The subtle way background color and music affect our decision-making

Have you ever wondered why you make certain choices, even when you believe you're making them all on your own? The answer might lie in a psychological phenomenon known as priming. The "priming effect" is often cited as an example of how the brain can be influenced by seemingly irrelevant situations. The priming effect refers to the change in a person's behavior due to a presented primer (“stimulus” in academic term).

What makes the priming effect so interesting is that seemingly unrelated stimuli such as color, music, location, and smell can subconsciously influence people's decision-making.

In one example, a fictitious car website selling two different cars employed either a green background or a red background on the welcome page.

On the site with the green background, 74% of respondents chose the price-oriented, or cheaper but less safe, model and 34% chose the safety-oriented, or safer but more expensive, model. The green background primed price so more customers chose the less expensive and less safe car. However, on the site with a red background, the number of respondents who chose the safety-oriented model increased to 50%. The color red primed people to think about safety more and thus led to more people choosing the safer but more expensive car.

Here’s another experiment on the priming effect—this time with wine purchasing.

A wine store in the United Kingdom changed the music played in the store each day for two weeks to study how background music can affect wine sales. The store sold French and German wines and these wines were in the same price range and the same sweetness. Additionally, they also changed the placement of each wine depending on the day so that location would not be factored into the results.

The results showed that on days when French background music was played, 83% of customers bought French wine. Conversely, on days when German background music was played, 73% of customers bought German wine.

What’s even more interesting is that the researchers had the consumers fill out a survey after their purchase. When asked to state explicitly whether or not they thought the music had influenced their choice of wine, only about 14% of the respondents said that the music influenced their choice.

From these two examples, it’s clear that both background music and background visuals can influence the selection of certain products and these choices are largely not consciously recognized. So, if you're in charge of designing environments where people make decisions, it's important to be aware and take note of what associations you may be subconsciously creating for your consumers. However, if you're often finding yourself on the side of the consumer, maybe pay extra attention to the environment you're making decisions in and think about how it may be leading you to choose one product over another.

The Planning Fallacy: Achieve your deadlines in a timely manner

Did you know that the best way to estimate how long it’ll take to complete a project is imagine a worst-case scenario estimate, and then add 15%?

When project managing, we’re often tasked with figuring out how long it would take to complete a project. One easy way is to estimate the amount of time we think we’ll spend on each individual phase of the project. Sounds easy, right? However, how often do you think that we underestimate the time we’ll spend on something, whether that be due to optimism or just unforeseen things that pop up? As a behavioral scientist who is well aware of the planning fallacy, I know that the answer is more often than not. It's natural to be overly optimistic about our abilities and underestimate the potential obstacles and setbacks we might encounter along the way of a task. And so, as a result, we often end up with unrealistic timelines that can lead to stress, frustration, and missed deadlines. And this planning fallacy happens even to the best of us.

To illustrate the planning fallacy in action, let's take a look at an experiment where people are asked to estimate how long it would take to complete a large project, such as writing a big paper. Participants were asked to provide three different estimates on when they would submit their paper: their best estimate, a best-case scenario estimate, and a worst-case scenario estimate.

Participants were assigned to a sequence of either two, three, four, or five samples and then asked which one of all they tasted were their favorite. For simplicity, let’s focus on the three and four-sequence groups—take a look at the percent chosen as their favorite below.

Best Estimate: On average, the students predicted they would finish their thesis in 34 days. This initial estimate reflected their baseline expectations.

Best-Case Scenario: They were then asked to estimate how long it would take "if everything went as well as it possibly could." The average response was 27 days.

Worst-Case Scenario: Likewise, they were asked how long it would take "if everything went as poorly as it could." The average response was 49 days.

However, the actual average completion time for these students' theses was actually 56 days, worse than their worst-case scenario estimate! Fewer than a third of the students completed their thesis in the amount of time they initially predicted.

So how can we learn from this research? The implications of the planning fallacy are far-reaching, especially for professionals like consultants who need to estimate project timelines accurately.

We can acknowledge our optimism and recognize that our initial time estimates are often overly optimistic. This estimate might be a good starting point but it’s important to allocate extra time as a buffer. We can also consider worst-case scenarios. By thinking about worst-case scenarios, we can further build in buffers for unexpected situations or challenges that pop up.

