What’s the Matter With Us?
Behaviour architect Ram Prasad explains why proposed solutions to problems such as spitting and railway track trespassing are fundamentally flawed.
Final Mile managed to decrease railway track trespassing deaths through an innovative perception-based solution.
If you’re a bar or club owner, know this: a “No Smoking” sign with a picture of a lit cigarette crossed through by a red slash, especially one that’s neon lit, is about as effective as telling a pack-a-day smoker that smoking causes cancer. In fact, chances are it’ll make the smoker light up instantly. This is because the sign is designed for the conscious brain, when it’s the nonconscious brain that’s really processing the image of the neon lit cigarette, replete with its alluring associations to nightlife. In other words: right intention, wrong outcome.
As a behaviour architect, the bulk of my work at my company Final Mile is developing neuroscience-based applications for solving real life, day-to-day problems. Or in other words to figure out why people do what they do; and in doing so figure out how to get them to stop doing it. In a city like Mumbai, this field of study, called brain sciences, proves exceptionally useful in finding solutions to behavioural problems, like spitting, littering or trespassing on railway tracks. To effectively tackle these issues, however, we have to do away with the fundamental assumption that we are in control of our brain and our behaviour.
In fact, a little more than 95 per cent of the decision making happens at a nonconscious level. We are not aware of the processing in itself, we are only aware of the outcome. Scientists call this a “tape delay” (read more here). In simple terms, our nonconscious brain has already decided which car to buy and then throws the decision to our conscious brain. Our conscious brain then goes about rationalising that this particular car is the best car for us. We’ll find the necessary justifications for a decision already taken. To borrow a phrase from neuroscientist Joseph E. Ledoux, “We know exactly what we want, after we have decided.”
One area where this insight has great use is in designing for public behaviour. Let’s take spitting. The moment we see a visual of a person spitting next to a “Do not spit” sign, we may feel disgust but unconsciously produce excess saliva and consequently have to exercise great restraint to not spit it out. The brain reacts to the image of a person spitting before the control mechanism kicks in. While conducting research on why people spit in public places, we asked a man who had just spat on a staircase why he did it. He didn’t answer the question, but what he did was more disgusting than spitting—he started cleaning the spit with his bare hands. So, at a conscious level, he would rather not spit, but in behavioural terms, he continues to spit in spite of all the shame. Some unconventional experiments have shown promising results. One involved putting up an image of human eyes, which seemed to reduce dishonest acts and spitting as well. In closed environments, most people spit when they are alone; they typically look around to check if anyone is noticing. Using this insight we tried interventions where stick figures and silhouettes were pasted on walls to create a sense that that the spitter was not alone.
In our work to reduce trespassing deaths, we saw that the mere presence of infrastructure doesn’t guarantee the right behaviour. For example, Mulund station has a foot over-bridge, but over 30 deaths occur under it every year. We found that we could solve, to a large extent, the behavioural problem of trespassing if we used some of the learnings from neuroscience.
Where possible, underground walkways should be built. As opposed to an over-bridge, the first step here is walking down, which seems effortless. An over-bridge seems like a lot more effort because the first step is climbing up. The second task of climbing up or down doesn’t impact the decision as much. Where underground walkways are not possible, behavioural interventions aimed at shifting the perception of the risk work. At an intuitive level, people “feel” little risk while crossing tracks and there is a fair amount of over-confidence that nothing will happen to them. (By the way, all of us are over-confident, unless of course one is clinically depressed.). Nonconscious fear building interventions that work at an emotional level have proven to be effective in breaking this over-confidence. In Wadala for instance, we managed to significantly reduce track trespassing deaths through implementation of small signage tweaks and warning systems (you can read more about them here) that were designed explicitly for the nonconscious brain.
Rather than writing obvious things like “Drive carefully”, we need to put in place behavioural interventions that work intuitively. I once saw this message on a highway: “Speed is a five letter word, so is death. Slow is a four letter word, so is life.” By the time you read this profound statement and appreciate the connect, you would have crossed over to the other side of the road and veered into a few vehicles. Surely, we can do better by designing signage that works at the intuitive/automatic level: less words, more visuals, emotional rather than rational messages. But first, we just have to come to terms with this simple yet crazy fact: that we are not as much in control of our actions as we think we are. Still not convinced? Try not thinking about chocolate.
Ram Prasad is the co-founder of Final Mile, a behavioural architecture firm based in Mumbai.
Tags: behaviour architecture, Final Mile, Ram PrasadComments (15)
Leave a comment
Featured Articles
First Look At New Secret South Mumbai Bar The Local
June 18, 2013 by Purva Mehra
News Corp
June 17, 2013 by Pronoti Datta
Editor’s Notes: GQ’s Che Kurrien
June 17, 2013 by Editors
20 Food Websites To Bookmark
June 14, 2013 by EditorsYou Might Also Like...
