Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Interactive Media for Sustainability pp 25–59Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

Behavior

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 759 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter describes the design and use of interactive media aimed at closing the “attitude-behavior gap” by influencing the behaviors of their users. The chapter draws from contemporary work in cognitive science and behavioral psychology and surveys a wide variety of persuasive interactions with varying degrees of prescriptiveness—from “seducing” users to engaging them with what B.F. Skinner calls a “technology of behavior.” The image of sustainability that emerges from persuasive uses of interactive media is of a delicate balance between human and nonhuman interests, one that can only be restored by inculcating more sustainable, or less unsustainable, behaviors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See report and video here: https://www.businesscornwall.co.uk/news-by-location/truro-business-news/2015/09/video-clean-cornwall-week (last accessed Mar. 18, 2018).

  2. 2.

    See http://www.thefuntheory.com (last accessed Mar. 18, 2018).

  3. 3.

    What will be referred to here as “persuasive design” includes (among others) “persuasive systems design,” “design with intent,” “affective computing,” “persuasive technologies,” “design for sustainable behavior change,” “persuasive sustainability systems,” and “behavior change support systems.” For overviews of the different approaches and how they compare, see Brynjarsdóttir et al. (2012), Niedderer et al. (2016), Oinas-Kukkonen (2013), Zachrisson and Boks (2012), Zapico et al. (2009).

  4. 4.

    https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/11/fact-sheet-us-china-joint-announcement-climate-change-and-clean-energy-c (last accessed Mar. 18, 2018).

  5. 5.

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-10/china-s-fossil-fuel-deadline-shifts-focus-to-electric-car-race-j7fktx9z (last accessed Mar. 18, 2018).

  6. 6.

    This is sometimes referred to as “confirmation bias.”

  7. 7.

    As made evident by the range of reports from the Pew Institute (http://www.pewinternet.org) and the International Telecommunications Union (https://www.itu.int).

  8. 8.

    Hiraoka et al. (2009) report positive outcomes, but their test was done with simulators. Lee et al. (2010) report very minor changes in driving behavior based on both online surveys and actual user tests data. The makers of greenMeter, however, make the following statement on their website: “Based on a conservative estimate of worldwide use in its first year, greenMeter has likely saved about 2 million gallons of gas, reduced fuel expenses by over $5 million, dropped oil consumption by nearly 20,000 barrels, and prevented almost 47,000 tons of CO2 from entering the atmosphere” (emphasis added; http://hunter.pairsite.com/greenmeter (last accessed Mar. 18, 2018)).

  9. 9.

    To some extent, these questions relate to larger concerns about the long-term sustainability of eco-feedback interventions (see, for instance, Barreto et al. 2013; Snow et al. 2013).

  10. 10.

    Yang et al. (2014) make the same point: “considerable motivation and engagement on the part of consumers is required for eco-feedback to lead to behavior changes” (p. 824).

  11. 11.

    Serious games can be defined in different ways, but in essence they attempt to transfer in-game behavior to real-world issues and contexts—“from the game world into the material world” (Bogost 2007, p. 47).

  12. 12.

    See more about the game here: https://thecdm.ca/projects/archives/carbon-chaos-2010 (last accessed Mar. 18, 2018).

  13. 13.

    It appears the team developing the game “didn’t have the resources to determine if the game actually increases environmental awareness,” admitted the professor who guided the process of development (cited in Lavender 2010, July 18).

  14. 14.

    See, for instance, the “Living Planet Index” by the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) (McRae et al. 2016).

  15. 15.

    Mostly in the range of 5–15 participants according to Brynjarsdóttir et al. (2012, p. 949), a median of 26 according to Hamari et al. (2014, p. 123).

  16. 16.

    The exchange between Shove (2010a, 2011) and Whitmarsh et al. (2011) is particularly relevant here.

  17. 17.

    A few examples of work in SHCI that is already moving in this direction are Ganglbauer et al. (2013), Knowles et al. (2014), Prost et al. (2014).