Lastly, track and use previous data. If available, look back on how long it’s taken you or your team to complete previous similar projects and use that as a base. Actual data, even from a different project, can help you recognize there’s always something that comes up that can delay your project. will better guide you in making future estimates.

By acknowledging our bias to be optimistic, considering worst-case scenarios, and using data-driven insights, we can improve our project planning and increase the likelihood of meeting our deadlines successfully. So, the next time you're estimating project timelines, remember to factor in the planning fallacy and plan accordingly.

The Decisions of Hungry and Tired Judges

According to Barbara Sahakian, a professor of clinical neuropsychology, we make about 35,000 decisions a day. How many of those do you think are made consciously or with at our minds at 100%? If we behave the way traditional economics tells us that we do, the answer would be all of them! But we know that isn’t the case. Our minds are often refreshed after a good night's sleep, priming the morning for important decision-making, but the myriad decisions made during the day are done under suboptimal conditions, which leads us to be more susceptible to biases.

A concept known as decision fatigue in behavioral economics helps shed light on why normal people skip the exercise class they intended to go to after work, choose the less healthy comfort food option for dinner, or go late-night online shopping. These decisions might seem inconsequential and infrequent, but what if I told you decision fatigue occurs in high-stakes areas as well?

Let’s take a look at an experiment involving Israeli judges to demonstrate decision fatigue further.

This experiment analyzed 1,100 cases of judicial rulings by Israeli judges who presided over parole hearings in criminal cases. The study sought to determine if the time of day affects the likelihood that parole would be granted. The researchers found an interesting result, where there were three distinct times during the day when judges are most likely to grant parole.

In the first hearings in the morning, 65% of prisoners are granted parole and that probability slowly declines to zero right before their lunch break. However, after their lunch break, the probability of parole increased again to about 65%, and then gradually dropped, again, to zero. Then, after the afternoon break, the probability of parole increased again to about 65%.

What is happening here?

After so many repeated decisions, judges become exhausted, hungry, and mentally depleted. And in these states, the judges become more simplistic in their decisions and use less effortful strategies. In this case, the default and status quo of not granting parole, which is a lower-risk option.

So, what can we do about this? How do we design our environment so that we’re able to make the best decisions when it matters the most?

Understanding that timing matters may be the most important takeaway. Just like the Israeli judges, key business decisions should be made during the times of day when you’re most mentally alert and fresh, typically in the morning. Additionally, deprioritize less important decisions and identify the ones that require full cognitive capacity to prioritize. Lastly, it’s important to take breaks! Perhaps avoid scheduling back-to-back meetings and give yourself some time for a mental refresh.

Recognizing and actively working to combat decision fatigue can lead to better, more thoughtful decisions for you and your organization.

Wine Tasting and the Serial Position Effect

Going wine tasting has always been an activity I look forward to. From the natural beauty of the vineyards to the human craftsmanship, it connects me to nature and I get to experience the collective work of those involved in its creation. One taste after another, I slowly pick out the different elements of each wine and learn about my favorite varietals. Although I’m not the most knowledgeable, I can at least tell you what I like and don’t like. Or can I? As a behavioral scientist, I should be the first to know that context plays a huge factor in judgment and decision-making. Do I really think that one wine is my favorite, or is it just my favorite in the moment?

In one particular experiment, researcher Antonia Mantonakis and colleagues told participants that they would be participating in a study of “attitudes and values towards wine”. They were told that they would taste locally produced wines and led to believe that it would different samples of one grape varietal.

Participants were assigned to a sequence of either two, three, four, or five samples and then asked which one of all they tasted were their favorite. For simplicity, let’s focus on the three and four-sequence groups—take a look at the percent chosen as their favorite below.

As you can see, there seems to be a primacy effect for the three-sequence tasting (e.g., a large percentage of participants chose the first wine as their favorite) and both primacy and recency effects for the four-sequence tasting (e.g., larger percentages of participants choosing the first and last wine as their favorite).

So, there’s a serial position effect where the position of the information in a sequence affects our judgment, but what if the first and last wine were really that much better? Well, there’s one more important detail about all of these tastings. They were not different samples of the same grape varietal; they were actually all the same exact wine!

As you may have guessed, this phenomenon is not exclusive to wine tasting. The serial position effect unfolds all around us in many different contexts. By understanding this cognitive quirk, businesses can better reach and engage their customers, such as by placing the more important information at the beginning or the end of a communication or by ensuring a high customer experience by beginning and, perhaps more importantly, ending on a high note.