This is some really interesting stuff that you guys are doing. Hats off
*bhavineev, medical adherence is a massive challenge, across the world. Some estimates put the financial loss of$300 billion annually in the US alone. Back home we have serious consequences like drug resistant TB and poor adherence in chronic conditions like diabetes and Hypertension. We are currently running a project on improving adherence among TB patients. Higher order goals, beyond the cure itself work. (A couple wanting to cure TB so that they could have a child). So do favorable social norms and active supervision through the family/healthcare provider. Beyond all this, there is a need to make reward systems available so that people see benefits beyond the cure, as removal of disease is not positive enough an outcome. We do come across a small percentage of people who are diehard defaulters. Must remember that the reasons they articulate aren’t the real reasons, they are rationalizations. So at the very least one shouldn’t address the reasons they invent.
Thanks for sharing these ideas, Ram. How would you recommend architecting a way for people to be regular with taking their medication; especially when they are completely against taking it, and invent reasons to prove they do not need it?
i really like the thought structure here. honest appreciation from my side for someone who even ventures to think and find solutions in this context.
ArZan, No, I don’t agree and no grudge either. I ignored your comment, that’s it. You are of course free to presume anything that gives you satisfaction. Try googling Choice Architecture, Architects of the Constitution, Architects of Poverty, Information Architecture, Architects of Fear…
Ram
By ignoring my comment above, I presume you grudgingly agree to what I have to say ??
Alexander, you are right. Sometimes excessive communication of risk leads to maladaptive behaviors (people smoking more). Would love to see your work on stopping people from smoking.
Amirudh, you have a point on underground subways.. they might seem unsafe and with the kind of rains Mumbai gets, they could get flooded. I have seen them work very well in Chennai.
Maverick, hopefully MRVC will keep some of the points you made when they design the escalators. Better to predict some of these behaviors and design accordingly rather than reacting later.
Good point there, Ram. Old habits die hard. We can also say that people deserve what they get into, as they cannot control their mind. But as responsible citizens of this country as well as on humanitarian grounds, we have to help our ignorant countrymen to change their lifestyles (and save their lives too!), this is one of the sure ways towards progress.
Anyway, MRVC plans to install escalators. How those escalators are going to withstand the weather, dust and hooligans is another question. I am sure you have some ideas!
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-01-20/mumbai/30646834_1_escalators-goregaon-senior-railway-official
Cheers!
Nice article. My only gripe is the bastardization of the term architect.
As a real architect….qualified and certified I find it ironic and funny that the author calls himself a behaviour architect.
The dictionary meaning of architect is “1. a person who designs buildings and advises in their construction
or 2
: a person who designs and guides a plan or undertaking.
So how does what the author do, make him an architect? I can understand a behavioral scientist, consultant or just expert.
It does leave me a bit wary of actually reading something written by someone with a made-up qualification.
This is a truly innovative and creative approach to solving some of the crucial problems that Mumbai faces. But I think I would have to say that building underground walkways (subways in Mumbai) may not be effective in the sense that most people in Mumbai are averse to using these as well. Case in point is Andheri station. Maybe escalators may be a useful in this case, though the feasibility of it is questionable. But great approach nonetheless.
Very interesting. We just created a series of works for an health insurance company in Canada based on the same principles. You can’t get people to give up smoking by telling them that it kills as the brain can gloss over this easily plus everyone already knows this is the case. So simple techniques for quitting that don’t involve quitting that start from the premise that people want to stop is far more successful. Nice article.
nik, behavioural sciences is an exciting field, lots of books and articles in the last few years. I am sure you’ll find this field interesting and useful.
Maverick, glad you found the piece interesting. Prevention of course is the best case scenario..but in the case of trespassing we have a long way to go. Where Railways have built walls/fencing, people break them or use ladders and cross. And since there are more than 1000 trespassing points, its going to take a while to build FOBs and Escalators. In the meanwhile, we need to do try and save as many lives. We are losing 8-10 people a day. I agree though that people deserve better. While education helps in many ways, it is poor in dealing with cognitive biases that have formed over millions of years. e.g. Only 1 in 9 people who go through a bypass surgery change their lifestyle…and this is in the US where education, awareness and healthcare are accessible. So is the case with many who smoke, awareness doesn’t automatically lead to action.
Anoop, I have seen those visuals and they work. That we shouldn’t be disrespectful to Gods is hard wired and hence works automatically. And if spittoons aren’t provided, people will release it else where and make a crimson masterpiece like you said.
Interesting read and workable solutions.
Apart from the ones mentioned here, I’ve noticed another remarkably successful solution to stop people from spitting (particularly staircase corners). Many apartments in Mumbai clad the lower half of the walls (the ones running along the staircases) with tiles, not just plain tiles, they include tiles with images of Ganesh, Lakshmi, Jesus, Guru Nanak etc. And the result has been incredible, people refrain from spitting on these walls, out of sheer respect. Its a conscious decision that they make.
(Oh! But then they do find walls devoid of these images, and make a crimson masterpiece out of it.)
Agree and appreciate most of the observations and behaviorial patterns. Very interesting indeed.
Though the suggestions are quite practical, they are not the only deterrent. They should be complementary to good infrastructure, which will “prevent” people from say, crossing the tracks, for example, iron railings between tracks, escalators on platforms. We are in the 21st century and this is the least to expect from the Railways. I say this, after having travelled to and observed infrastructure in cities like Seoul, Singapore, Sydney etc. Most important is the attitude and education level of the people.
Love the article and the ending more. Am gonna do more research about this.