0
Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems:Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change Peoples Behaviors and Attitudes           ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”                                           Persuasion is: !               ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”                                                          Source: http://w...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012                                       ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”                                                                          ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”                                                                          ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”         Behavior Change Support Systems!                                 ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”                       Persuasion postulates                              ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”                "#%$$! )+$2/&04! *611$**,60! .+062&%(! +61+5$*! &%$! #$!  ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”                       Persuasion postulates                              ...
BCSS. The perceived systemStibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”principles relate to how to design                    ...
, and provides affective feedback for the user to adopt Socio-Technical Systems” results of this study suggest that very f...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Expected Contribution     Social Learning                            ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Socio-Technical Context                                              ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”                                                              Table 1 Beha...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”                           CASE STUDY : 1!                                ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Research Context                        Social Cognitive Theory :    ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Research Question                       How and to what extent social...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Research Framework                            USER FACTORS           ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Research Setting                  •    A system developed on top of T...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”Persuasive 2012Linköping, Sweden: June 7, 2012                            ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”Persuasive 2012Linköping, Sweden: June 7, 2012                            ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Findings: Recognition vs. Competition                                ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Findings: Had vs. Had Not (seen themselves on the screen)            ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Conclusions                  •  Contributions:                       ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”                               CASE STUDY : 2!                            ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Social Cognitive Model                                               ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Research Model                       Persuasive Software Features!   ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Ongoing Studies: Social ComparisonRiga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Ongoing Studies: Normative InfluenceRiga Business SchoolOctober 8, 20...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Results                       Persuasive Software Features!          ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”                           CASE STUDY : 3!                                ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Research question                       What kinds of inherent persua...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Research settings                                                    ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”       +$,"#$%        -)(.*%                               !"#$%          ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Number of followees and followers you have in Twitter?               ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     How often do you tweet?                       $!!"#                  ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Regarding content in Twitter you consider yourself as?               ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     What is the level of credibility in Twitter?                       (!...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Are there unwritten behavioral rules in Twitter?                     ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Is Twitter a powerful tool to call to action outside the virtual worl...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Summary of findings                                       Number of  ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     4th postulate of Persuasive Systems Design framework          !#,"   ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”                       CASE STUDY : 4                                     ...
A    .oulu.fi
Twitter influences my thoughts.                             0   20      40   60   80   100     120      140   160   180   ...
In Twitter, there are norms that should be followed by users, including me.                              (Normative Influe...
Twitter allows me to compare myself with others.                                     (Social Comparison)                  ...
In Twitter, I can observe the behavior of other users and learn from it.                                   (Social Learnin...
Twitter is an influential tool to call for actions outside the virtual world.                             0   20   40   60...
In Twitter, there is an observable tendency of followers to stratify in the                                  groups of int...
B    .oulu.fi
Twitter influences my behavior.                             0   10   20   30   40   50   60   70    80   90   100 110 120 ...
In Twitter, I can compete with other users.                                                 (Competition)                 ...
In Twitter, users receive recognition for special merit.                                        (Recognition)             ...
There are “unwritten” communication and behavioral rules in Twitter,                           which users need to follow....
C    .oulu.fi
In Twitter, I can observe other current active users.                                      (Social Facilitation)          ...
In Twitter, I have an opportunity to cooperate with others.                                      (Cooperation)            ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”                          Summary!Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012     ...
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”     Summary of Current Findings                                          ...
Agnis.Stibe@oulu.fi                                                            @agsti                                     ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes. Twitter Case Studies.

1,210

Published on

Published in: Technology

Transcript of "Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes. Twitter Case Studies."