When Sunk Costs Lead to Larger Opportunity Costs

Change is a constant in life, and yet, as creatures of habit, we tend to seek familiarity and comfort in our daily lives. As such, we may stick with the status quo more often and longer than we should. Ask yourself the following questions:

•  Have you ever continued a project at work you knew wasn’t going to succeed simply because you’ve already invested a lot of time and effort into it?

• Do you know a friend who has stuck with the same partner for much longer than they should have because they’ve been together for years and have too much invested?

• Have you been staying at the same job for a while even though it’s been making you unhappy?

Rationally speaking, behavioral economics tells us that once the costs outweigh the benefit of an action, we should stop the behavior. However, we’re all human and that doesn’t always happen. Here’s an experiment by researchers Arkes and Blumer to illustrate: 

The researchers gave Ohio and Oregon college students the following scenario:

1. You’ve spent $100 on a ticket for a ski trip to Michigan and a $50 ticket for a ski trip to Wisconsin.

2. You think you’ll enjoy the Wisconsin trip more than the Michigan trip.

3. As you handle your two tickets, you realize both are for the same weekend!

Unable to sell or return either ticket, you choose one trip to go on. Which do you choose?

The researchers found that 54% of the participants chose the Michigan trip, the trip that was thought to be less enjoyable! Based on traditional economic theory, since both trips are paid for and they can’t get their money back, we would expect all participants to choose the Wisconsin trip but the larger sunk cost of $100 seemed to influence their decision.

This type of “irrational” decision-making happens often in our professional lives. But think about it—the sunk costs are not just the time, money, and effort that have been invested so far and wasted. The most painful cost is the opportunity cost; that is, the loss of the opportunity to do something else that could have been done with that time, money, and effort that would have led to more success.

If you continue to work on a project that is not working, you will lose the opportunity to start a new, potentially more successful, project in that time. If you put the energy, budget, and human resources to continue a project that is already not working elsewhere, new opportunities will arise.

This is the "opportunity cost”.

When it comes to making professional moves, most people hesitate to change jobs because of the sunk cost of having worked hard and the status quo bias. By considering not what you are giving up by changing jobs, but what opportunities you are losing by not changing jobs, you can start seeing things from a different perspective.

In the age of the Attention Economy, it is important for everybody to be constantly aware of where they are directly their time and energy. To do so, they must first be aware of their cognitive habits and think carefully about them. Therefore, sunk costs are not only a loss of time, money, and effort, but also a loss of the next opportunity to succeed.

The Three Factors Shaping Decision-Making

When people ask us what Behavioral Economics is, we often briefly reply with, it’s a way of understand how humans make (often irrational) decisions. However, learning behavioral economics and applying it can be difficult for folks who are new to the discipline. Behavioral economics has faced some limitations due to its lack of systematization and organization. And without a cohesive framework we are left to memorize many different and separate theories one by one. We introduce a new approach that categorizes these theories into three distinct factors for practitioners, enabling a better understanding of the human decision-making processes which in turn allows us to more effectively apply them.

Factor 1: Decision Style

Decision styles play a critical role in how we process information and make choices as a result. One well-known dual processing theory is System 1 and System 2. To put it simply, System 1 is largely driven by intuition and System 2 is mostly reliant on logic. Depending on the situation, the brain uses either system to make decisions quickly and automatically or to make decisions by carefully analyzing all available information.

While System 1's rapid processing is valuable in making quick decisions and preventing cognitive overload, it can lead to overly simplified and potentially suboptimal decisions. Understanding the existence of both systems and employing each way of thinking appropriately is crucial for making better choices.

Factor 2: Context

In addition to decision styles, external circumstances also significantly impact human decision-making. People often make choices that are influenced by their environment, as opposed to the traditional belief of making rational decisions regardless of the context we’re in. For example, people make different decisions when they are with their coworkers or with their family, or if they are by themselves. People also make different decisions based on how our environment is laid out. One experiment has shown that people purchase more French wine than German wine when there is French background music playing in the store. Another has shown that people opt to purchase more expensive products when there are other people around.

While we want to think we are making our own decisions but often time, the context we’re in might mostly make decisions for us. Understanding how context influences our decisions can help us mitigate the effect when necessary, and create environments that lead to behavior we desire.

