Grouped into 6 ‘lenses’ giving different perspectives

Design for Behaviour Change: The Design with Intent Toolkit v. 0.9
Download the poster (it’s a 1.3 MB PDF) – now also includes A4 pages for each lens, for easier printing  [Alternative link]

***Please note***
This is an old version of the toolkit – the newer Design with Intent toolkit v.1.0 is also available and is much better!

 
 
 
 
 
 

Start with the problem

You have a product, service or environment—a system—where users’ behaviour is important to it working properly (safely, efficiently), so ideally you’d like people to use it in a certain way.

Or maybe you have a system where it would be desirable to alter the way that people use it, to improve things for users, the people around them, or society as a whole.

How can you modify the design, or redesign the system, to achieve this: to influence, or change users’ behaviour?

The design patterns

The Design with Intent Toolkit aims to help designers faced with ‘design for behaviour change’ briefs. The poster* features 12 design patterns which recur across design fields (interaction, products, architecture), and there are also 35 more detailed here on the website. Some of the names will be unfamiliar, but we hope the patterns and examples will be understandable, and inspire your own concepts.

Think about how you might apply the ideas to your brief, and what could work given what you know about the problem. If you get stuck, try combining ideas from different patterns: many real examples can be thought of as using two or more patterns.

The patterns are grouped into six ‘lenses’, each offering a different worldview on design and behaviour. The lenses allow you to ask “How might someone else approach the problem?” and ought to help you think outside your initial perspective (or your client’s):

Architectural lens

Errorproofing lens

Persuasive lens

Visual lens

Cognitive lens

Security lens

A different approach: using the patterns as questions
Nedra Kline Weinreich, author of Hands-on Social Marketing, has created a clever Design Approach for Behaviour Change worksheet based on the 12 patterns from the Design with Intent poster, by re-framing each of the patterns as a question. This is a great idea, turning the patterns into cues for you to think about relative to your problem. After working through the questions, you pretty much end up with a set of possible solutions.


What sort of behaviour are you trying to achieve?

See the next page…

*Lockton, D., Harrison, D.J., Stanton, N.A. Design for Behaviour Change: The Design with Intent Toolkit v.0.9, Uxbridge: Brunel University 2009 (ISBN 978-1-902316-6-1 print; 978-1-902316-63-5 eBook), http://www.designwithintent.co.uk

____________________
The Design with Intent Toolkit v0.9 by Dan Lockton, David Harrison and Neville A. Stanton
Introduction | Behaviour | Architectural lens | Errorproofing lens | Persuasive lens | Visual lens | Cognitive lens | Security lens

dan@danlockton.co.uk

Read More

The ‘Design with Intent method‘, on which I’m working as the first part of my PhD, has been fairly sparsely reported on this blog. This is intended to be an innovation method for helping designers faced with “behaviour change” problems come up with useful solutions, or in situations where helping users to use a product or system more efficiently would be worthwhile. The ideas that have gone into it are (mostly) the ‘positive’ side of what we’ve discussed on the blog for the last few years.

The brief series of posts from last summer about getting people to do things in a particular order, which more recently got some attention from Kati London’s ‘Persuasive Technologies: Designing the Human‘ class at NYU’s Interactive Telecommunications Program (with some very interesting student commentary) was based on a relatively early iteration of the method. At some point, I’ll draw up a comparison between the iterations of the method, even if simply for my own clarity of mind – it’s helpful to record why I changed different aspects along the way.

The initial plan had been for it to be almost TRIZ-like in terms of ‘prescribing’ relevant design techniques to help achieve particular target behaviours. The first few iterations of the method thus took the form of a kind of hierarchical decision tree. Live|Work‘s very helpful advice to me last summer to reduce the prescriptive nature slightly by having a kind of illustrated ‘idea space’ led – in due course – to the version tested in the pilot studies carried out in late 2008 and earlier this year. What the studies showed, among other things (to be reported in the Persuasive 2009 paper!) was that many designers, when asked to come up with concept solutions, don’t really like working from categories and rules and hierarchies, even where they would be useful. Some do (and with impressively exhaustive efficiency), but many don’t: they preferred to use the method as a kind of well of inspiration, without necessarily using it in any kind of procedural way.

So – and there’s another reason for this, too, which I’ll be able to announce at some point – it seemed sensible to redesign the method to accommodate both modes of working: a ‘prescription mode’ for the more procedure-driven designer, and an ‘inspiration mode’ for the designer who prefers less bounded creativity (a bit more like IDEO’s method cards, but not quite as unstructured as the Oblique Strategies). The inspiration mode is essentially a very simplified, flattened set of design patterns loosely grouped into different ‘lenses’ representing views on influencing behaviour, but with no real structure beyond that. It’s more of a ‘toolkit’ than a method, and because of its relative simplicity it seems worth releasing to get some feedback without too much more work. The “eight design patterns for errorproofing” post from a few weeks back is a kind of preview of part of it.

On Monday morning, then, there’ll be a large poster available to download on the blog, and I’ll do a series of posts forming the online component of the toolkit. So please, feel free to comment, make suggestions for improvements or better examples, or pick holes in it!

P.S. I’m aware the blog needs a bit of housekeeping in terms of making the sidebar work properly again in IE, fixing the very out-of-date blogroll, and my appalling sloth in replying to people who’ve very kindly sent very interesting links and ideas. I will try to get round to it all soon.

Read More

@danlockton

Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

Upcoming talks & events

I'm speaking or running workshops at:

Some of my previous presentations

Comments & trackbacks

Blog 2005-date