Design

The Irony of Neuroscience & Behaviour Change

by Andy Polaine on December 7, 2011

in General

I have been enjoying the Brain Culture: Neuroscience & Society series via BBC Radio 4′s podcasts recently. In the series Matthew Taylor looks at how developments in neuroscience are changing the way we think about everything from law and punishment to education and marketing. As a fan of Raymond Tallis’s writing, who is somewhat of a neuroscience sceptic, I found Taylor’s account pretty balanced, but not without asking some provocative questions.

The last episode looked at the use of neuroscience with regards to behaviour change, perhaps most famous through the Nudge concept favoured by the previous and present UK governments. Its also something that has gained some attention in service design and public policy/social design fields as a potential tool for designing for behavioural change.

The theory is essentially that by bypassing our brains’ rational level, we can be nudged into changing our behaviour on the semi-unconscious level, because our brains frequently make decisions before we are rationally conscious of them. This is put into practice in political environments, such as election campaigns, policy and public service systems (as in the case of using it for preventing no-shows to doctor’s appointments) or in the slightly scary sounding field of neuromarketing. On the one hand the practice appears extremely devious and devalues our sense of self and of being rational beings because it denies us the possibility of changing out nature (Tallis’s argument). On the other hand, neuromarketers claim that these techniques are no different from anyone who has baked bread or made fresh coffee in order to sell their house during viewings.

Science was built on the foundation of rational thought. Until recently economics and business thinking was also based on this rationale, much of it still is. The irony of the new discoveries in neuroscience, it seems to me, is that rational science is essentially getting excited about something designers and many others have know all along. People aren’t rational and make decisions – from financial investments to buying a car to getting married – based on their gut feelings, which they mostly post-rationalise afterwards. It’s also why we are so naturally rubbish at understanding statistics and probabilities. Science has taken several decades to rationally prove that we are irrational.

NestLearningThermostat-Away.jpg

By now most of you will have already seen the learning thermostat, Nest, designed by Tony Fadell, who led the team that created the first 18 generations of the iPod and the first three generations of the iPhone. The news has been heating up the Web for the last couple of days.

For those of you who have not yet heard about it, Nest is a beautifully designed thermostat that is armed with an array of sensors and also Wi-Fi enabled. It is “programmable” in the sense that you teach it, but it’s not like one of the usual thermostats that is impossible to understand or operate. While thermostats sound boring, actually they account for an awful lot of energy wastage.

According to the U.S. Department of Energy and Lawrence Berkeley National Lab approximately half the heating and cooling (HVAC) accounting for approximately half of the bill. The programmable thermostat, developed in the 1970s, promised to help people conserve energy, but 89 percent of owners rarely or never set a program (source: ACEEE, 2010). The devices are simply too complicated. In fact, Energy Star revoked its certification of all thermostats in 2009, according to Nest’s information sheet.

Nest addresses the programming problem through a combination of sensors, algorithms, machine learning, and cloud computing. Nest learns behaviors and preferences and adjusts the temperature up or down accordingly, making you comfortable when you’re home and saving energy while you’re away. Nest also provides people with tips and information to help them make energy-saving choices.

“It was unacceptable to me that the device that controls 10 percent of all energy consumed in the U.S. hadn’t kept up with advancements in technology and design,” says Tony Fadell.

So far, so normal. It’s a great product in an area that has really failed at any kind of innovation and a product that hopefully does what it says. Except, of course, that it’s not just a product. It’s a product-service system.

There are several layers of services in Nest. The first obvious one is that it’s an information and control system that’s managing your heating (or cooling) service. Warmth and coolness aren’t products, they’re environmental services that we are able to control and interact with. Most of the time we’re doing that with pretty blunt instruments, but Nest aims to change that.

Then there is the learning aspect of Nest. It’s smart enough, apparently, to know when the house is empty and turn itself down as well as learn the patterns of your behaviors. But it’s also able to influence your behavior with its leaf icon that shows you that you could save or be more environmentally friendly by turning it down a notch.

retouched_1_2.jpeg

Nest is also Wi-Fi enabled, which means you can access, monitor and set it from a variety of devices via a Web interface. So not only do the designers have to design the product, but also consider how that Web interface is going to look and feel. Most of the other smart home interfaces I have ever seen look like an engineer’s readout on Windows 3.0. If the Nest concept is going to be successful in this regard, they need to be sure that this aspect of their service works.

Finally, you can buy a Nest from Best Buy, but you can also buy it directly from Nest themselves. So they’re offering a retail service, which also includes help working out the installation process along with useful videos and online support. The device also helps you install it and set it up. You can even order a Nest and have them come and install it for you. Again, a whole back-end of service management that must be taken into account as part of the design process.

If their website (compare that to other home heating manufacturers’ websites) and offering is anything to go by, Nest have this pretty well covered. But it just goes to show that even a single, seemingly small product, needs a well thought through service ecosystem for it to really work. Product designers don’t just design products anymore and they need to think of the product-service system they are entering into or creating, not just let others deal with it as an afterthought.

Design Research – A Failure of Imagination?

July 7, 2011

Have design education and design research failed to fire up the imagination in public discourse? I believe so and I believe the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) mantra has unbalanced thinking about education curricula in general. John Thackara’s recent Observers Room newsletter notes the same: Last month, as the Dutch government expelled trouble-making artists [...]

Read the full article →

Is Design Research Useless for Innovation?

December 11, 2009

Don Norman has just posted a very provocative and thoughtful piece about the value of design research, or not. “I’ve come to a disconcerting conclusion: design research is great when it comes to improving existing product categories but essentially useless when it comes to new, innovative breakthroughs.” You should read the full article, but he [...]

Read the full article →

Printing Your Toast

December 6, 2009

Congratulations to one of my MA students at Luzern, Othmar Mühlebach, who has just won the second prize at the Berner Design Awards for his toaster re-design. Based on the idea of a printer, you lay a stack of bread at the top and each slice runs through the toaster. Given the trend for burning [...]

Read the full article →

The Little Man in the Box

June 25, 2009

Hi from Multitouch Barcelona on Vimeo. All of us anthropomorphise our machines, perhaps no more so than the car and the computer. Hi, A Real Human Interface from Multitouch Barcelona (an interaction design group that explores natural communication between people and technology) is a charming example of how we think about computers and interfaces from [...]

Read the full article →

Writing is Design

March 3, 2009

“Verbalizing design is another act of design. I realised this while writing this book,” writes Kenya Hara in the preface to his book, Designing Design. But writing itself is an act of design, whatever the subject. Over the years I have done quite a bit of writing and recently my PhD is the largest block [...]

Read the full article →

Gruber on iPhone-Likeness

November 4, 2008

Good piece from John Gruber on iPhone-Likeness and why many developers don’t get it when it comes to creating apps that feel iPhone-like: I’ll put forth one central, overriding guideline for iPhone UI design: Figure out the absolute least you need to do to implement the idea, do just that, and then polish the hell [...]

Read the full article →

Taxi Driver With Storyboards

October 29, 2008

There’s a discussion going on over at IxDA about whether an interaction design can create great interaction without great visual design skills. My answer is “It depends”. The two are overlapping areas and whilst some interactions are really helped or hindered by the visuals, it’s also possible to have something almost entirely visually driven or [...]

Read the full article →

Designing Education’s Future

September 11, 2008

I gave a presentation yesterday at Northumbria University’s School of Design’s staff conference called Designing Education’s Future: online, collaborative, playful and socially aware. I just found out it has been featured on Slideshare, which is always good to hear. I’ll try and stripe the audio on it soon to help it make more sense. It’s [...]

Read the full article →