Factor 3: Emotion

Contrary to the assumptions of traditional economics, emotions can heavily influence human behavior and decision-making. Our choices are subject to change based on our emotional state at any given moment. Understanding how emotions influence our decisions can provide perspectives on how emotions are affecting your and others’ behavior, and also help manage your emotions in positive ways.

Evolutionarily, our emotions were meant to convey information to us. Fear may signal that we might be in danger, which helps us to take action quickly. As we evolved, we are left with useful emotions and some not so helpful emotions that might hinder our ability to act “rationally”. We can use these useful emotions to better ourselves and create positive change. On the other hand, we can learn to be aware and leverage the less helpful emotions to our advantage to better our lives and move our businesses forward.

The three factors working together:

As you may have already predicted, these three factors do not work in isolation; they are intricately intertwined and affect one another. In most cases, they work together, with one factor outweighing the others depending on the situation. Acknowledging these connections gives us a more comprehensive understanding of human behavior and the knowledge to identify which factors may be more at play during certain times.

By systematically organizing behavioral economic theories into decision styles, context, and emotion, we can achieve a more accessible approach to understanding human decision-making processes. Furthermore, with this structured approach, applying the insights from behavioral economics will be even easier. If you’d like to continue building your knowledge on these three factors, consider following the blog and subscribing for future updates!

Why do we act against our better judgment?

How much of what we do is dependent on what we feel? Furthermore, why do we behave in ways that is contrary to what we know is the “right” choice? Researchers Veronika Denes-Raj and Seymour Epstein decided to investigate this with a common American candy: the jelly bean.

Let’s say you are presented with the below two bowls of jelly beans.

Each bowl contains both white jelly beans and red jelly beans, with a total of 100 jellybeans in Bowl A in which 9 are red. Bowl B consists of 10 total jelly beans, in which 1 of them is red.

You can draw from either bowl of jelly beans. If you drew a red jelly bean, you’d win some money.

---

Which bowl would you draw from?

---

In the study that Denes-Raj and Epstein conducted, many people chose to draw from Bowl A. However, actually, it is more reasonable to draw from Bowl B. Why is that?

Because Bowl A contains 100 total jelly beans, 9 of which are red. Therefore, the probability of drawing a red jelly bean is 9%. On the other hand, Bowl B contains 10 jelly beans, one of which is red. Therefore, the probability of drawing a red jelly bean is 10%, which is higher than the probability of drawing a red jelly bean in Bowl A.

In fact, more than 60% of people choose to draw from Bowl A. Why is that? People tend to look at the number of colored jelly beans itself and not choosing based on the actual probabilities.

Participants in the experiment often commented that they felt they had a better chance of winning money by picking the from the bowl with more winning jelly beans. They would say, “I picked the ones with the more red jelly beans because it looked like there were more ways to get a winner, even though I knew there were also more whites, and that the percents were against me.”

---

We make mistakes in judgment, even though we can understand them when we think about them calmly. This is the nature of actual human beings. Thus, human beings are creatures that often engage in "irrational behavior," or in other words, often make "irrational decisions”.

Understanding why such "irrational people behave irrationally" is the essence of behavioral economics. We often act against our own better judgment in other aspects of our lives, even when we possess the necessary knowledge and information to make optimal choices. By acknowledging the potential for irrational behavior, individuals and organizations can work towards more effective decision-making.

These insights from behavioral economics underscore the reason we consult with business folks and organizations: we want to help you make better decisions and to help you better understand the decisions of those around you. If you’d like to learn more, don’t hesitate to reach out!

---

Source: Denes-Raj, V., & Epstein, S. (1994). Conflict between intuitive and rational processing: when people behave against their better judgment. Journal of personality and social psychology, 66(5), 819

Increasing Employee Retention with a BeSci Model of Trust

In this blog, you’ll discover:

• Why Trust is an integral part of employee well-being, commitment, and retention;

• How Trust from a BeSci perspective can be broken into 3 components: Competence, Process, and Care; and

• How this framework of Trust is applied in a case study on hospitality workers.

How can organizations leverage BeSci to foster and maintain the talent in their organization? The Great Resignation, The Great Attrition, whatever you want to call it, people just won’t quit switching jobs or quitting altogether. In fact, 2021 report by McKinsey and Co. found that 40% of workers were considering quitting their jobs by the beginning of 2023. Like many other companies, a client of ours was experiencing an attrition rate as high as 35% in some of their divisions. After trying many “conventional” methods, they still found themselves with an ever-increasing attrition rate. That’s when they decided to turn to BeSci and reached out to us.

