This is a case study on how
psychology insights on decision making can be used to guide choices. I assume
that most of you are familiar with “Scribd.com” or if not, just go on the
web-page.
When trying to make an account on
this web-site, one is faced with three choices of subscriptions. The following
screen-shot presents the options that are available. (click to enlarge)
Next, I will present the Decision
Design (choice architecture) elements that I believe to be relevant in this
case.
First, we see that the text on
top of the image says that in essence all types of accounts offer the same
benefits. This is somehow counter-intuitive since the idea of having multiple
types of accounts is to have different benefits. Scribd.com, however, differentiates
its offerings only in terms of price and duration.
Second, we have the “classical”
three options available as in the “Linked In case study” One reason to have three options is that the information is not overwhelming,
thus making it rather easy to process. We know that too many choices are not sogood. Another reason for having three options is that most studies on choice architecture
(decision design) have been done with three options. I’ll soon refer to these
studies.
Third, we have a clear case of “Attractioneffect” (or This one is clearly better than that one). The first option – the “Day Pass” – is clearly inferior if compared with the second
option “Monthly Membership”. The “Day pass” costs 9 USD and gives access for 24
hours, while the “Monthly Membership” costs the same 9 USD and gives access for
one month. Even a mentally retarded person knows that “one month” is better
than “one day”.
The attraction effect shifts attention from
the comparison of “Monthly Membership” and “Annual Membership”. Now, it is easy
to see that “Monthly membership” is better than the “Day Pass” and the user
doesn’t have to compare “Monthly Membership” with “Annual Membership”.
Fourth, The “Monthly Membership”
is presented as a “middle option” or “compromise option”. As we know from “Nottoo…, but Not too…” the “Compromise effect” makes the middle option very attractive. Scribd.com
wants to sell you the “Monthly Membership” and it has made it to be “a
compromise option”.
Fifth, The “Monthly Membership”
is preselected as a “default option”. As we know from “Just leave it like that”
most people don’t bother to change the default option. This way, the “Monthly
Membership” is presented as a “recommended” option.
Sixth, The “Monthly Membership”
is highlighted and presented larger than the other options. Unlike in the
Linked in Case study when the user selects another option, the “Monthly Membership” is not highlighted
anymore, but it remains larger than the other options. The highlighting and the
bigger graphical dimension are aimed at focusing the user’s attention to this
option.
Seventh, For the “Monthly
Membership” there is a mention that it is “Most Popular Option!”. This is aimed
at influencing the decision of the user. We know that people like to do what
other people do, or in other words follow the social norm. By mentioning that the
monthly membership is “Most Popular Option!” it ensures people that if they
choose this option they will follow the social norm.
Seventh, the “monthly membership”
is billed monthly while the “annual membership” is billed once a year. From a strictly
monetary perspective it is better to take the annual membership since it is
5USD per month (60 USD in total), while the “Monthly membership” is 9USD per
month (108 USD per year). Scribd.com wants people to buy the more expensive
option, and it encourages them to do so by using loss aversion. If one chooses the “monthly membership” she will suffer NOW a loss of 9 USD, but if she chooses the “Annual Membership” she will suffer NOW a loss of 60 USD. Of course it is
better to suffer the smaller loss. In addition to this, most people think that
they will cancel their subscription soon, so it is wise to take the “Monthly
membership”. However, in many instances, especially when the renewal of the
subscription is by default, most people don’t cancel.
Eighth, the orange button says “Sign
up and download now”. The key is the “now” and it is aimed at influencing the
user to focus on the present moment and give less attention to “future outcomes”.
Ninth, Under the orange button there
is a mention of “Only 60 seconds to sign up.”. This tells the user that it is
easy to sign up and it requires little effort.
Tenth, Under the orange button there
is a mention of “Cancel any time online. There's no commitment.” When faced
with decisions, sometimes people anticipate regret and have a need to manage
it. The user might unconsciously think that he will later regret subscribing.
This is not actual regret, but rather anticipated regret. One of the most
popular methods of dealing with anticipated regret is to ensure the reversibility
of the decision. By telling people that they can cancel at any time and that
there is not commitment, Scribd.com ensures people that they can manage their
(potential) future regret. In brief, Scribd.com says that “The choice is
reversible”. A little more on regret you can find in this post.
I believe that the above
presented case study on Scribd.com is a very good example of Decision Design
(or Choice architecture) that makes use of many “tools” and at the same time it
allows for freedom of choice.
2 comments:
Choice architecture is a new concept part of a new science called behavioral economics applied recently to social engineering. Nicolae, let me suggest that you change the format of public presentation of this important research to include as many people as possible who are interested in architectural decision making. I, for one, is interested in hospitals. Thank you.
Thanks Drelk for the comment. Behavioral economics is not so new (it has about 40 years now).
This post is just a case study and you are right that behavioral insights can be used in various fields including hospitals.
I'll try to come up with some applications for hospitals, though thankfully I haven't visited one in a few years.
Post a Comment