  1. 1. Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems:Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change Peoples Behaviors and Attitudes Twitter Case Studies Agnis Stibe Doctoral Candidate and Project Researcher Department of Information Processing Science agnis.stibe@oulu.fi 29224488 @agsti
  2. 2. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Persuasion is: ! ! the influence ! of beliefs, attitudes, intentions, motivations, or behaviors.! a process ! aimed at changing peopleʼs attitude or behavior, by using written or spoken words to convey information, feelings, or reasoning, or a combination of them.! Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PersuasionRiga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  3. 3. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/34557143@N07/3283901503/Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  4. 4. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  5. 5. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Source: BJ FoggRiga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  6. 6. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Source: BJ FoggRiga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  7. 7. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Behavior Change Support Systems! ! - PSD Model! - O/C Matrix! Source: Oinas-Kukkonen H.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  8. 8. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Persuasion postulates IT is never neutral (P1) PSD Model Consistency Incrementality Routes (P2) (P3) (P4) Usefulness and ease Unobtrusiveness Transparency of use (P5) (P6) (P7) Persuasion context The intent The event The strategy Intended Use, user, and Message, route outcome/change technology contexts Persuasive software features Primary task support Computer-human Perceived system Social influence dialogue support credibilityRiga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi Source: Oinas-Kukkonen H.
  9. 9. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” "#%$$! )+$2/&04! *611$**,60! .+062&%(! +61+5$*! &%$! #$! ,+%5&/+24! &0$%&/+24! +%! %$/2,+%1$5$2* +,! &/67$*4! Outcome/Change Matrix -$#&./+%*!+%!1+5)0(/23F!#$*$!5&(!-$!%$*)$1/.$0(!1&00$7!&*! G9H61+5$4!;9H61+5$4!&27!I9H61+5$!<=>?@! * !"!#$%&* ("!#$%&** )"!#$%&** +" G+%5/23!&2!&1! G+%5/23!&! G+%5/23!&2! ,-." +,!1+5)0(/23! -$#&./+%! &/67$!JGK;L! /01* JGK8L! JGK:L! )" ;0$%/23!&2!&1!+,! ;0$%/23!&! ;0$%/23!&2! ,-." 1+5)0(/23!J;K8L! -$#&./+%! &/67$!J;K;L! /01* J;K:L! 2" I$/2,+%1/23!&2! I$/2,+%1/23!&! I$/2,+%1/23! ,-." &1!+,!1+5)0(/23! -$#&./+%! &2!&/67$! /01* JIK8L! JIK:L! JIK;L! ;0<1!()!=>9!?0/&#+!@(AB)! Source: Oinas-Kukkonen H.Riga Business School ;! 5&%/M! 1&2! -$! 1+2*%61$7! ,%+5! #$! /2$27$7! +61+5$*!October 8, 2012 &27!#$!()$*!+,!1#&23$@!N$$!"&-0$!=@!A#$2!%$*$&%1#/23!+%! .oulu.fi
  10. 10. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Persuasion postulates IT is never neutral (P1) PSD Model Consistency Incrementality Routes (P2) (P3) (P4) Usefulness and ease Unobtrusiveness Transparency of use (P5) (P6) (P7) Persuasion context The intent The event The strategy Intended Use, user, and Message, route outcome/change technology contexts Persuasive software features Primary task support Computer-human Perceived system Social influence dialogue support credibilityRiga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi Source: Oinas-Kukkonen H.