---

The client was a leading international and domestic hospitality staffing agency that specializes in placing hospitality workers in resorts, hotels, and other facilities in the U.S. They wanted to leverage BeSci in not only understanding the reasons why their hospitality workers breach their contract, but also potential ways to reduce breaches. What we learned by speaking to their current and breached staff was that a lack of Trust in the hospitality staffing agency was a top driver of contract breach.

Trust is shown to be a key factor not only for this client but for many organizations. Research has shown that employees working at high-trust organizations are more likely to plan to stay with their employer over the next year and more likely to recommend their company to family and friends as a place to work. Additionally, people at high-trust companies report less stress, more energy at work, higher productivity, more engagement, more satisfaction with their lives, and less burnout (Zak, 2017).

---

But what exactly is Trust and how do we build Trust? Trust might be something we intuitively experience, but it’s not something that most of us know how to systematically build. So, we turned to a three-component Behavioral Science Framework.

---

Component 1: Competence

Competence relates to the current and historical actions and performance of the organization and includes characteristics such as reliability, predictability, and ability in a specific context. It is also the set of skills and expertise that an organization possesses on the relevant domain. For example, does your organization have the ability to deliver to your employees what you promised to deliver? Or does your organization have the relevant support to ensure your contractors can achieve their sales and business goals?

In the context of the hospitality staffing agency, this included the organization’s ability to place hospitality workers at a reputable facility during the contract term, and the organization’s expertise in finding their workers affordable housing quickly when they relocate.

Component 2: Transparency

Transparency refers to the perceived openness of the organization, as well as its honesty and fairness of its policies. It can include the degree to which the organization adheres to principles that a worker finds appropriate. For example, is your organization transparent about the promotion process? Or how clearly does your company communicate new strategies and goals that affect compensation?

For our client, this related to how upfront the organization was about the hospitality workers’ contract terms, and the fairness and clarity of the reassignment process if they need to relocate hospitality staff.

Component 3: Care

Care is a perception that the organization’s motivations and intentions towards their employees are positive. It is the extent that an employee believes the organization values them, wants to do good to treat them well, and help them even when they are not obligated to.  For example, an employee may feel like the company cares about them by being flexible about personal days or remote work, or by showing empathy when an employee is going through a hard time.

In this case study, this relates to how much the hospitality workers feel that the organization respects them and genuinely listens to their concerns; the perception that the organization understands that moving to a new country/city is challenging and wants to help them acclimate as smoothly as possible. 

---

Applying this framework, we found that our client’s organization was performing well when it came to the Competence; however, the organization could improve upon the Transparency, such as understandability of the contract terms should a staff member decide to breach. For example, the organization could be more upfront and explicit about the financial implications if a staff member wants to end the contract. The largest opportunity for improvement turned out to be Care—many of the staff felt that the organization treated them as a business transaction rather than a person. For example, the organization could proactively check in with them once they arrive in a new city and provide them with a network of other workers in that area to help them build community and identity.

Based on these learnings, we partnered with the client leadership team to review each of the key touchpoints with the hospitality workers, from the moment they contacted the organization to the fulfillment of their contract. Additionally, we also helped them further identify areas of opportunity and how to create new initiatives to help build Trust among the hospitality workers, and hence fulfill their contracts. For example, the organization could emphasize the availability and the willingness of their assistants to help the hospitality nurses transition to the new city, or survey the hospitality workers on different BeSci personality traits (e.g., resilience and openness to experience) to better match them to the available cities.

Based on an assessment of each initiative’s impact and feasibility, the client made a number of changes to their program, including hiring a full-time staff to help manage the workers’ top concerns, increasing transparency in the recruiting process, and creating flexibility in the locations they were deployed.

---

This project was a great example of how our many tools in our BeSci toolbox come in handy (no pun intended). We strongly believe that we should not go into the research with principles or frameworks in mind, but rather, we listen to the stakeholders through a BeSci lens. With this approach, we were able to identify BeSci principles at play and organize them into a framework specifically personalized for our client’s unique situation.

If you’d like to learn how to leverage BeSci to create positive change for your organization, don’t hesitate to reach out!

