Designing for Behavior Change (feat. Amy Bucher)

Amy Bucher, PhD, discusses her book Engaged: Designing for Behavior Change, and provides practical tips to UXers who want to incorporate these methods into their work.

Sponsored by Watch City Research
Watch City Research is your trusted UX research partner

Disclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you.

Episode Transcript

Dan Berlin (00:14):
Hi, everyone, and welcome to another episode of
the 97 UX things podcast. DanBerlin here, your host and book
editor. This week, I'm joined byDr. Amy Bucher, who will be
talking about designing forbehavior change. Welcome, Amy.

Amy Bucher (00:27):
Thanks, Dan. I'm really glad to be here.

Dan Berlin (00:29):
Thanks for joining me. Can you please tell us a
little bit about yourself?

Amy Bucher (00:33):
Sure. I am the author of a book called Engaged;
Designing for Behavior Change,which came out a few years ago
with Rosenfeld Media. So, reallyintended for a UX professional
audience who want to incorporatepsychology behavior science into
their toolkit - whether they'reresearchers or designers,
whatever UX role they play. I'mcurrently the Chief Behavioral

(00:54):
Officer at Lirio, a company thatuses artificial intelligence and
behavioral science to getpatients to take actions around
their health. So for example, ifsomeone's overdue for a cancer
screening, or a vaccination, orhasn't seen their primary care
provider in a number of years -we can really personalize
messages that will speak to thereason why they're not taking
action and drive them to getback into the medical office.

(01:16):
Get the care that will help thembe healthier. Prior to that, you
and I worked together at Mad*Powfor a number of years. So, I was
able to really learn a ton inthe consulting world, working
with all different types oforganizations to apply
behavioral science to the workthat they were doing. I've also
spent time at CVS, at Johnson &Johnson, worked for another
startup early in my career -which is actually how I came in

(01:37):
to be as part of Johnson &Johnson. So kind of worked all
over the space, mostly inhealth. But really applying
behavioral science to the designof interventions, products and
services that are intended tochange people's behavior.

Dan Berlin (01:49):
To start things off, before we actually dig into the
the bulk of the content... Canyou define that for us at a
high-level? Behavioral scienceand deciding for behavior
change?

Amy Bucher (02:00):
Yeah. You know, it's funny. Because I have actually
felt like my own definition ofbehavioral science has gotten a
little slippery in the last fewyears. My degrees are in
psychology. So, kind of atraditional academic training. I
really focused on socialpsychology as an undergrad -
which is the focus of howsystems, the environment, other
people affect a person'sbehavior, perception, and
experience. Then in grad school,I studied organizational

(02:23):
psychology - which was reallybecause the person I wanted to
work with, as an advisor, was inthat department. But it's just
the same kind of thing - onlycontextualized to a formal
organization, like a business ora school. As I've gone through
my professional career,behavioral economics has been
something that's on the rise forthe last several decades. The
book Nudge that came out, Ithink in 2010-ish, really pushed

(02:45):
behavioral economics to thefore. So now, I think behavioral
science very much includeseconomists, and particularly
behavioral economists, who arethinking about the ways that
choice architecture affectspeople's behavior. Then, I
sometimes see the communityincluding other social sciences
as well. So sociologists,anthropologists, sometimes their
perspectives are brought in. Iwill say I've taken courses in

(03:05):
both of those areas, and foundthat their toolkits are very
complementary and helpful. So,particularly think about
something like ethnography. Ananthropologist is very
well-trained to do that sort ofresearch. So when I think of
behavior science, I think of itas rooted in the social
sciences. But you'll see a lotof variation in the particular
strengths and focus anyindividual has.

Dan Berlin (03:24):
Sounds very similar to UX - in that way rooted in
the social sciences, but thestrengths will differ based on
the person. So, tell us moreabout that. So for the UX-ers
out there, how can we dig intothat for designing for behavior
change?