Bibliography

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akrich, M. (1992). The Description of Technical Objects. In W. E. Bijker & J. Law (Eds.), Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change (pp. 205–224). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Backlund, S., Gyllenswärd, M., Gustafsson, A., Ilstedt Hjelm, S., Mazé, R., & Redström, R. (2006). STATIC! The Aesthetics of Energy in Everyday Things. Paper Presented at the Design Research Society International Conference, Lisbon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bamberg, S., & Möser, G. (2007). Twenty Years After Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: A New Meta-Analysis of Psycho-social Determinants of Pro-environmental Behaviour. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27, 14–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1994). Self-Efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Human Behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 71–81). New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barreto, M., Karapanos, E., & Nunes, N. (2013). Why Don’t Families Get Along with Eco-feedback Technologies?: A Longitudinal Inquiry. In Proceedings of CHItaly ‘13 (Article No. 16). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berdichevsky, D., & Neuenschwander, E. (1999). Toward an Ethics of Persuasive Technology. Communications of the ACM, 42(5), 51–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhamra, T., Lilley, D., & Tang, T. (2011). Design for Sustainable Behaviour: Using Products to Change Consumer Behaviour. The Design Journal, 14(4), 427–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bickman, L. (1972). Environmental Attitudes and Actions. The Journal of Social Psychology, 87(2), 323–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bogost, I. (2007). Persuasive Games: The Expressive Power of Videogames. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boks, C., Lilley, D., & Pettersen, I. N. (2015). The Future of Design for Sustainable Behaviour, Revisited. Paper Presented at the 9th EcoDesign International Symposium on Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufacturing, Tokyo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brey, P. (2000). Disclosive Computer Ethics. Computers and Society, 30(4), 10–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brulle, R. J. (2010). From Environmental Campaigns to Advancing the Public Dialog: Environmental Communication for Civic Engagement. Environmental Communication, 4(1), 82–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brynjarsdóttir, H., Håkansson, M., Pierce, J., Baumer, E. P. S., DiSalvo, C., & Sengers, P. (2012). Sustainably Unpersuaded: How Persuasion Narrows Our Vision of Sustainability. In Proceedings of CHI ‘12 (pp. 947–956). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bucchi, M. (2008). Of Deficits, Deviations and Dialogues: Theories of Public Communication of Science. In M. Bucchi & B. Trench (Eds.), Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology (pp. 57–76). London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, R. (1985). Declaration by Design: Rhetoric, Argument, and Demonstration in Design Practice. Design Issues, 2(1), 4–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, J., Harrison, C., & Filius, P. (1998). Environmental Communication and the Cultural Politics of Environmental Citizenship. Environment and Planning A, 30, 1445–1460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crompton, T. (2010). Common Cause: The Case for Working with Our Cultural Values. Surrey: WWF-UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crompton, T., & Kasser, T. (2009). Meeting Environmental Challenges: The Role of Human Identity. Surrey: WWF-UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. New York: Putnam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Damasio, A. R. (2003). Looking for Spinoza: Joy, Sorrow, and the Feeling Brain (1st ed.). Orlando: Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, R. J. (2000). Cognitive Neuroscience Needs Affective Neuroscience (and Vice Versa). Brain and Cognition, 42(1), 89–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, J. (2009). Design Methods for Ethical Persuasive Computing. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Persuasive Technology (pp. 6–13). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, M. (2003). The Consumer Trap: Big Business Marketing in American Life. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Oliveira, R., & Carrascal, J. P. (2014). Towards Effective Ethical Behavior Design. In Proceedings of CHI ‘14 (pp. 2149–2154). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiSalvo, C., Sengers, P., & Brynjarsdóttir, H. (2010). Mapping the Landscape of Sustainable HCI. In Proceedings of CHI ‘10 (pp. 1975–1984). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dourish, P. (2010). HCI and Environmental Sustainability: The Politics of Design and the Design of Politics. In O. W. Bartelsen & P. Krogh (Eds.), Proceedings of DIS 2010 (pp. 1–10). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egan, P. J., & Mullin, M. (2017). Climate Change: US Public Opinion. Annual Review of Political Science, 20, 209–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ewen, S. (2001). Captains of Consciousness: Advertising and the Social Roots of the Consumer Culture (25th anniversary ed.). New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fogg, B. J. (2003). Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do. Amsterdam/Boston: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster, D., Lawson, S., Blythe, M., & Cairns, P. (2010). Wattsup?: Motivating Reductions in Domestic Energy Consumption Using Social Networks. In Proceedings of NordiCHI 2010 (pp. 178–187). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, B. (1996). Value-Sensitive Design. Interactions, 3(6), 17–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, B., & Nissenbaum, H. (1996). Bias in Computer Systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 14(3), 330–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Froehlich, J., Findlater, L., & Landay, J. (2010). The Design of Eco-feedback Technology. In Proceedings of CHI 2010 (pp. 1999–2008). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabrielli, S., & Maimone, R. (2014). Designing a Context-Aware Mobile Application for Eco-driving. In Proceedings of ICCASA 14 (pp. 102–104). Brussles: ICST.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamberini, L., Spagnolli, A., Corradi, N., Jacucci, G., Tusa, G., Mikkola, T., et al. (2012). Tailoring Feedback to Users’ Actions in a Persuasive Game for Household Electricity Conservation. In M. Bang & E. L. Ragnemalm (Eds.), Persuasive Technology. Design for Health and Safety. PERSUASIVE 2012 (pp. 100–111). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ganglbauer, E., Reitberger, W., & Fitzpatrick, G. (2013). An Activist Lens for Sustainability: From Changing Individuals to Changing the Environment. In S. Berkovsky & J. Freyne (Eds.), PERSUASIVE 2013 (pp. 63–68). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauntlett, D. (2005). Moving Experiences: Media Effects and Beyond (2nd ed.). Eastleigh/Bloomington: John Libbey Pub.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geelen, D., Keyson, D., Boess, S., & Brezet, H. (2012). Exploring the Use of a Game to Stimulate Energy Saving in Households. Journal of Design Research, 10(1–2), 102–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, J., & Miller, S. (1998). Science in Public: Communication, Culture, and Credibility. New York: Perseus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guerin, D. A., Yust, B. L., & Coopet, J. G. (2000). Occupant Predictors of Household Energy Behavior and Consumption Change as Found in Energy Studies Since 1975. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 29(1), 48–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Pakkanen, T. (2014). Do Persuasive Technologies Persuade? – A Review of Empirical Studies. In A. Spagnolli, L. Chittaro, & L. Gamberini (Eds.), Persuasive Technology. PERSUASIVE 2014 (pp. 137–142). Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hassenzahl, M., & Laschke, M. (2015). Pleasurable Troublemakers. In S. P. Walz & S. Deterding (Eds.), The Gameful World: Approaches, Issues, Applications (pp. 167–195). London/Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hazas, M., Bernheim Brush, A. J., & Scott, J. (2012). Sustainability Does Not Begin with the Individual. Interactions, 19(5), 14–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiraoka, T., Terakado, Y., Matsumoto, S., & Yamabe, S. (2009). Quantitative Evaluation of Eco-driving on Fuel Consumption Based on Driving Simulator Experiments. In Proceedings of the 16th World Congress on Intelligent Transport Systems (pp. 21–25). Washington, DC: ITS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornsey, M. J., Harris, E. A., Bain, P. G., & Fielding, K. S. (2016). Meta-Analyses of the Determinants and Outcomes of Belief in Climate Change. Nature Climate Change, 6, 622.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hulme, M. (2009). Why We Disagree About Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kahan, D. M., Jenkins-Smith, H., & Braman, D. (2011). Cultural Cognition of Scientific Consensus. Journal of Risk Research, 14(2), 147–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karppinen, P., & Oinas-Kukkonen, H. (2013). Three Approaches to Ethical Considerations in the Design of Behavior Change Support Systems. In S. Berkovsky & J. Freyne (Eds.), PERSUASIVE 2013 (pp. 87–98). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, P. (1992). Does Advertising Work: A Review of the Evidence. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 9(4), 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, T., Hong, H., & Magerko, B. (2010). Design Requirements for Ambient Display That Supports Sustainable Lifestyle. In Proceedings of DIS 2010 (pp. 103–112). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, N. (2014). This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate. Toronto: Alfred A. Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knowles, B., Blair, L., Coulton, P., & Lochrie, M. (2014). Rethinking Plan A for Sustainable HCI. In Proceedings of CHI 2014 (pp. 3593–3596). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koger, S. M., & Winter, D. D. N. (2010). The Psychology of Environmental Problems: Psychology for Sustainability (3rd ed.). New York/London: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the Gap: Why Do People Act Environmentally and What Are the Barriers to Pro-environmental Behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 239–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krimsky, S., & Plough, A. L. (1988). Environmental Hazards: Communicating Risks as a Social Process. Dover: Auburn House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuijer, L., & Bakker, C. (2015). Of Chalk and Cheese: Behaviour Change and Practice Theory in Sustainable Design. International Journal of Sustainable Engineering, 8(3), 219–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lavender, T. (2010, July 18). Digital Media Students Want to Raise Your Carbon Consciousness. Vancouver Observer. Retrieved from http://www.vancouverobserver.com/blogs/megabytes/2010/07/18/digital-media-students-want-raise-your-carbon-consciousness