How to Be a Better Gift Giver Using Behavioral Science

As we enter the holiday season, many of us are tasked with buying gifts for our friends and family. You may be excited at demonstrating their thoughtfulness or you might feel burdened to make all of these decisions. Either way, here are some tidbits from the behavioral science literature on the value of gift giving and ideas on how you can maximize your (and your friends and family’s!) gift giving experience.

Think beyond the point of exchange

There’s often a mismatch between what gift givers think recipients want and what recipients actually want. This is because gift givers are often focused on the “wow factor,” the “big reveal,” and the emotional reaction of the recipient when they receive the gift, rather than what the gift’s value is over time (Yang & Urminsky, 2018). To rid these reaction-maximizing thoughts, imagine not giving the gift in person and instead focus on the long-term value of the gift.

Gift experiences

Experiential gifts can be more effective than material gifts at connecting people socially. Research has shown that experiential gifts strengthen the relationship between the gift giver and the recipient more than material gifts, even if the gift giver and recipient don’t use the gift together. This is because experiential gifts tend to elicit stronger positive emotions (Chan & Mogilner, 2007). But if you are set on a material gift, consider a material gift that reminds the recipient of a positive experience you had together with them, such as a wine glass to remind them of the fun wine tasting night you had together.

Don’t break the bank

We often think that the more money we spend on a gift, the more the recipient will appreciate because expensive gifts signal a higher level of thoughtfulness. However, research shows that recipients don’t report this association between the price of a gift and their actual feelings of appreciation. Recipients also don’t think that expensive gifts are more thoughtful (Flynn & Adams, 2009).

When in doubt, just ask

As discussed earlier, gift givers often focus on the element of surprise and deviate from a recipient’s wish list to appear more thoughtful and considerate. (This is even more true for gift givers that are close to the recipient.) And so, gift givers think that they’ll appreciate a rogue gift just as much. However, research shows that recipients are actually more appreciative of gifts they actually asked for (Gino & Flynn, 2011).

We hope that these snippets of behavioral science research help you find the optimal gifts to give to your loved ones this year, and just know that giving itself can have positive effects on the gift giver as well (Dunn et al., 2008).

Conceptual Metaphors: When physical orientation influences nonconscious thinking

Below are two different orientations of the same advertisement for a fictitious watch brand. What immediate associations do you have with each image? Which feels more luxurious and powerful to you?

Peracchio, L. A., & Meyers-Levy, J. (2005). Using stylistic properties of ad pictures to communicate with consumers. Journal of Consumer Research, 32(1), 29-40.

Research in the behavioral sciences has shown a vertical as opposed to a diagonal, orientation of a product depicted in an ad increases perceptions of prestige and luxury (Peracchio & Meyers-Levy, 2005).

This makes sense if we ask ourselves the following questions. What do phrases like “looking down on others,” “moving on up,” or “high-end/upscale fashion” evoke? These phrases can elicit dominance, success, and luxury. We feel that we have more control and power over others when we’re above them. When we rise, we oppose gravity which implies that we have perseverance and strength. Verticality is associated with valence and signals power and luxury. Why is that? The answer is Conceptual Metaphor Theory.

Conceptual Metaphor Theory

The Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT) argues that metaphors are not merely figures of speech (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980; 1999). These metaphorical associations allow people to use knowledge from shared, sensorial, and concrete knowledge to understand abstract information. In other words, the unconscious feelings of "looking down on others,” “moving on up,” or “superiority” when we see the watch vertically oriented is interpreted more concretely as "this watch must be a luxury item”.　　

Without these connections between metaphorical associations and concrete knowledge, abstract concepts would not have relatability to the physical world and would be hard to explain and communicate. These connections are generally unconscious (i.e., automatic cognitive mechanisms able to facilitate mental representation).

In other cases, conceptual metaphor theory has been incorporated into product design. For example, tall, elongated bottles (see left photo) are perceived as more luxurious than compact bottle shapes (see right photo) (Van Rompay & Pruyn, 2011).

Another example is Nespresso's 2009 "High Design" campaign, which placed a coffee maker in the background of a sky-high skyscraper, projecting the appeal of an upscale skyscraper onto a generally less luxurious capsule coffee (Van Rompay et al., 2012).

Because these phenomena of conceptual metaphor theory occur subconsciously, they cannot be understood by research based on consumer feedback, and therefore require knowledge of behavioral science theory.

What behavioral science can tell us about human behavior during the World Cup

As the world gathers to watch the thirty-two teams playing in the 2022 World Cup, you may wonder why sports fans behave a certain way—a way that they would not behave if it weren’t for these teams playing in the biggest international football tournament in the world. 

