There are certain studies that should be replicated. Not because the findings are controversial. Rather, because the findings are so uncontroversial that you have to experience it to get how powerful the effect is.
The "craning and gawking" study1 is one of those experiments.
Researchers stood on a busy New York city street corner and stared ‚Äď craned and gawked actually ‚Äď up at a 6th floor window. All the while they were being unobtrusively filmed. The researchers were interested whether the size of the craning and gawking crowd would influence whether passers-by would also look up. The entire exercise lasted about 60 seconds.
As it happens, size does matter... but even small groups have a big impact. Slightly more than 40% of the passers by imitated his behavior. When 15 researchers looked up ‚Äď still at nothing ‚Äď about 85 % of the passers also looked up.
What is interesting about a bunch of psychologists, standing on a corner, gawking up at nothing? This experiment offers a profound demonstration of the power of social proof as a call to action.
Using the behavior of crowds to shape target behavior builds on the persuasion / influence strategy of social proof. Social proof is a human decision-making shortcut. In situations where we need to act but aren't quite sure about what decision to take, we tend to look around and check out what other people in the same situation are doing. And then we use that information to shape our own behavior. Social proof turns out to be quite powerful. In fact, in some cases it is a stronger call to action than potentially saving the world.
Well, does this sound familiar? This interactionist view focuses on the experience of the viewer ‚Äď and that's our professional expertise: "user experience".
Our authors show evidence that the user experience associated most with identifying both truth and beauty tends to be the "fluency" with which someone can process an object. Now you have some buzz words: "processing fluency". Use these buzz words over and over until your audience can process them fluently. :)
Thus, "easier" becomes "better" or "I like it" or "more beautiful". The authors present study results that support processing fluency as a reason for saying "judgments of preference, liking, and beauty are closely related."
Thus, the interaction approach allows us to say that when a viewer experiences a web page that is easy to process or understand, they get a good feeling about their experience. This good feeling contributes to calling the web page a "beautiful design". That's "interaction" experience.
Have you ever noticed the "reuse your towels" cards in your hotel room? They typically show a beautiful vista with copy describing how reusing your towel will save energy, water, and, by extension, the environment. Are you convinced? Do you reuse your towels? Most people don't.
The hotel industry seemed to think that "some do" was good enough, though. Perhaps hotel executives thought they'd hit a compliance ceiling? So they continue (today!) to print the same cards with the same pictures and the same largely unpersuasive message.
Researchers Goldstein, Cialdini, and Griskevicius, however, felt that it was the hook ("Do this to save the earth.") not the sentiment ("save the earth") that was weak. They hypothesized that knowing that other people had done it would evoke greater compliance than just saving the earth.2
To test their hypothesis, Goldstein and team created two sets of request cards that contrasted the original conservationist message with a new social proof motivator message. The gist of the messages (although not the actual messages) were:
Then they worked with hotel staff to distribute the cards throughout the rooms. And then waited to see who reused their towels and who didn't.
The result was impressive. Hotel guests who saw the "Everybody's doing it" message reused their towels 26% more than those who saw the "Save the earth" message. That represents a 26% increase over the accepted industry standard.
The researchers wondered if a shared social proof appeal could be even more persuasive through similarity. So they ran the study again. This time they included a third treatment variation, which essentially conveyed, "People in exactly your situation ‚Äď who stayed in the same hotel room ‚Äď have reused their towels." Their hunch was that knowing that people who had stayed in the room had participated in the desired behavior would add even more social pressure to comply.
Again they were correct. Individuals exposed to the same-room-social-proof motivator message were 33% more likely to reuse their towels than individuals in the conservationist message rooms.
It seems that the closer to home (away-from-home) the social comparison is, the more effective it is.
Pointing to the behavior of crowds is a powerful way to nudge people toward behaviors that they might or might not otherwise engage in. But, remember the craning and gawking experiment? It only took one or two people looking up to get others to stop. And the first few members had the biggest impact, with the largest increase in stopping and looking behavior coming with the second and third additional gawker.
And knowing that the people in your hotel room reused their towels has a bigger impact on your likelihood to reuse your towels than knowing that people in your whole hotel did.
This suggests that, that while "other people are doing it" is a strong persuasive message, "other people like you are doing it" will be even more persuasive.
I think I'd better to go sign up for twitter now...
1. Milgram, S., Bickman, L, Berkowitz L. (1969), "Note on the Drawing Power of Crowds of Different Size," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13(1), 79-82.
2. Goldstein, N.J., Cialdini, R.B., Griskevicius, R.B. (2008), A Room with a Viewpoint: Using Social Norms to Motivate Environmental Conservation in Hotels, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 35.
I think this has practical application for Help writers when we are recommending a best practice. Instead of saying "We recommend a value of..." we could say "Many users set this value to..."
I'm thinking the other 66% who were not motivated to reuse their towels may include some hotel-stayers like me. When I stay in a hotel with my husband or children, I don't want to reuse my towels because I don't know which ones are really mine ‚Äď they are usually all white.
I don't have a study to proove this, but I am sure (by personal opinion :-) that there's a certain amount of people who will actively reject to do what "all the others are doing". It might not be significant, but it might be worth mentioning.
I agree that the influence of social proof is powerfull. Although I haven't read the work by Goldstein, Cialdinim, and Griskevicius, my own experience at hotels triggers some questions. I have traveled quite extensively, particularly in the past 2 years. I do hang up my towels to indicate reuse and use a card to idicate that the bed linens do not need to be changed. In all but one case, housekeeping changed my towels and bed linens irrespective of the towels being hung and the card on the bed linen. Could it be possible that the results were biased to some degree by the Hawthorne Effect and Observation Effect on the housekeeping staff (including management)?
BRILLIANT, just brilliant. Wonderful article.
The gawking example is pretty simple to explain: if there are people standing around and gawking, the implied message is "We're looking at something worth looking at."
But the "save the earth" example is somewhat horrifying. I want to ask the 33% if they'd jump off a cliff if Jimmy did. This shows a complete lack of reasoning and willingness to shut off one's mind to follow some unknown "others".
While this social proof may be a reasonable reaction to something rather minimal and concrete (e.g., everyone's running away from something and screaming, so you run in the same direction), it's terrible to think that people would apply the same process to a complex idea.
My thought is that your two examples are very qualitatively different. When people are craning their neck to look at something, how could a human being not be curious what's going on up there? With the towels, it really does seem to be an example of people acting, essentially, like sheep.
Sign up to get our Newsletter delivered straight to your inbox
HFI may use ‚Äúcookies‚ÄĚ or ‚Äúweb beacons‚ÄĚ to track how Users use the Website. A cookie is a piece of software that a web server can store on Users‚Äô PCs and use to identify Users should they visit the Website again. Users may adjust their web browser software if they do not wish to accept cookies. To withdraw your consent after accepting a cookie, delete the cookie from your computer.
HFI believes that every User should know how it utilizes the information collected from Users. The Website is not directed at children under 13 years of age, and HFI does not knowingly collect personally identifiable information from children under 13 years of age online. Please note that the Website may contain links to other websites. These linked sites may not be operated or controlled by HFI. HFI is not responsible for the privacy practices of these or any other websites, and you access these websites entirely at your own risk. HFI recommends that you review the privacy practices of any other websites that you choose to visit.
HFI is based, and this website is hosted, in the United States of America. If User is from the European Union or other regions of the world with laws governing data collection and use that may differ from U.S. law and User is registering an account on the Website, visiting the Website, purchasing products or services from HFI or the Website, or otherwise using the Website, please note that any personally identifiable information that User provides to HFI will be transferred to the United States. Any such personally identifiable information provided will be processed and stored in the United States by HFI or a service provider acting on its behalf. By providing your personally identifiable information, User hereby specifically and expressly consents to such transfer and processing and the uses and disclosures set forth herein.
In the course of its business, HFI may perform expert reviews, usability testing, and other consulting work where personal privacy is a concern. HFI believes in the importance of protecting personal information, and may use measures to provide this protection, including, but not limited to, using consent forms for participants or ‚Äúdummy‚ÄĚ test data.