  11. 11. BCSS. The perceived systemStibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”principles relate to how to design Agnis credibility design system so that it is more believable and thereby more persuasive. The desig principles in the social influence category describe how to design the system so that Categoriesusers by leveraging social influence. motivates of Persuasive Features Social influence User Primary task support Human-computer ! dialogue Perceived system credibility Other users Fig. 1. Four categories of design principles for BCSSs Source: Oinas-Kukkonen H.Riga Business School Tørning and Oinas-Kukkonen [25] have analyzed the scientific research publicationOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  12. 12. , and provides affective feedback for the user to adopt Socio-Technical Systems” results of this study suggest that very few Agnis Stibe “Persuasive activity. Theing habits while working at the computer. Chi et al. [9] studies resulted in achieving the intended goal. Only a fed a smart kitchen application for improving home took advantage of any persuasive techniques, and none by providing calorie awareness regarding the food interventions were conceptually designed through p s used Categories of Persuasivethe cooking in the meals prepared during Features design frameworks. The conclusion of this studyThis was based on ubiquitous sensors for tracking the designing a new generation of BCSSs should be based f calories in different ingredients, and then providing frameworks. Persuasive systems design techniques Primary task support Dialogue support System credibility Social support Tailoring Suggestion Surface credibility Social comparison Tunneling Praise Authority Normative influence Reduction Liking Trustworthiness Social learning Self-monitoring Reminders Expertise Recognition Simulation Rewards Real-world feel Cooperation Personalization Similarity 3rd party endorsements Social facilitation Rehearsal Social role Verifiability Competition Figure 1. Persuasive systems design techniques. Source: Oinas-Kukkonen H. Riga Business School October 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  13. 13. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Expected Contribution Social Learning Incrementality?! Social Comparison Cognitive! Dissonance?! Normative Influence Behavior Change Social Facilitation Cooperation Competition Participation Recognition FeedbackRiga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  14. 14. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Socio-Technical Context Social Web Individuals Persuasion Social InfluenceRiga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  15. 15. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Table 1 Behavior change related theories Theory of Reasoned Action Individual behavior is determined by behavioral intentions, i.e., an individuals Behavior Change attitude toward the behavior and subjective norms about the behavior [6] Theory of Planned Behavior Individuals perception of the ease with which the behavior can be performed, i.e., behavioral control, influences individual’s behaviors [7] Related Theories Technology Acceptance Model Perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use determine an individuals intention to use a system, which leads into actual system use; perceived ease of use impacts perceived usefulness; assumes that actors are free to act without limitations when they just have an intention to act; based on Theory of Reasoned Action [16] Unified Theory of Acceptance Performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, and facilitating and Use of Technology conditions determine the usage intention and usage behavior, whereas gender, age, experience, and voluntariness of use moderate this impact; extended from Technology Acceptance Model [17] Self-Efficacy Theory Individuals who perceive themselves as capable of taking action also do take action; strengthening the sense of efficacy happens through vicarious experiences, social models, social persuasion, and reducing peoples stress reactions and altering their negative emotional proclivities and misinterpretations of their physical states [8, 21] Social Cognitive Theory Observing others performing a behavior influences the perceptions of individual’s own ability to perform the behavior, i.e. self-efficacy, and the perceived expected outcomes [9] Elaboration Likelihood Model Central and peripheral routes are key routes for persuasion; central route is used when information processing is based