Towards Simulation-Based Preplanning for Experimental Analysis of Nudging

Bibtex

Cite as text

						@Select Types{,
							 
							 
							 
							 
							 
							Journal   = "Band-1",
							 Title= "Towards Simulation-Based Preplanning for Experimental Analysis of Nudging", 
							Author= "Stephanie C. Rodermund, Ricardo Buettner, and Ingo J. Timm", 
							Doi= "https://doi.org/10.30844/wi_2020_k6-rodermund", 
							 Abstract= "People often make irrational decisions. With digital nudging, decisions made in online environments can be guided beneficially by adapting design elements of the user-interface and thus the user’s choice environment. To evaluate the effectiveness of different nudging methods, modeling and simulation can be used. In this paper, we make a step towards preplanning of experiments to analyze nudging methods via simulation. To this end, we provide a model that replicates human behavior based on an experiment, that addresses gaming behavior in a digital environment. In a second step, the model is extended using several nudging methods in order to adapt the gamers’ decision-making. Experiments are presented that outline the model’s capability to produce plausible results concerning human gaming behavior as well as the effects of nudging methods on decision-making.

", 
							 Keywords= "Digital Nudging, Agent-based Modeling, Loss aversion.", 
							}
					
Stephanie C. Rodermund, Ricardo Buettner, and Ingo J. Timm: Towards Simulation-Based Preplanning for Experimental Analysis of Nudging. Online: https://doi.org/10.30844/wi_2020_k6-rodermund (Abgerufen 17.07.24)

Abstract

Abstract

People often make irrational decisions. With digital nudging, decisions made in online environments can be guided beneficially by adapting design elements of the user-interface and thus the user’s choice environment. To evaluate the effectiveness of different nudging methods, modeling and simulation can be used. In this paper, we make a step towards preplanning of experiments to analyze nudging methods via simulation. To this end, we provide a model that replicates human behavior based on an experiment, that addresses gaming behavior in a digital environment. In a second step, the model is extended using several nudging methods in order to adapt the gamers’ decision-making. Experiments are presented that outline the model’s capability to produce plausible results concerning human gaming behavior as well as the effects of nudging methods on decision-making.

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter

Digital Nudging, Agent-based Modeling, Loss aversion.