Social Connectedness: Jumping on the Bandwagon

Much of our motivation for following the World Cup can be attributed to our need for belonging. We want to be able to chime into heated discussions about game strategy or simply enjoy sharing the experience with your friends and family.  Research has shown that this sense of sharing has a positive psychological impact on ourselves. In fact, hundreds of undergraduate fans with higher identification with a team is associated with higher levels of self-esteem and positive emotion. Higher identification also acts as a buffer against alienation, loneliness, depression, and other negative emotions (Wann, 2006). When we see someone wearing the same jersey, we instantly feel connected to them. This sense of a shared identity can aid in communication or increase the feeling among us fans that we have shared values.

In-group Bias: Either you’re with us or you’re against us

Why do we feel that we can trust someone more when they are wearing the same sports jersey as us? Why do we feel that we can’t trust someone in a different jersey? Research has shown that we tend to give preferential treatment to those who belong to the same group as us. In one study, researchers surveyed fans from both teams as they were leaving a sporting event and asked them to assess how much they agreed that their team’s fans has showed good behavior and sportsmanship. When asked to evaluate the opposing team’s fans, they found that fans were more likely to say that the opposing team’s fans displayed worse behavior than their own team’s fans (Wann & Grieve, 2005). We all want to feel positive about ourselves, about the groups we belong to, even if there is no basis to favor one person over another.

Deindividuation: “Irresponsible” Fan Behavior

In some countries, you may see sports fan flip cars, breaking windows, and starting fire in the streets. What makes people think this behavior is remotely acceptable enough to participate? Deindividuation occurs when people’s own sense of individuality and self-awareness is diminished, and can potentially result in a diminished sense of self-responsibility (Diener et al. 1976). This is when you blend into a crowd and become anonymous, something that’s likely to happen if we’re all wearing the same football jersey or have our faces painted. Deindividuation may lead us likely to act in a manner appropriate to the norms of the group rather than our own personal norms. Among football fans, those norms may involve rowdy behavior.

So, whether or not you’re following the World Cup this time around, we challenge you to reflect on your current or past behavior as it relates to sports through the lens of behavioral science. And if you want to learn more about how behavioral science can explain different aspects of human behavior, don’t hesitate to reach out to namika@sagaraconsulting.com!

Saying our Thank Yous

‘Tis the season for gratitude and overindulgence. Whether or not you celebrate with a full-size turkey or get together with friends and family, a plethora of insights from behavioral economics and behavioral science can help you maximize the benefits of some holiday traditions.

Many behavioral scientists will suggest that you leverage choice architecture such as using smaller plates or even using chopsticks to influence your food consumption. Although self-control and overeating are hot topics among us behavioral scientists during this time of year, let’s also not forget the Thanksgiving tradition of gratitude.

What exactly is gratitude?

Psychologists Robert Emmons and Michael McCullough define gratitude as a two-step process (2003):

1. “Recognizing that one has obtained a positive outcome.”

2. “Recognizing that there is an external source for this positive outcome,” meaning that we can be grateful to other people and to the world, but not to ourselves.

But are there any benefits of gratitude in our daily life?

The answer is yes! Research in positive psychology has shown that experiencing gratitude has a myriad of benefits. Feeling gratitude has positive consequences for well-being, mood, health, self-esteem, and better sleep (Wood et al., 2010). Research conducted with fifty couples also find that one’s felt and expressed gratitude positively relate to relationship satisfaction (Gordon et al., 2011).

Specifically, in one study, Emmons and McCullough asked participants to keep gratitude journals on a weekly basis. Compared to participants who were instructed to keep a journal of hassles or neutral life events, those in the gratitude condition felt better about their lives on the whole, reported greater optimism, fewer physical symptoms, and spent more time exercising (2003).

Gratitude at work, literally

Gratitude has many ramifications for the workplace as well. If you’re a leader, it may be intuitive that showing your employees you appreciate them can contribute to employee motivation, but it also has many other spillover effects such as serving as an “antidote against toxic emotions [such as jealousy or injustice] at the workplace” (Emmons, 2003).

Gratitude has been shown to facilitate prosocial behavior and can lead employees to contribute more to the organization (Grant & Gino, 2010). When employees feel appreciated, they feel stronger feelings of competence and social worth, which may motivate them to perform prosocial behaviors like deciding to volunteer more or putting more effort into their roles and responsibilities.