upon critical thinking; peripheral route is based on rules of thumb; change via central route is more enduring, resistant and predictive of behavior [10] Cognitive Dissonance Theory Individuals seek consistency among their cognitions such as beliefs and opinions; inconsistency between attitudes or behaviors creates dissonance that needs to be eliminated [18] Goal Setting Theory Goals affect performance through directing attention and effort, energizing, persistence, and by leading to arousal and/or use of task-relevant knowledge and strategies; the highest goals produce the highest levels of effort and performance; specific, difficult goals consistently lead to higher performance than urging people to do their best; when goals are self-set, people with high self-efficacy set higher goals than people with lower self-efficacy; people with high self-efficacy are more committed to the assigned goals and and to responding more positively to negative feedback [19] Computer Self-Efficacy Computer self-efficacy means individual’s judgment of one’s capabilities to use computers for both task performance and computer performance; anxiety, innovativeness, task characteristics, prior performance, and perceived effort play a role; based on Self-Efficacy Theory [20] Source: Oinas-Kukkonen H.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  16. 16. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” CASE STUDY : 1! ! Comparative Analysis of Recognition and Competition! as Features of Social Influence Using Twitter! ! Source: Stibe A. and Oinas-Kukkonen H.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  17. 17. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Research Context Social Cognitive Theory : Self-Regulation PSD model : Social Influence Recognition Competition Source: Stibe A. and Oinas-Kukkonen H.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  18. 18. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Research Question How and to what extent social influence design principles! can persuade people ! to participate in sharing feedback?! Recognition Competition Source: Stibe A. and Oinas-Kukkonen H.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  19. 19. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Research Framework USER FACTORS SOFTWARE FEATURES USER BEHAVIOR PERSONAL ENVIRONMENTAL BEHAVIORAL Malone and Lepper, 1987 Oinas-Kukkonen and Interpersonal Motivators Harjumaa, 2009, PSD Cooperation CR Cooperation H1 Bandura, 1991 Social Cognitive Theory Competition CT Competition H2 Judgment Self-Regulation Recognition User Behavior RE H3 Targeted to Recognition Self-Response Feedback Sharing H4 Observation Vicarious Learning SL Social Learning Social Learning Theory Bandura, 1976 H5 Social Facilitation SF Social Facilitation Zajonc, 1965 ! Source: Stibe A. and Oinas-Kukkonen H.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  20. 20. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Research Setting •  A system developed on top of Twitter •  A pilot study conducted in class setting with master students –  37 participants in two computer rooms •  18 in recognition room •  19 in competition room –  30 minutes hands-on use of the system –  6 questions in total displayed to the participants –  Participants responded to questions using Twitter •  Online questionnaire about perceptions (47 questions, mainly Likert-7) Source: Stibe A. and Oinas-Kukkonen H.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  21. 21. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”Persuasive 2012Linköping, Sweden: June 7, 2012 .oulu.fi
  22. 22. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems”Persuasive 2012Linköping, Sweden: June 7, 2012 .oulu.fi
  23. 23. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Findings: Recognition vs. Competition Independent sample t-test Item Recognition Competition t-value df p Twitter is a powerful tool to call for action outside the virtual 5.50 4.32 2.937 35 .006** world. I believe that the system would 5.56 4.47 2.775 35 .009** work well in a real airport. I think that the system is effective for encouraging users to 6.11 5.11 2.570 35 .015* participate. More encouraging to participate Source: Stibe A. and Oinas-Kukkonen H.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  24. 24. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Findings: Had vs. Had Not (seen themselves on the screen) Item Yes No t-value df pDisplaying public recognition or All 5.44 3.25 4.512 33 .000**the top responders helped me to Recognition 5.54 3.50 3.427 15 .004**monitor my performance. Competition 5.36 3.00 2.977 16 .009**Tweets provided by others on the All Non-significant differencebig display encouraged me to Recognition 5.69 5.00 3.323 12 .006**come up with my tweets. Competition Non-significant differenceDisplaying public recognition or All 5.00 3.75 2.352 33 .025*the top responders motivated me Recognition 5.38 3.50 2.409 15 .029*to produce more tweets. Competition Non-significant difference More encouraging and motivating to tweet Source: Stibe A. and Oinas-Kukkonen H.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  25. 25. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Conclusions •  Contributions: –  Scientific: An empirical analysis of persuasive software features from the PSD model; –  For business: A persuasive and operational system to engage customers in feedback sharing. •  Limitations: –  Class setting; –  Sample: education and age; –  Missing the control group. •  Further research: –  Field-testing - actual use; –  Other social influence features. Source: Stibe A. and Oinas-Kukkonen H.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  26. 26. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” CASE STUDY : 2! ! Social Influence on Customer Engagement: ! The Effects of Social Learning, Social Comparison, and Normative Influence ! Source: Stibe A., Oinas-Kukkonen H., and Lehto T.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  27. 27. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Social Cognitive Model PERSONAL! ! USER FACTORS:! -  Vicarious learning! -  Self-regulation! ENVIRONMENTAL! BEHAVIORAL! ! ! SOFTWARE FEATURES:! BEHAVIORAL INTENTION:! -  Social learning! -  To engage in feedback -  Social comparison! sharing (using -  Normative influence! information system)! Source: Stibe A., Oinas-Kukkonen H., and Lehto T.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  28. 28. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Research Model Persuasive Software Features! SC! Social Comparison! H4d! H3! H4c! SL! NI! Social Learning! Normative Influence! H4b! H2! PP! H4a! Perceived Persuasiveness! H1! BI! Behavioral Intention! Source: Stibe A., Oinas-Kukkonen H., and Lehto T.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  29. 29. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Ongoing Studies: Social ComparisonRiga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  30. 30. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Ongoing Studies: Normative InfluenceRiga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  31. 31. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Results Persuasive Software Features! SC! Social Comparison! β=0.59**" 34%! β=0.20*" β=0.47**" NI! SL! Normative Influence! Social Learning! 36%! β=0.21*" β=0.53**" PP! β=0.28*" Perceived Persuasiveness! 45%! β=0.28*" BI! Behavioral Intention! 24%! Source: Stibe A., Oinas-Kukkonen H., and Lehto T.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  32. 32. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” CASE STUDY : 3! ! Incremental Persuasion through Microblogging:! A Survey of Twitter Users in Latvia! Source: Stibe A., Oinas-Kukkonen H., Berzina i., and Pahnila S.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  33. 33. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Research question What kinds of inherent persuasion patterns do exist in Twitter that can ! change usersʼ behaviors and/or attitudes? ! Source: Stibe A., Oinas-Kukkonen H., Berzina i., and Pahnila S.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  34. 34. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Research settings July 19-28, 2010 Latvia Quantitative survey online: -  37 questions -  403 valid responses Invitations for users: -  7 tweets by authors -  1 author’s blog entry in -  http://ilzeberzina.wordpress.com/ -  Several authors’ messages in other social networks -  37 retweets by other Twitter users -  1 reference in technology blogger article Source: Stibe A., Oinas-Kukkonen H., Berzina i., and Pahnila S.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  35. 35. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” +$,"#$% -)(.*% !"#$% Profile of the respondents &()*% Gen :$"8$5& !"#$$%& 9()*& ()*& 73.845& /9(1*& +,-#."#$$%& /0(1*& Edu !"#$"%&()" 4"0$"%&()" *+,-." ##,5." 23"#4%$5& 66(6*& Age 6"2"0345)" 7,8." !"#"$%&()" #$/#+"%," #2/#3"%," *+,-." 01,2." #2,*." *"/"2"0345)" -2,2." #"$,"/"*"0," 1-,+." Source: Stibe A., Oinas-Kukkonen H., Berzina i., and Pahnila S.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  36. 36. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Number of followees and followers you have in Twitter? (!!" !!" &!!" %!!" 516617**+" 516617*3+" $!!" #!!" !" )*++",-./"(" ("01/,-+",1" #",1"$"2*.3+" $"2*.3+"./4" 01/,-+" #"2*.3" 013*" Source: Stibe A., Oinas-Kukkonen H., Berzina i., and Pahnila S.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  37. 37. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” How often do you tweet? $!!"# ,!"# +!"# *!"# 9:.76#826# )!"# ;.:.72<#=4./#>.7#?..@# (!"# ;54.=4./#8A7B3C#2#45301# !"# &!"# D3E.#B3#/.:.72<#45301/# %!"# F5#350#0?..0# $!"# !"# -.//#0123# )#45301/# $#05#%# %#6.27/# )#45301/# 05#$#6.27# 6.27/# 238#457.# The amount of tweeting increases over time. χ2(6)=18.059, p=0.006 Source: Stibe A., Oinas-Kukkonen H., Berzina i., and Pahnila S.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  38. 38. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Regarding content in Twitter you consider yourself as? $!!"# ,!"# +!"# *!"# 97.2057# )!"# :./;538.7# (!"# !"# :.0<..0.7# &!"# :.28.7# %!"# $!"# !"# -.//#0123#)# )#45301/# $#05#%#6.27/# %#6.27/#238# 45301/# 05#$#6.27# 457.# Experienced users generate more content than new users. χ2(9)=29.789, p=0.000 Source: Stibe A., Oinas-Kukkonen H., Berzina i., and Pahnila S.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  39. 39. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” What is the level of credibility in Twitter? (!!"# !"# &!"# 567-# %!"# 8*4690#-67-# $!"# 8*4690# )1:# !"# )*++#,-./#&# &#01/,-+# 01/,-+# (#,1#$# ,1#(#2*.3# $#2*.3+# 2*.3+# ./4#013*# The longer one has used the Twitter χ2(9)=21.130, p=0.012 the higher trust the user has for it. Source: Stibe A., Oinas-Kukkonen H., Berzina i., and Pahnila S.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  40. 40. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Are there unwritten behavioral rules in Twitter? $!!"# ,!"# +!"# *!"# )!"# 9./# (!"# :278#05#/26# !"# &!"# ;5# %!"# $!"# !"# -.//#0123#)# )#45301/# $#05#%#6.27/# %#6.27/#238# 45301/# 05#$#6.27# 457.# Twitter users learn over time unwritten χ2(6)=19.064, p=0.004 communication and/or behavioral rules in Twitter. Source: Stibe A., Oinas-Kukkonen H., Berzina i., and Pahnila S.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  41. 41. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Is Twitter a powerful tool to call to action outside the virtual world? (!!"# !"# &!"# 5*+# %!"# 6.34#,1#+.2# $!"# 71# !"# )*++#,-./#&# &#01/,-+# 01/,-+# (#,1#$# ,1#(#2*.3# $#2*.3+#./4# 2*.3+# 013*# Twitter is powerful tool to call for action offline, i.e. outside the virtual world, and experienced users are more ready to take action based on their communication via Twitter. χ2(6)=18.551, p=0.005 Source: Stibe A., Oinas-Kukkonen H., Berzina i., and Pahnila S.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  42. 42. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Summary of findings Number of followers and Intensity of followees tweeting Content Trust generators information Powerful tool to Recognize call to action unwritten outside the communication virtual world rules Source: Stibe A., Oinas-Kukkonen H., Berzina i., and Pahnila S.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  43. 43. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” 4th postulate of Persuasive Systems Design framework !#," CHANGE !#+" !#," !#*" 95::5;../" !#+" !#)" 95::5;.7/" !#*" !#(" 95::5;../" <;..0".=.76"826" !#)" 95::5;.7/" >530.30"?7.2057" !#" !#(" <;..0".=.76"826" >7.8@A@:@06"4.8@B4"1@C1" !#&" >530.30"?7.2057" D.12=@572:"7B:./" !#" !#%" >7.8@A@:@06"4.8@B4"1@C1" >2::"05"2?E53" !#&" !#$" D.12=@572:"7B:./" !#%" !" >2::"05"2?E53" !#$" -.//"0123")"45301/" )"45301/"05"$"6.27" $"05"%"6.27/" %"6.27/"238"457." !" -.//"0123")"45301/" )"45301/"05"$"6.27" $"05"%"6.27/" %"6.27/"238"457." I N C R E M E NTAL STE PS Source: Stibe A., Oinas-Kukkonen H., Berzina i., and Pahnila S.Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  44. 44. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” CASE STUDY : 4 (ongoing)! ! A Longitudinal Study of Behaviors and Attitudes ! of Twitter users in Latvia!Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  45. 45. A .oulu.fi
  46. 46. Twitter influences my thoughts. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200Disagree completely Pilnībā nepiekrītu Disagree NepiekrītuSomewhat disagree Daļēji nepiekrītu Undecided Neesmu izlēmis Somewhat agree Daļēji piekrītu A Agree Piekrītu Agree completely Pilnībā piekrītu .oulu.fi
  47. 47. In Twitter, there are norms that should be followed by users, including me. (Normative Influence) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160Disagree completely Pilnībā nepiekrītu Disagree NepiekrītuSomewhat disagree Daļēji nepiekrītu Undecided Neesmu izlēmis Somewhat agree Daļēji piekrītu A Agree Piekrītu Agree completely Pilnībā piekrītu .oulu.fi
  48. 48. Twitter allows me to compare myself with others. (Social Comparison) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200Disagree completely Pilnībā nepiekrītu Disagree NepiekrītuSomewhat disagree Daļēji nepiekrītu Undecided Neesmu izlēmis Somewhat agree Daļēji piekrītu A Agree Piekrītu Agree completely Pilnībā piekrītu .oulu.fi
  49. 49. In Twitter, I can observe the behavior of other users and learn from it. (Social Learning) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220Disagree completely Pilnībā nepiekrītu Disagree NepiekrītuSomewhat disagree Daļēji nepiekrītu Undecided Neesmu izlēmis Somewhat agree Daļēji piekrītu A Agree Piekrītu Agree completely Pilnībā piekrītu .oulu.fi
  50. 50. Twitter is an influential tool to call for actions outside the virtual world. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200Disagree completely Pilnībā nepiekrītu Disagree NepiekrītuSomewhat disagree Daļēji nepiekrītu Undecided Neesmu izlēmis Somewhat agree Daļēji piekrītu A Agree Piekrītu Agree completely Pilnībā piekrītu .oulu.fi
  51. 51. In Twitter, there is an observable tendency of followers to stratify in the groups of interests. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220Disagree completely Pilnībā nepiekrītu Disagree NepiekrītuSomewhat disagree Daļēji nepiekrītu Undecided Neesmu izlēmis Somewhat agree Daļēji piekrītu A Agree Piekrītu Agree completely Pilnībā piekrītu .oulu.fi
  52. 52. B .oulu.fi
  53. 53. Twitter influences my behavior. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150Disagree completely Pilnībā nepiekrītu Disagree Nepiekrītu BSomewhat disagree Daļēji nepiekrītu Undecided Neesmu izlēmis Somewhat agree Daļēji piekrītu B Agree Piekrītu Agree completely Pilnībā piekrītu .oulu.fi
  54. 54. In Twitter, I can compete with other users. (Competition) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140Disagree completely Pilnībā nepiekrītu Disagree Nepiekrītu BSomewhat disagree Daļēji nepiekrītu Undecided Neesmu izlēmis Somewhat agree Daļēji piekrītu B Agree Piekrītu Agree completely Pilnībā piekrītu .oulu.fi
  55. 55. In Twitter, users receive recognition for special merit. (Recognition) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140Disagree completely Pilnībā nepiekrītu Disagree Nepiekrītu BSomewhat disagree Daļēji nepiekrītu Undecided Neesmu izlēmis Somewhat agree Daļēji piekrītu B Agree Piekrītu Agree completely Pilnībā piekrītu .oulu.fi
  56. 56. There are “unwritten” communication and behavioral rules in Twitter, which users need to follow. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140Disagree completely Pilnībā nepiekrītu Disagree Nepiekrītu BSomewhat disagree Daļēji nepiekrītu Undecided Neesmu izlēmis Somewhat agree Daļēji piekrītu B Agree Piekrītu Agree completely Pilnībā piekrītu .oulu.fi
  57. 57. C .oulu.fi
  58. 58. In Twitter, I can observe other current active users. (Social Facilitation) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200Disagree completely Pilnībā nepiekrītu Disagree NepiekrītuSomewhat disagree Daļēji nepiekrītu Undecided Neesmu izlēmis Somewhat agree Daļēji piekrītu Agree Piekrītu C Agree completely Pilnībā piekrītu .oulu.fi
  59. 59. In Twitter, I have an opportunity to cooperate with others. (Cooperation) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260Disagree completely Pilnībā nepiekrītu Disagree NepiekrītuSomewhat disagree Daļēji nepiekrītu Undecided Neesmu izlēmis Somewhat agree Daļēji piekrītu Agree Piekrītu C Agree completely Pilnībā piekrītu .oulu.fi
  60. 60. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Summary!Riga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  61. 61. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Socio-Technical Systems” Summary of Current Findings Behavior Change Recognition Competition Participation Social Facilitation Cooperation Feedback Social Comparison Normative InfluenceRiga Business SchoolOctober 8, 2012 .oulu.fi
  62. 62. Agnis.Stibe@oulu.fi @agsti 29224488 Thanks to:the Foundation of Nokia Corporationthe Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovationthe Doctoral Program on Software and Systems Engineering
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×