User Models for Motivational Systems

The Affective and the Rational Routes to Persuasion
  • Floriana Grasso
  • Jaap Ham
  • Judith Masthoff
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7138)


The idea that a computer system could be used to motivate people to perform a certain task on the basis of a user model is certainly not novel. As early as the 80s, intelligent tutoring systems would encourage students to learn by means of tailored feedback and hints [24], and in the 90s patient education systems would attempt to address the problem of compliance to a medical regimen by means of information and personalised advice [1] or would encourage people to adopt healthier lifestyles [19]. It is however only recently that a number of, seemingly non correlated, extensive research efforts, from various perspectives, have started to focus on a more complex cognitive model of rational and extra-rational features, involving emotions, persuasion, motivation and argumentation. We can distinguish three parallel strands of research that have become prominent.


Motivational Systems Persuasive Technology Argu- mentation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    De Carolis, B., de Rosis, F., Grasso, F., Rossiello, A., Berry, D., Gillie, T.: Generating Recipient-Centred Explanations About Drug Prescription. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine 8(2), 123–145 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fishbein, M., Triandis, H.C., Kanfer, F.H., Becker, M., Middlestadt, S.E., Eichler, A.: Factors influencing behaviour and behaviour change. In: Baum, A., Revenson, T.A., Singer, J.E. (eds.) Handbook of Health Psychology, vol. 317, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fogg, B.J.: Persuasive technology: using computers to change what we think and do. In: Ubiquity 2002 (December 2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Greenwald, A.G., McGhee, D.E., Schwartz, J.K.L.: Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74, 1464–1480 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ham, J., Van den Bos: The merits of unconscious processing of directly and indirectly obtained information about social justice. Social Cognition 28, 180–191 (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ham, J., Midden, C.: Ambient Persuasive Technology Needs Little Cognitive Effort: The Differential Effects of Cognitive Load on Lighting Feedback Versus Factual Feedback. In: Ploug, T., Hasle, P., Oinas-Kukkonen, H. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2010. LNCS, vol. 6137, pp. 132–142. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    De Carolis, B., Mazzotta, I.: Motivating People in Smart Environments. In: [20], pp. 47–58 (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jackson, T.: Motivating sustainable consumption: a review of models of consumer behaviour and behavioural change. In: A Report to the Sustainable Development Research Network. Policy Studies Institute, London (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Leventhal, H., Cameron, L.: Behavioral theories and the problem of compliance. Patient Education and Counceling 10, 117–138 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lloyd-Kelly, M., Wyner, A.: Arguing with Emotions. In: [20], pp. 59–70 (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lopez, C., Brusilovsky, P.: Adapting Engagement e-mails to Users’ Characteristics. In: [20], pp. 71–83 (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Michie, S., Johnston, M., Abraham, C., Lawton, R., Parker, D., Walker, A.: Making psychological theory useful for implementing evidence based practice: a consensus approach. Quality and Safety in Health Care 14, 26–33 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Michie, S., Johnston, M., Francis, J., Hardeman, W., Eccles, M.: From theory to intervention: Mapping theoretically derived behavioural determinants to behaviour change techniques. Applied Psychology: An International Review 57(4), 660–680 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nguyen, H., Masthoff, J.: Designing Persuasive Dialogue Systems: Using Argumentation with Care. In: Oinas-Kukkonen, H., Hasle, P., Harjumaa, M., Segerståhl, K., Øhrstrøm, P. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2008. LNCS, vol. 5033, pp. 201–212. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nguyen, H., Masthoff, J.: Developing personalised digital behaviour interventions: A multi stage process. In: User Models for Motivational Systems Workshop, Associated with UMAP, Hawaii, US, pp. 43–52 (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Paramythis, A., Weibelzahl, S., Masthoff, J.: Layered evaluation of interactive adaptive systems: framework and formative methods. User Modelling and User-Adapted Interaction 20(5), 383–453 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Picard, R.W.: Affective Computing. MIT Press (1997)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Poggi, I., D’Errico, F., Vincze, L.: Discrediting Moves in Political Debates. In: [20], pp. 84–99 (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Reiter, E., Robertson, R., Osman, L.: Lessons from a failure: Generating tailored smoking cessation letters. Artificial Intelligence 144, 41–58 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ricci, F., Semeraro, G., de Gemmis, M., Lops, P., Masthoff, J., Grasso, F., Ham, J. (eds.): Joint Proceedings of the Workshop on Decision Making and Recommendation Acceptance Issues in Recommender Systems (DEMRA 2011) and the 2nd Workshop on User Models for Motivational Systems: The Affective and the Rational Routes to Persuasion (UMMS 2011). CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 740. RWTH, Aachen (2011),, ISSN: 1613-0073
  21. 21.
    Ritterband, L.M., Thorndike, F.P., Cox, D.J., Kovatchev, B.P., Gonder-Frederick, L.A.: A behaviour change model for internet interventions. Annals of Behavioural Medicine 38, 18–27 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Romero, P., Calvillo-Gamez, E.: Towards an Embodied View of Flow. In: [20], pp. 100–105 (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Simari, G.R., Reed, C., Rahwan, I., Grasso, F.: Introducing Argument & Computation. Argument and Computation 1(1), 1–5 (2011)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sleeman, D., Brown, J.S.: Introduction: Intelligent Tutoring Systems. In: Sleeman, D., Brown, J.S. (eds.) Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pp. 1–11. Academic Press, New York (1982)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tkalcic, M., Kunaver, M., Kosir, A., Tasic, J.: Addressing the New User Problem with a Personality Based User Similarity Measure. In: [20], pp. 106–111 (2011)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tkalcic, M., Odic, A., Kosir, A., Tasic, J.: Impact of Implicit and Explicit Affective Labeling on a Recommender System’s Performance. In: [20], pp. 112–123 (2011)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Webb, T.L., Joseph, J., Yardley, L., Michie, S.: Using the internet to promote health behaviour change: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of theoretical basis, use of behaviour change techniques, and mode of delivery on efficacy. Journal of Medical Internet Research 12(1) (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Floriana Grasso
    • 1
  • Jaap Ham
    • 2
  • Judith Masthoff
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of LiverpoolUK
  2. 2.Department of Innovation SciencesEindhoven University of TechnologyNetherlands
  3. 3.Department of Computing ScienceUniversity of AberdeenUK

Personalised recommendations