Additionally, gratitude can also enhance psychological security at work (Edmondson, 2002). When employees feel psychologically safe, they may be more inclined to express their own ideas which can lead to enhanced creativity and innovation for the organization.

Time to say thanks!

If you’re looking to practice more gratitude in your daily life either at home or at work, psychologist Martin Seligman has come up with an exercise called “The Three Good Things (Three Blessings)”. In short, one should:

1. Think of and write down three good things that have happened

2. Reflect on why they happened

So, take some time out of your day to simply say thank your family and your team at work. It doesn’t have to be a grand gesture; as long as it is backed with authenticity, your family and teams can reap the benefits of gratitude.

---

If you’re interested in learning more about how you can apply behavioral science to your own life and work, reach out to us at Namika@SagaraConsulting.com!

Changing Health Behavior with Behavioral Science

Ever wonder why people don’t do what they think they should do? Why don’t we eat healthier or exercise regularly when we know it can extend our lifespan? Why doesn’t merely knowing that something is good for us make us perform the desired behavior?

One of our healthcare clients turned to behavioral science to understand precisely this. Our client wanted to understand how they could close gaps in care for their patients across a number of cares by leveraging validated and peer-reviewed research in behavior change. The challenge they were facing was their patients were not performing desired behaviors such as taking their medication or getting preventative care even when they were reminded.  

Working with the clients, we decided to conduct in-depth interviews with their patients across different cares to get a deeper and first-hand understanding of patients’ barriers to getting preventative care and taking medication. Alongside a market research partner, we worked to draft a discussion guide that takes into account of various behavioral science factors, such as their motivations, context, and System 1 and System 2 decision-making strategies that go into patients’ desires to adhere to the care plan.

Coming out of the in-depth interviews, our team of behavioral scientists identified the different mindsets patients were in, different types of barriers that hindered adhering to the care plan, the presence (or lack) of behavioral cues, and any rewards or consequences associated with the behavior. We then created a behavior change model personalized to our client that was rooted in the behavioral science literature where we were able to map all of the factors involved in the likelihood of adhering to the care plan and provide recommendations to encourage their patients to regularly take their medication and to get preventative tests.

Here were some of the insights:

Cues—Signals that occur at the right time and at the right moment to perform a behavior.

This included:

• Alarms and reminders to take medication

• Keeping medication somewhere visible and somewhere they frequent

• Mail reminders to schedule their next preventative test

Motivation—An internal or external desire to perform a behavior or to achieve a goal.

This included:

• Intrinsic motivation to be a good patient and be there for their family

• A lack of motivation due to perceived susceptibility of the disease

• A lack of motivation due to perceived efficacy of preventative testing

Barriers—Obstacles that prevent a behavior which can be psychological, logistical, physical, etc.

This included:

• A lack of knowledge of cadence of preventative testing

• Anticipated physical pain or discomfort from getting a preventative test or taking medication

• Anticipated psychological distress from receiving bad news

It’s important to note that Cues, Motivation, and Barriers can interact with each other and affect the strength of one another. For example, if someone is more motivated to perform a behavior or achieve a goal, they may more easily recognize different cues to the behavior.

Most of the time, performing a behavior leads to a reward.

Rewards—A positive or negative outcome associated with the behavior.

• Physical pain of preventative tests

• Perceived excess exposure to radiation

• A general lack of immediate, positive rewards for getting preventative testing and taking medication

By organizing behavior and mapping behavior change this way, we were able to provide recommendations to the client under each of the different components in the model.

Our sample recommendations to the Marketing Team:

• To create better cues for preventative tests, we recommended that patients attach a memorable and specific date around them.

• To increase motivation, we recommended specific messaging to increase patients’ psychological empowerment.

• To decrease some of the psychological barriers (e.g., fear and anxiety), we recommended reframing language around risk to avoid mentions of death and instead focusing on how taking their medication regularly and getting preventative tests to speak to their motivation around being a good patient and there for their family. 

With the proposed recommendations clearly mapped out by the different components, the client was easily able to assess which changes would be the most feasible and impactful for their patients in their marketing communications. This behavior change model now serves as a fundamental framework of health behavior change for our clients.

If you’re looking to change behavior through tactics that are backed by rigorous behavioral science research, don’t hesitate to reach out!