References

Referenzen

1. Thaler, R.H., Johnson, E.J.: Gambling with the House Money and Trying to Break Even: The Effects of Prior Outcomes on Risky Choice. Manag. Sci. 36, 643–660 (1990).
2. Tom, S.M., Fox, C.R., Trepel, C., Poldrack, R.A.: The Neural Basis of Loss Aversion in Decision-Making Under Risk. Science. 315, 515–518 (2007).
3. Knoll, M.A.Z.: The Role of Behavioral Economics and Behavioral Decision Making in Americans’ Retirement Savings Decisions. Soc. Secur. Bull. 70, 1–23 (2010).
4. Karl, F.M., Holle, R., Schwettmann, L., Peters, A., Laxy, M.: Status quo bias and health behavior: findings from a cross-sectional study. Eur. J. Public Health. (2019).
5. Dolan, P., Hallworth, M., Halpern, D., King, D., Vlaev, I.: MINDSPACE: Influencing behaviour for public policy. Inst. Gov. Cabinet Off (2010).
6. Campbell-Arvai, V., Arvai, J., Kalof, L.: Motivating Sustainable Food Choices: The Role of Nudges, Value Orientation, and Information Provision. Environ. Behav. 46, 453–475 (2014).
7. Demarque, C., Charalambides, L., Hilton, D.J., Waroquier, L.: Nudging sustainable consumption: The use of descriptive norms to promote a minority behavior in a realistic online shopping environment. J. Environ. Psychol. 43, 166–174 (2015).
8. Ölander, F., Thøgersen, J.: Informing Versus Nudging in Environmental Policy. J. Consum. Policy. 37, 341–356 (2014).
9. Weinmann, M., Schneider, C., Brocke, J. vom: Digital Nudging. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 58, 433–436 (2016).
10. Rodermund, S.C., Lorig, F., Timm, I.J.: Ethical Challenges in Modeling and Simulation of Nudging in Care. Presented at the EMoWI@ Wirtschaftsinformatik. (2019).
11. Lembcke, T.B., Engelbrecht, N., Brendel, A.B., Kolbe, L.: To Nudge or Not to Nudge: Ethical Considerations of Digital Nudging Based on its Behavioral Economics Roots. In: ECIS 2019 Proceedings. AIS (2019).
12. Bonabeau, E.: Agent-based modeling: Methods and techniques for simulating human systems. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 99, 7280–7287 (2002).
13. Reuter, L., Berndt, J.O., Timm, I.J.: Simulating Psychological Experiments: An Agent- Based Modeling Approach. In: HUSO 2018 Proceedings. 5–10 (2018).
14. Balke, T., Gilbert, N.: How Do Agents Make Decisions? A Survey. J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul. 17, 13 (2014).
15. Evans, J.St.B.T.: Dual-Processing Accounts of Reasoning, Judgment, and Social Cognition. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 59, 255–278 (2008).
16. Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science. 185, 1124–1131 (1974).
17. Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J.L., Thaler, R.H.: Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias. J. Econ. Perspect. 5, 193–206 (1991).
18. Shin, J., Ariely, D.: Keeping Doors Open: The Effect of Unavailability on Incentives to Keep Options Viable. Manag. Sci. 50, 575–586 (2004).
19. Fleischmann, M., Amirpur, M., Benlian, A., Hess, T.: Cognitive Biases in Information Systems Research: A Scientometric Analysis. In: ECIS 2014 Proceedings. AIS (2014).
20. Amirpur, M., Benlian, A.: Buying under Pressure: Purchase Pressure Cues and their Effects on Online Buying Decisions. In: ICIS 2015 Proceedings. AIS (2015).
21. Cai, S., Xu, Y. (Calvin): Designing Product Lists for E-commerce: The Effects of Sorting on Consumer Decision Making. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 24, 700–721 (2008).
22. Schneider, C., Weinmann, M., Vom Brocke, J.: Digital Nudging–Guiding Choices by Using Interface Design. Commun. ACM. 61, 67–73 (2018).
23. Thaler, R.H., Sunstein, C.R.: Nudge: improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness (2008).
24. Weber, E.U.: Doing the Right Thing Willingly: Using the Insights of Behavioral Decision Research for Better Environmental Decisions. In: The Behavioral Foundations of Public Policy. E. Shafir, Editor (2013).
25. Thaler, R.H., Benartzi, S.: Save More TomorrowTM: Using Behavioral Economics to Increase Employee Saving. J. Polit. Econ. 112, S164–S187 (2004).
26. Johnson, E.J., Goldstein, D.: Do Defaults Save Lives? Science. 302, 1338–1339 (2003).
27. Wansink, B.: From mindless eating to mindlessly eating better. Physiol. Behav. 100, 454– 463 (2010).
28. Johnson, E.J., Shu, S.B., Dellaert, B.G.C., Fox, C., Goldstein, D.G., Häubl, G., Larrick, R.P., Payne, J.W., Peters, E., Schkade, D., Wansink, B., Weber, E.U.: Beyond nudges: Tools of a choice architecture. Mark. Lett. 23, 487–504 (2012).
29. Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science. 211, 453–458 (1981).