  • Lee, H., Lee, W., & Lim, Y.-K. (2010). The Effect of Eco-driving System Towards Sustainable Driving Behavior. In Proceedings of CHI 2010 (pp. 4255–4260). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lilley, D., & Wilson, G. T. (2013). Integrating Ethics into Design for Sustainable Behaviour. Journal of Design Research, 11(3), 278–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lilley, D., Lofthouse, V., & Bhamra, T. (2005). Towards Instinctive Sustainable Product Use. Paper Presented at the 2nd International Conference: Sustainability Creating the Culture, Aberdeen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockton, D. (2013). Design with Intent: A Design Pattern Toolkit for Environmental & Social Behaviour Change. PhD dissertation submitted at Brunel University, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Losh, E. M. (2009). Virtualpolitik: An Electronic History of Government Media-Making in a Time of War, Scandal, Disaster, Miscommunication, and Mistakes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lövbrand, E., Beck, S., Chilvers, J., Forsyth, T., Hedrén, J., Hulme, M., et al. (2015). Who Speaks for the Future of Earth? How Critical Social Science Can Extend the Conversation on the Anthropocene. Global Environmental Change, 32, 211–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lupia, A., McCubbins, M. D., & Popkin, S. L. (2000). Beyond Rationality: Reason and the Study of Politics. In A. Lupia, M. D. McCubbins, & S. L. Popkin (Eds.), Elements of Reason: Cognition, Choice, and the Bounds of Rationality (pp. 1–20). Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mankoff, J. C., Fussell, S. R., Dillahunt, T., Glaves, R., Grevet, C., Johnson, M., et al. (2010). StepGreen.org: Increasing Energy Saving Behaviors Via Social Networks. In Proceedings of the Fourth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (pp. 106–113). Palo Alto: AAAI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazé, R. (2010). Static! Designing for Energy Awareness. Stockholm: Arvinius Förlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKenzie-Mohr, D. (2000). Fostering Sustainable Behavior Through Community-Based Social Marketing. American Psychologist, 55(5), 531–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McRae, L., Freeman, R., & Marconi, V. (2016). The Living Planet Index. In N. Oerlemans (Ed.), Living Planet Report 2016: Risk and Resilience in a New Era. Gland: WWF International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niedderer, K., Ludden, G., Clune, S. J., Lockton, D., Mackrill, J., Morris, A., et al. (2016). Design for Behaviour Change as a Driver for Sustainable Innovation: Challenges and Opportunities for Implementation in the Private and Public Sectors. International Journal of Design, 10(2), 67–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nodder, C. (2013). Evil by Design: Interaction Design to Lead Us into Temptation. Indianapolis: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2010). When Corrections Fail: The Persistence of Political Misperceptions. Political Behavior, 32(2), 303–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oinas-Kukkonen, H. (2013). A Foundation for the Study of Behavior Change Support Systems. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 17(6), 1223–1235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oinas-Kukkonen, H., & Harjumaa, M. (2009). Persuasive Systems Design: Key Issues, Process Model, and System Features. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 24(article 28), 485–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Packard, V. (1957). The Hidden Persuaders. New York: D. McKay Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peffer, T., Pritoni, M., Meier, A., Aragon, C., & Perry, D. (2011). How People Use Thermostats in Homes: A Review. Building and Environment, 46(12), 2529–2541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pettersen, I. N., & Boks, C. (2008). The Ethics in Balancing Control and Freedom When Engineering Solutions for Sustainable Behaviour. International Journal of Sustainable Engineering, 1(4), 287–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, J., Odom, W., & Blevis, E. (2008). Energy Aware Dwelling: A Critical Survey of Interaction Design for Eco-visualizations. Paper Presented at OZCHI 2008, Cairns.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prost, S., Schrammel, J., & Tscheligi, M. (2014). ‘Sometimes It’s the Weather’s Fault’: Sustainable HCI & Political Activism, CHI ‘14 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2005–2010). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rozendaal, M. (2016). Objects with Intent: A New Paradigm for Interaction Design. Interactions, 23(3), 62–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruijten, P. A. M., Midden, C. J. H., & Ham, J. (2011). Unconscious Persuasion Needs Goal-Striving: The Effect of Goal Activation on the Persuasive Power of Subliminal Feedback. In Proceedings of Persuasive 2011 (article number 4). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutherford, A. (2003). B. F. Skinner’s Technology of Behavior in American Life: From Consumer Culture to Counterculture. Journal of History of the Behavioral Sciences, 39(1), 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuel, L. R. (2010). Freud on Madison Avenue: Motivation Research and Subliminal Advertising in America. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Shove, E. (2010a). Beyond the ABC: Climate Change Policy and Theories of Social Change. Environment and Planning A, 42, 1273–1285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shove, E. (2010b). Social Theory and Climate Change: Questions Often, Sometimes and Not Yet Asked. Theory, Culture & Society, 27(2–3), 277–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shove, E. (2011). On the Difference Between Chalk and Cheese – A Response to Whitmarsh et al.’s Comments on ‘Beyond the ABC: Climate Change Policy and Theories of Social Change’. Environment and Planning A, 43, 262–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shove, E., & Spurling, N. (Eds.). (2013). Sustainable Practices: Social Theory and Climate Change. London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, B. F. (1971). Beyond Freedom and Dignity. Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of Risk. Science, 236(4799), 280–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smids, J. (2012). The Voluntariness of Persuasive Technology. In M. Bang & E. L. Ragnemalm (Eds.), PERSUASIVE 2012 (pp. 123–132). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow, S., Buys, L., Roe, P., & Brereton, M. (2013). Curiosity to Cupboard: Self Reported Disengagement with Energy Use Feedback Over Time. In Proceedings of OzCHI ‘13 (pp. 245–254). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stern, P. C. (2000). Toward a Coherent Theory of Environmentally Significant Behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strengers, Y. (2011). Designing Eco-feedback Systems for Everyday Life. In Proceedings of CHI 2011 (pp. 2135–2144). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strengers, Y., & Maller, C. (Eds.). (2015). Social Practices, Intervention and Sustainability: Beyond Behaviour Change. London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strike, K. A. (1975). Beyond Freedom and Dignity. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 9(1–2), 112–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tavris, C., & Aronson, E. (2007). Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts. Orlando: Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, C. (2004). Modern Social Imaginaries. Durham: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thaler, R. H. (2000). From Homo Economicus to Homo Sapiens. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14(1), 133–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thieme, A., Comber, R., Miebach, J., Weeden, J., Krämer, N., Lawson, S., & Olivier, P. (2012). “We’ve Bin Watching You”: Designing for Reflection and Social Persuasion to Promote Sustainable Lifestyles. In Proceedings of CHI 2012 (pp. 2337–2346). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Timmer, J., Kool, L., & van Est, R. (2015). Ethical Challenges in Emerging Applications of Persuasive Technology. In T. MacTavish & S. Basapur (Eds.), Persuasive Technology. PERSUASIVE 2015 (pp. 196–201). Cham: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tromp, N., Hekkert, P., & Verbeek, P.-P. (2011). Design for Socially Responsible Behavior: A Classification of Influence Based on Intended User Experience. Design Issues, 27(3), 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1982). Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (pp. 3–20). Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Vaughn, R. (1980). How Advertising Works: A Planning Model. Journal of Advertising Research, 20(5), 27–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verbeek, P.-P. (2006). Persuasive Technology and Moral Responsibility: Toward an Ethical Framework for Persuasive Technologies. Paper Presented at Persuasive 06, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace-Wells, D. (2017, July 9). The Uninhabitable Earth. New York Magazine. Retrieved from http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/07/climate-change-earth-too-hot-for-humans.html

