tech-learning-psych - UC Berkeley School of Information

+

Behavioral Psychology and Technologies for Education Marti Hearst March 10, 2012

+

This Lecture 

I present psychological results



Collectively we decide how these impact education and technology + education.

+

The Elephant and the Rider 

Your brain isn’t of one mind: 



The elephant and the rider.

Jonathan Haidt, University of Virginia, Psychology

+

Your Brain Isn’t of One Mind The rider is the conscious controller Perched on top and seems to hold the reins. Thinks long term But also overthinks; analysis paralysis

The elephant is the emotional side: much more powerful Often wins the argument about which way to go.

Instant gratification. Sometimes for the benefit Instinct to protect your child Provide the energy behind motivating major efforts.

+

Willpower is an exhaustible resource Experiment: •

Can eat radishes but not cookies

•

Afterwards, radish eaters have less energy to engage in a puzzle.

The rider is too tired to work any longer.

+

How to Change Behavior 

To change behavior 





Must engage both the rider and the elephant

Three main steps: 

Direct the rider



Motivate the elephant



Shape the path

Chip Heath, Stanford Business School, Organization Behavior

+

Example: changing purchasing habits Engage the elephant

+

Example: change hospital practices Defect rate in hospital practice analyzed to be 1 in 10. The methods to improve were clear, but nothing was changing. How to fix? Engage the elephant: • Brought in mother of patient who didn’t make it • Set a tangible goal: •

Save 100,00 lives in 18 months.

Shaped the path: • Step-by-step instructions • Support groups, mentors • Peer pressure

+ Example: how to save malnourished children with no budget? The rider lists the dozens of impossible problems •

Water quality, sanitation, poverty

•

TBU (true but useless)

Strategy: •

Look for bright spots

•

Engage the elephants of the population to make these work

Eventually engaged 2.2M people

+

Example: how to sell a new product? A few salespeople were successful The Rider discounts this, says they had an unfair advantage Instead, see what they do differently. They provided a path for success The drug required an unfamiliar administration method, so they focused on tutorials for this part.

+

Habit 

100 years ago, few people brushed their teeth 

A Pepsodent marketer changed this.



Cue, routine, reward



Charles Duhigg, journalist

+

Habit Rats in maze: • Brains highly active when first learning • Then as rats got faster, mental activity decreased. • At this point, there are two spikes of mental activity: at the start when they heard the click of the maze opening, and at the end when they got the reward of the chocolate. The brain is ready to change at those points (no chocolate, new maze)

+

Habit Duhigg always got a cookie at 3pm Gained 20 pounds! Habit psychology helped him solve it Three part loop: •

Cue (trigger)

•

Routine

•

Reward

+ Habit How to change it: •

Change the cue

•

Change the reward

•

The routine gets reinforced over time

+

The Paradox of Choice 

Contrary to popular opinion, more choices can be negative 



Can lead to more anxiety

Barry Schwartz, Swarthmore, psychologist

+

Jam Study Lepper & Iyengar 24 flavors of jams available Showed either 24 or 6 varieties •

When 24 shown, attracted more customers, but 3% bought

•

When 6 shown, 30% bought

+

Decision paralysis If there is one drug left to try before surgery, doctors try it. • But if there are 2, they go for surgery 401k investments: • For every 10 options offered, participation rate decreases 2% Speed daters who meet 8 people make more matches than those who meet 20 Shopping makes you tired: • The rider has to make lots of choices

+

Nudges 

Decision making:  No setting is neutral  Even small and seemingly insignificant details can matter



“Libertarian paternalism”  People retain their right to make choices  But are “nudged” in the “right” direction



Richard Thaler & Cass Sunstein, University of Chicago, Law & Behavioral Economics

+

Settings Influence Behavior How much someone eats is influenced by the size of the serving

+

Default settings matter

+

Choices are presented in non-neutral frames •

Cafeteria offerings

•

401(k) investments

•

Organ donation

+

Predictably Irrational 

Anchoring effects 



People exposed to one number carry it over to others

Dan Ariely, Behavioral Economist, MIT

+

Cognitive Biases 

Conjunction Falacy: 



Hindsight bias 



Conjunction of 2 events seen as more probably then either in isolation

Tendency to revise history of one’s beliefs in light of what actually happened

Halo effect: 

Tendency to like or dislike everything about an entity based on a few salient traits

Thanks to Arthur Suermondt, Jeff Zych, and Evan Smith for this slide

+

How To Live in a World We Don’t Understand Very Well 

People underestimate lowprobability events



People are biased not to notice negative information



Nassim Taleb, Former professor, financial advisor, “epistemologist of randomness”

+

Survivor bias •

•

WWII: placement of armor on returning airplanes •

Looked at where the bullet holes appeared on the plane

•

They don’t see the planes that were shot down!

Lessons learned from business successes: I had 3 successful startups so now I’m the guru. •

Or am I just the lucky one statistically?

+ Low Probability Events •

In applying probabilities there is an asymmetry between safety and danger.

•

Some decisions require vastly more caution than others: •

You don’t need evidence that the waster is poisonous to not drink it.

Taleb: http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/taleb08

+ Survivor Bias and Low Probability Events •

If the same study is done 20 times, and by chance it’s positive once time in 20, we only see the published paper with the lowprobability positive event.

•

Someone in a crowd of 1000 people will get heads more often than chance.

•

Someone in a large enough set of people will appear to have ESP.

•

Some of the companies in “Good to Great” by Jim Collins in 2001 are now defunct •

If you invested in the 11 “great” companies you would have underperformed the market

•

Did some of the not “great” companies also practice a “culture of discipline?

•

Among these “greats” were Fannie Mae and Circuit City.

•

http://www.freakonomics.com/2008/07 /28/from-good-to-great-to-belowaverage/

+

Discussion