HFI may use personally identifiable information collected through the Website for the specific purposes for which the information was collected, to process purchases and sales of products or services offered via the Website if any, to contact Users regarding products and services offered by HFI, its parent, subsidiary and other related companies in order to otherwise to enhance Users‚Äô experience with HFI. HFI may also use information collected through the Website for research regarding the effectiveness of the Website and the business planning, marketing, advertising and sales efforts of HFI. HFI does not sell any User information under any circumstances.
HFI may disclose personally identifiable information collected from Users to its parent, subsidiary and other related companies to use the information for the purposes outlined above, as necessary to provide the services offered by HFI and to provide the Website itself, and for the specific purposes for which the information was collected. HFI may disclose personally identifiable information at the request of law enforcement or governmental agencies or in response to subpoenas, court orders or other legal process, to establish, protect or exercise HFI‚Äôs legal or other rights or to defend against a legal claim or as otherwise required or allowed by law. HFI may disclose personally identifiable information in order to protect the rights, property or safety of a User or any other person. HFI may disclose personally identifiable information to investigate or prevent a violation by User of any contractual or other relationship with HFI or the perpetration of any illegal or harmful activity. HFI may also disclose aggregate, anonymous data based on information collected from Users to investors and potential partners. Finally, HFI may disclose or transfer personally identifiable information collected from Users in connection with or in contemplation of a sale of its assets or business or a merger, consolidation or other reorganization of its business.
If a User includes such User‚Äôs personally identifiable information as part of the User posting to the Website, such information may be made available to any parties using the Website. HFI does not edit or otherwise remove such information from User information before it is posted on the Website. If a User does not wish to have such User‚Äôs personally identifiable information made available in this manner, such User must remove any such information before posting. HFI is not liable for any damages caused or incurred due to personally identifiable information made available in the foregoing manners. For example, a User posts on an HFI-administered forum would be considered Personal Information as provided by User and subject to the terms of this section.
Information about Users that is maintained on HFI‚Äôs systems or those of its service providers is protected using industry standard security measures. However, no security measures are perfect or impenetrable, and HFI cannot guarantee that the information submitted to, maintained on or transmitted from its systems will be completely secure. HFI is not responsible for the circumvention of any privacy settings or security measures relating to the Website by any Users or third parties.
Human Factors International, Inc.
PO Box 2020
1680 highway 1, STE 3600
Fairfield IA 52556
HFI reserves the right to cancel any course up to 14 (fourteen) days prior to the first day of the course. Registrants will be promptly notified and will receive a full refund or be transferred to the equivalent class of their choice within a 12-month period. HFI is not responsible for travel expenses or any costs that may be incurred as a result of cancellations.
$100 processing fee if cancelling within two weeks of course start date.
4 Pack + Exam registration: Rs. 10,000 per participant processing fee (to be paid by the participant) if cancelling or transferring the course (4 Pack-CUA/CXA) registration before three weeks from the course start date. No refund or carry forward of the course fees if cancelling or transferring the course registration within three weeks before the course start date.
Individual Modules: Rs. 3,000 per participant ‚Äėper module‚Äô processing fee (to be paid by the participant) if cancelling or transferring the course (any Individual HFI course) registration before three weeks from the course start date. No refund or carry forward of the course fees if cancelling or transferring the course registration within three weeks before the course start date.
Exam: Rs. 3,000 per participant processing fee (to be paid by the participant) if cancelling or transferring the pre agreed CUA/CXA exam date before three weeks from the examination date. No refund or carry forward of the exam fees if requesting/cancelling or transferring the CUA/CXA exam within three weeks before the examination date.
There will be no audio or video recording allowed in class. Students who have any disability that might affect their performance in this class are encouraged to speak with the instructor at the beginning of the class.
The course and training materials and all other handouts provided by HFI during the course are published, copyrighted works proprietary and owned exclusively by HFI. The course participant does not acquire title nor ownership rights in any of these materials. Further the course participant agrees not to reproduce, modify, and/or convert to electronic format (i.e., softcopy) any of the materials received from or provided by HFI. The materials provided in the class are for the sole use of the class participant. HFI does not provide the materials in electronic format to the participants in public or onsite courses.