Amy Bucher (03:38):
When I wrote my book, I put a lot of thought
into how to set this up. Becausepeople had come up to me a lot,
especially after I got moreinvolved - like in the UXPA
Boston community and UXPAInternational. I think that was
really where I started torealize that UX-ers were very
interested in the skill set. Ihave accidentally crafted a
career that had one foot inbehavior science and one in
design. But a lot of people wantto do it deliberately. So, I

(04:02):
ended up focusing on twodifferent frameworks in my book
that, I think, lend themselvesvery nicely to design. And are
not overly complicated forpeople to understand and start
to use. Although I do think atsome point, most people will run
into a place where they feellike they need expert help. One
of them is the COM-B framework,where it's an acronym. B stands
for Behavior, and C O M isCapability, Opportunity,

(04:23):
Motivation. It's a lens that wecan use to understand why people
may not be taking action. Then,it includes linkages to research
that says... If we can identifythe set of problems, what is the
right set of solutions to buildinto our designs, to help people
overcome those barriers? Then,the other is a
Self-Determination Theory (SDT)of motivation, which is a really
long name for something that ispretty straightforward. Most

(04:45):
people know the Deci and Ryanextrinsic and intrinsic
motivators. This is actuallyDeci and Ryan's work, but a
little more detail. There's kindof a range of motivators between
extrinsic and intrinsic. Theidea is... The more we can get
people to do things for theirown internally-generated
reasons... The more likelythey'll stick with them, the
more interested they'll be inthe behaviors that you're asking
them to do. There's all kinds ofways that we can do that with

(05:07):
design. So by supportingpeople's needs for making their
own good choices, feeling likethey're learning, growing
through their experience, andhelping them feel like they
really belong to somethingbigger than themselves... So I
chose those two frameworks formy book, because I use them a
lot myself. But like I said, Ialso think they're very friendly
to people who are trying to pickup new skills. There's bits and
pieces of wisdom that you cangrab from them, and kind of

(05:29):
bring them in alongside theexpertise that you've already
developed as a UX-er.

Dan Berlin (05:32):
You can make an assumption that sounds like that
would be initially incorporatedin the research portion. When
we're doing this research, weshould be approaching in a
certain way, in order to uncoverwhat these capabilities and so
forth are. How can we do that?

Amy Bucher (05:49):
Yeah, and you're absolutely right. I think that
all good behavioral design doesbegin with research - and
ideally, at least some primaryresearch. To use comedy as an
example, I like to ask people totell me stories about the
behaviors that we're trying toaffect. I say stories because
we're natural-born storytellers.
That's how we're built. So,people usually have a reasonably
easy time telling you a storyabout a time that they've done

(06:10):
something, if they've done itbefore. Then, your role as a
researcher is to be a reallyactive listener. Try to hear
whether they're talking aboutthese capability, opportunity,
or motivational factors. You candig in more on any one of them.
I actually have a spreadsheetthat I keep of starter questions
that allow you to dig in onthose three areas. Of course,
going in, you might havehypotheses about some of these

(06:31):
being more of a factor thanothers. So, you can prep your
moderator guide to be heavier inone area than another. The other
thing that I've gotten greatmileage out of from a research
perspective - and there was aproject that I did when I was at
Mad*Pow that was reallyinstrumental around this is...
Combining the interview withobservations, and especially if
it's a behavior that has a lotof social desirability factors.

(06:51):
People know that there's a rightway to do things, and they don't
want to admit to doing thingsthe wrong way. So, I worked on
construction worker safety, andwhy construction workers take
risks. They know they shouldn't,they're very well trained. They
go through a lot of trainingabout all the rules,
regulations. One of the thingsthat was so interesting is... In
the interviews, most of themwouldn't really talk about that.

(07:12):
But walking around the jobsite,you could see that almost
everybody was taking, at least,very minor risks. I saw a lot of
people standing on the very toprung of the ladder, for example
- which is obvious to me, anon-construction worker, that
you shouldn't be doing that. Sofirst of all, seeing the
discrepancy between what peopledescribed and what they were
doing was really helpful as aresearcher. But secondly, it

(07:32):
gave me some opportunities whenI was doing the interviews. What
I found worked really well isactually to say, "Not you. But
when I was walking around theconstruction site, I saw some
people doing XYZ. What do youthink's going on there?" I found
that tended to be a really goodway to start to get people to
talk about the reasons whypeople do those things. A lot of
people, I think, without evenrealizing it... Transitioned

(07:53):
into talking about their ownexperiences. But again, that
whole time I'm listening for"what are the barrier types?"
Are they talking about notunderstanding? Or a big thing
with construction workers wasbehavioral regulation. So lots
of noises, lots of thingshappening at once. Not only do
you have to remember your owncomplicated task, but you have
to adjust it based on whatpeople in your environment are

(08:14):
doing. So that was an issue attimes.

Dan Berlin (08:18):
Yep, and that speaks to the importance of using mixed
methods. Approaching a problemfrom different angles allows us
to uncover something, and thenhopefully probe on something
meaningful. I love what you saidabout doing the observations,
and then the interviews in orderto probe on what you saw.

Amy Bucher (08:37):
Yeah, I also think it's just more interesting as a
researcher. That's one of thereasons why I got into
psychology initially, and thenthe line of work that I do -
because people are interesting,and I want to see what they do.
I want to hear their storiesabout why they've approached
life the way that they have. AndI think mixed methods - if
you're a curious person, andmost UX authors are - it's just
going to give you that muchwider of a lens into other

(09:00):
people's worlds.

Dan Berlin (09:02):
You mentioned just getting back to the tactical in
terms of accomplishing this. So,you mentioned some starter
questions in order to get at thecapabilities and so forth. In
the analysis, are you quotingthem by capabilities,
opportunities, and motivations?

Amy Bucher (09:17):
Yeah, we absolutely are. I will say there's
sometimes a little bit ofdebate, because those three
things - it's a taxonomy, butthey are not discrete
categories. They relate to eachother. So sometimes, it won't be
clear whether this is somethingthat... Say, a social
opportunity - which is about thesocial environment that the
behavior's done in. Or automaticmotivation, which is about
mental models. But those, ofcourse, are very heavily shaped

(09:39):
by the environment that you'rein. So, we're coding according
to that. But what we'reultimately doing with that
coding is... We're trying tobridge into solutioning. And
part of what is great aboutCOM-B is that... When the
researchers who initially builtout this taxonomy did so, they
also identified the types ofsolutions that are most
effective for each of thesetypes of barriers. There's a

(09:59):
overlap in the solutions as wellas in the barriers themselves.
So when I'm confronted with asituation like, "I have this
barrier. I'm not sure if it'ssocial opportunity or automatic
motivation." I'll make a note,and I'll look at the solutions.
There are some solutions thatoverlap those two categories of
barrier. That tells me that whenI get into the design phase, I
need to highlight those sharedsolutions - if that makes sense.

(10:22):
I'm sort of kicking the can downthe road on the coding, if my
purpose is really designingsomething that works.

Dan Berlin (10:28):
Yep. I think that's fascinating - that there is this
directory of solutionsavailable. Where's that coming
from? What's that based on?

Amy Bucher (10:36):
So, it's based on a massive literature review. The
team that built this initiallycomes out of University College
of London. I think theirearliest publications were based
on something like 1300 differentresearch studies that they had
reviewed and classified. It's areally active research
community, which is another...
both of the theories that Imentioned, part of why I use
them as they have very vibrantresearch communities around
them. So the evidence tends tobe fresh. There's people who are

(10:58):
constantly probing on them, andmaking sure that they fit the
world that we live in. There's atool online called the "Theory
and Techniques Tool" thatactually somebody, some
researchers took all of thisevidence and put it into an
interactive tool. So, we usethat a lot in our design. We've
actually created our owninternal version that uses
evidence from our programs,which is has been very, very

(11:19):
cool. But it just shows wherethere is a linkage in the
research, between certain typesof solutions and problem sets.
So what we use it for... Sofirst of all, if something
already has a strong linkage,that tells us we want to use
that in our design. But we alsowill deliberately sometimes pick
areas where there is not a lotof evidence. But we have a
strong hypothesis that thatmight work, because we see that
as an opportunity to generatenew knowledge.

Dan Berlin (11:42):
It almost sounds like this is a huge support to
what a lot of people areattempting in terms of building
research repositories...
Building repositories of whatthey learn with their user
interviews. But then oftenenough, the question comes up
is, "Alright, what can we dowith this?" That sounds like a
wonderful next step in order toactually take some next steps

(12:02):
there?

Amy Bucher (12:04):
Yeah, I think it is.
And it's relatively new too, Ishould say. I think the "Theory
and Techniques Tool" wasdeveloped four or five years
ago. It feels like the sort ofthing that people are really
just starting to pay attentionto in the last year or two. But
yeah, it's a great way to sharethis knowledge that we're
generating as a field. I knowthe more advanced I get in my
career, the harder time I havekeeping up with new findings.
Like, I can't read papers theway I used to in grad school,

(12:26):
right? So to be able to go tothis kind of consolidated
database, this aggregator - andbe able to see where the
evidence is strongest, and wherewe could build upon it... Has
been a real gift.

Dan Berlin (12:39):
What else were you hoping to convey here today?

Amy Bucher (12:42):
I love what I do. I really... I can't state enough
how much I love what I do. So,I'm always hoping to convey
excitement to others aroundusing behavioral science - you
know, tools, perspectives intheir own work. I think that it
really is important if you'rebuilding anything that you're
hoping will change people'sbehavior in a sustained way. So,
there's certain types ofproducts that people work on,

(13:03):
where it might not matter thatmuch. Like, maybe you want them
to transact once, and as long asyou make that an easy experience
- that's enough. But for inhealthcare, for example, where
most of my career has been,we're really looking to engage
people over the long term. Then,a series of behaviors that are
oftentimes difficult, expensive,or unpleasant. I think it's
really important that we try tounderstand what drives human

(13:24):
behavior, and we're designingthese experiences for people. So
if I can interest you in pickingup a book about behavior
science, it doesn't have to bemy book by any means. There's
lots of great stuff out there.
But just thinking aboutdifferent ways that you can
understand why people might bebehaving a certain way or not,
and building that into yourapproach that would that would
make me very excited.

Dan Berlin (13:43):
Hopefully, it's a big goal of having you here on
the podcast today. What are theresources can people refer to?

Amy Bucher (13:50):
I actually have a website, which I'm very poor
about maintaining,AmyBucherPhD.com - I have a blog
post on there. This may be abouttwo years old, where I
consolidated some books that Irecommend to people that I think
are good from a scienceperspective. But also
approachable if you don't haveyour PhD and want to dig into
the actual research. I also lovethe Habit Weekly community. So,

(14:12):
it's a newsletter. There's afree and a paid version, I do
the paid version. But even thefree version is a great
resource. They have a Slackcommunity that goes with it. I
find that to be a really diversegroup of people, in terms of
their backgrounds andperspectives. But they just
share this passion for AppliedBehavior science. So, I often
recommend people who areinterested in dipping their toes
in the water - look there, andyou'll likely find something

(14:33):
that bridges your fields andours.

Dan Berlin (14:35):
Yep. Great. One of the questions that just came to
mind is about privacy, becauseyou mentioned working in health
care, right? So how do we bridgethat gap between shoring
people's privacy, but alsogiving them this personalized, I
guess, nudges - for lack of abetter term - for that change.

Amy Bucher (14:55):
Yeah, well. I mean, I think consent and opt-in are
really, really important tothink about. This actually comes
naturally to me, as someone withthe advanced training in
psychology. Because anytime youdo human-subjects research - I
mean, I go through annualre-certification now to be able
to do human-subjects research. Alot of what we learn is how to
ensure that we have appropriateconsent. That we're not coercing

(15:15):
people. That people have theopportunity to withdraw from.
I'm saying research here. But Ithink of it the same way with
the commercial work that I do.
That we make it easy for peopleto opt out of that experience. I
can say that for us... We thinkabout the permissions that our
clients already have tocommunicate with people, and
will often ask for an additionaloption on top of that...
Depending on the topic thatwe're messaging and the type of

(15:35):
channel. So text message, forexample, is more sensitive than
email. So, we will often ask foradditional opt-in if we want to
do a text-messaging campaign.
But I think a lot of kind oftypical UX things too - about
not doing the evil UX. We makeit easy to opt out. We don't try
to bury the unsubscribe link,and a light gray font, and the
bottom of a huge footer -actually honoring those

(15:58):
requests. We do audit that tomake sure that people are being
successfully unsubscribed. Soall that to say, I don't think
that it's perfect by any means.
I know that there are people whowould probably be uncomfortable,
knowing that their data is usedto drive some of the health
experiences that they'reoffered. But I also believe that
if we can be as transparent aspossible about what's going on -

(16:19):
make it possible for people towithdraw from that. We're
constantly operating with thisidea of trying to be helpful to
people. Trying to help themadvance their own goals. That
we've got the right start, atleast.

Dan Berlin (16:31):
Yeah, 100%. Just setting those right
expectations, right? That's whatUX is all about. We set the
expectations, and we meet thoseexpectations. People are happy.

Amy Bucher (16:40):
I hope so.

Dan Berlin (16:40):
Yeah. Great. Well, my guest today has been Dr. Amy
Buker, who has been chattingabout designing for behavior
change. Thanks for joining metoday, Amy.

Amy Bucher (16:48):
Thanks for having me.

Dan Berlin (16:49):
Thanks for listening, everyone. You've been
listening to the 97 UX Thingspodcast, a companion to the book
97 Things Every UX PractitionerShould Know - published by
O'Reilly and available at yourlocal bookshop. All book
royalties go to UX nonprofits,as well any funds raised by this
podcast. The theme music is"Moisturize the Situation" by

(17:10):
Consider the Source. I'm yourhost and book editor, Dan
Berlin. Please remember to findthe needs in your community, and
fill them with your best work.
Thanks for listening.