  • Whitmarsh, L., O’Neill, S., & Lorenzoni, I. (2011). Climate Change or Social Change? Debate Within, Amongst, and Beyond Disciplines. Environment and Planning A, 43, 258–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, G. T., Lilley, D., & Bhamra, T. A. (2013). Design Feedback Interventions for Household Energy Consumption Reduction. Paper Presented at the ERSCP-EMSU 2013 Conference, Istanbul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, G. T., Bhamra, T., & Lilley, D. (2015). The Considerations and Limitations of Feedback as a Strategy for Behaviour Change. International Journal of Sustainable Engineering, 8(3), 186–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wynne, B. (1992). Misunderstood Misunderstanding: Social Identities and Public Uptake of Science. Public Understanding of Science, 1(3), 281–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, R., Newman, M. W., & Forlizzi, J. (2014). Making Sustainability Sustainable: Challenges in the Design of Eco-interaction Technologies. In Proceedings of CHI 2014 (pp. 823–832). New York: ACM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zachrisson, J., & Boks, C. (2012). Exploring Behavioural Psychology to Support Design for Sustainable Behaviour Research. Journal of Design Research, 10(1–2), 50–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zapico, J. L., Turpeinen, M., & Brandt, N. (2009). Climate Persuasive Devices: Changing Behaviour Towards Low-Carbon Lifestyles. In S. Chatterjee & P. Dev (Eds.), Proceedings of Persuasive ‘09 (Article 14). New York: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zappen, J. P. (2005). Digital Rhetoric: Toward an Integrated Theory. Technical Communication Quarterly, 14(3), 319–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands

    Roy Bendor

Authors
  1. Roy Bendor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bendor, R. (2018). Behavior. In: Interactive Media for Sustainability. Palgrave Studies in Media and Environmental Communication. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70383-1_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation