Persuasive technology is broadly defined as technology that is designed to change attitudes or behaviors of the users through persuasion and social influence, but not through coercion (Fogg 2002). Such technologies are regularly used in sales, diplomacy, politics, religion, military training, public health, and management, and may potentially be used in any area of human-human or human-computer interaction. Most self-identified persuasive technology research focuses on interactive, computational technologies, including desktop computers, Internet services, video games, and mobile devices (Oinas-Kukkonen et al. 2008), but this incorporates and builds on the results, theories, and methods of experimental psychology, rhetoric (Bogost 2007), and human-computer interaction. The design of persuasive technologies can be seen as a particular case of design with intent (Lockton et al. 2010). /from wikipedia.org/

1. Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers
to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes
Twitter Case Studies
Agnis Stibe
Doctoral Candidate and Project Researcher
Department of Information Processing Science
agnis.stibe@oulu.fi
+358 401490499
@agsti

2. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Persuasion is:
the influence
of beliefs, attitudes, intentions, motivations, or behaviors.
a process
aimed at changing people’ s 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/Persuasion
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

3. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/34557143@N07/3283901503/
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

4. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

5. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

6. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Source: BJ Fogg
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

7. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Source: BJ Fogg
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

8. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
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 credibility
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi Source: Oinas-Kukkonen H.

9. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Outcome/Change Matrix
Source: Oinas-Kukkonen H.
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

10. inciples in the social influence category describe how to design the system so th
Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
otivates users by leveraging social influence.
Categories of Persuasive Features
Social
influence
User
Primary task
support
Human-computer
!
dialogue
Perceived
system credibility
Other users
Source: Oinas-Kukkonen H.
Riga Business School
Fig. 1. Four categories of design principles for BCSSs
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

11. ng habits while working “Persuasive computer. ChiSocial Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter the Studies”
Agnis Stibe at the Technology: Practicing et al. [9]
studies resulted in achieving Case intended goal. Only a f
a smart kitchen application for improving home took advantage of any persuasive techniques, and non
by providing calorie awareness regarding the food interventions were conceptually designed through
s used in the meals prepared during the cooking design frameworks. The conclusion of this study
Categories of Persuasive Features
This was based on ubiquitous sensors for tracking the designing a new generation of BCSSs should be base
f calories in different ingredients, and then providing frameworks.
P e r s u a s iv e s y s te m s d e s ig n
te c h n iq u e s
P r im a r y ta sk su p p o r t D ia lo g u e s u p p o r t S y s te m c r e d ib ility S o c ia l s u p p o r t
T a ilo rin g S u g g e s tio n S u r fa c e c re d ib ility S o c ia l c o m p a ris o n
T u n n e lin g P ra is e A u th o rity N o rm a tiv e in flu e n c e
R e d u c tio n L ik in g T ru s tw o rth in e s s S o c ia l le a rn in g
S e lf -m o n ito rin g R e m in d e rs E x p e rtis e R e c o g n itio n
S im u la tio n R ew a rd s R e a l-w o r ld fe e l C o o p e ra tio n
P e r s o n a liz a tio n S im ila r ity 3 rd p a r ty e n d o r s e m e n ts S o c ia l fa c ilita tio n
R e h e arsa l S o c ia l ro le V e r ifia b ility C o m p e titio n
Figure 1. Persuasive systems design techniques.
Source: Oinas-Kukkonen H.
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

12. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Expected Contribution
Social Learning Incrementality?
Social Comparison Cognitive
Dissonance?
Normative Influence Behavior
Change
Social Facilitation
Cooperation
Competition Participation
Recognition
Feedback
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

13. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Socio-Technical Context
Social Web
Individuals
Persuasion
Social Influence
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

14. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
CASE STUDY : 1
Incremental Persuasion through Microblogging:
A Survey of Twitter Users in Latvia
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

15. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Research question
What kinds of inherent persuasion patterns
do exist in Twitter that can
change users’ behaviors and/or attitudes?
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

16. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
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., Pahnila S. 2011
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

17. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Profile of the respondents
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

18. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Number of followees and followers you have in Twitter?
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

19. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
How often do you tweet?
The amount of tweeting
increases over time.
χ2(6)=18.059, p=0.006
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

20. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Regarding content in Twitter you consider yourself as?
Experienced users generate more content
than new users.
χ2(9)=29.789, p=0.000
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

21. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
What is the level of credibility in Twitter?
The longer one has used the Twitter the
higher trust the user has for it.
χ2(9)=21.130, p=0.012
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

22. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Are there unwritten behavioral rules in Twitter?
Twitter users learn over time unwritten communication
and/or behavioral rules in Twitter.
χ2(6)=19.064, p=0.004
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

23. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Is Twitter a powerful tool to call to action outside the virtual world?
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
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

24. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
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
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

25. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
4th postulate of Persuasive Systems Design framework
CHANG
E
INCREMENTAL STEPS
Source: Stibe A., Oinas-Kukkonen H., Berzina I., Pahnila S. 2011
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

26. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
CASE STUDY : 2
Comparative Analysis of Recognition and Competition
as Features of Social Influence Using Twitter
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

27. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Research Context
Social Cognitive Theory : Self-Regulation
PSD model : Social Influence
Recognition Competition
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

28. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Research Question
How and to what extent social influence design principles
can persuade people
to participate in sharing feedback?
Recognition Competition
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

29. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Research Framework
Social Cognitive PSD Model
Theory
User
Participation
Bandura, 1991 Oinas-Kukkonen & Harjumaa, 2009
Source: Stibe A. and Oinas-Kukkonen H. 2012
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

30. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
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)
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

31. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Persuasive 2012
Linköping, Sweden: June 7, 2012 .oulu.fi

32. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Persuasive 2012
Linköping, Sweden: June 7, 2012 .oulu.fi

33. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
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. 2012
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

34. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Findings: Had vs. Had Not (seen themselves on the screen)
Item Yes No t-value df p
Displaying 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 difference
big display encouraged me to Recognition 5.69 5.00 3.323 12 .006**
come up with my tweets. Competition Non-significant difference
Displaying 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. 2012
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

35. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
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.
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

36. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
CASE STUDY : 3 (ongoing)
Social Influence on Customer Engagement:
The Effects of Social Learning, Social Comparison, and Normative Influence
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

37. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Ongoing Studies: Social Comparison
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

38. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Ongoing Studies: Normative Influence
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

39. Agnis Stibe “Persuasive Technology: Practicing Social Influence Powers to Change People's Behaviors and Attitudes - Twitter Case Studies”
Research Model (PLS)
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%
Riga Business School
June 12, 2012 .oulu.fi

40. Agnis.Stibe@oulu.fi
@agsti
+358 401490499
Thanks to:
the Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation
the Foundation of Nokia Corporation