30. Simons, A., Weinmann, M., Tietz, M., vom Brocke, J.: Which Reward Should I Choose? Preliminary Evidence for the Middle-Option Bias in Reward-Based Crowdfunding. Presented at the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2017).
31. Tietz, M., Simons, A., Weinmann, M., Vom Brocke, J.: The Decoy Effect in Reward- Based Crowdfunding: Preliminary Results from an Online Experiment. In: ICIS 2016 Proceedings. AIS (2016).
32. Weinmann, M., Tietz, M., Simons, A., Vom Brocke, J.: Get It before It’s Gone? How Limited Rewards Influence Backers’ Choices in Reward-Based Crowdfunding. In: ICIS 2017 Proceedings. AIS (2017).
33. Mirsch, T., Lehrer, C., Jung, R.: Digital Nudging: Altering User Behavior in Digital Environments. In: WI 2017 Proceedings. 634–648. (2017).
34. Hummel, D., Toreini, P., Maedche, A.: Improving Digital Nudging Using Attentive User Interfaces: Theory Development and Experiment Design. In: DESRIST 2018 Research in Progress Proceedings (2018).
35. Borshchev, A., Filippov, A.: From System Dynamics and Discrete Event to Practical Agent Based Modeling: Reasons, Techniques, Tools. In: Proceedings of the 22nd international conference of the system dynamics society (Vol. 22) (2004).
36. Wooldridge, M., Jennings, N.R.: Intelligent agents: theory and practice. Knowl. Eng. Rev. 10, 115–152 (1995).
37. Rahmandad, H., Sterman, J.: Heterogeneity and Network Structure in the Dynamics of Diffusion: Comparing Agent-Based and Differential Equation Models. Manag. Sci. 54, 998–1014 (2008).
38. Brooks, R.: A robust layered control system for a mobile robot. IEEE J. Robot. Autom. 2, 14–23 (1986).
39. Blythe, J.: A dual-process cognitive model for testing resilient control systems. In: 2012 5th International Symposium on Resilient Control Systems. 8–12. IEEE (2012).
40. Sharpanskykh, A., Haest, R.: An Agent-Based Model to Study Effects of Team Processes on Compliance with Safety Regulations at an Airline Ground Service Organization. In: PRIMA 2015 Proceedings. 492–500 (2015).
41. Haer, T., Botzen, W.J.W., de Moel, H., Aerts, J.C.J.H.: Integrating Household Risk Mitigation Behavior in Flood Risk Analysis: An Agent-Based Model Approach: Integrating Household Risk Mitigation. Risk Anal. 37, 1977–1992 (2017).
42. Lee, K., Lee, H., Kim, C.O.: Pricing and Timing Strategies for New Product Using Agent- Based Simulation of Behavioural Consumers. J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul. 17, 1 (2014).
43. Takahashi, H., Terano, T.: Agent-Based Approach to Investors’ Behavior and Asset Price Fluctuation in Financial Markets. J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul. 6, 3 (2003).
44. Speekenbrink, M., Konstantinidis, E.: Uncertainty and Exploration in a Restless Bandit Problem. Top. Cogn. Sci. 7, 351–367 (2015).
45. Moglia, M., Podkalicka, A., McGregor, J.: An Agent-Based Model of Residential Energy Efficiency Adoption. J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul. 21, 3 (2018).
46. Kirakozian, A., Charlier, C.: Public Policies for Households Recycling when Reputation Matters. Groupe de Recherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS) (2015).
47. Zhang, J., Tong, L., Lamberson, P.J., Durazo-Arvizu, R.A., Luke, A., Shoham, D.A.: Leveraging social influence to address overweight and obesity using agent-based models: The role of adolescent social networks. Soc. Sci. Med. 125, 203–213 (2015).
48. Wilson, A.L., Buckley, E., Buckley, J.D., Bogomolova, S.: Nudging healthier food and beverage choices through salience and priming. Evidence from a systematic review. Food Qual. Prefer. 51, 47–64 (2016).
49. Kirkpatrick, S., Gelatt, C.D., Vecchi, M.P.: Optimization by Simulated Annealing. Science. 220, 671–680 (1983).
50. Simonson, I.: The Effect of Purchase Quantity and Timing on Variety-Seeking Behavior. J. Mark. Res. 27, 150–162 (1990).
51. Liebe, U., Gewinner, J., Diekmann, A.: What is missing in research on non-monetary incentives in the household energy sector? Energy Policy. 123, 180–183 (2018).
52. Buettner, R.: Predicting user behavior in electronic markets based on personality-mining in large online social networks: A personality-based product recommender framework. Electron. Mark. 27, 247–265 (2017).
53. Buettner, R.: Innovative Personality-based Digital Services. In: PACIS 2016 Proceedings. AIS (2016).
54. Buettner, R.: Personality as a predictor of business social media usage: An empirical investigation of XING usage patterns. In: PACIS 2016 Proceedings. AIS (2016).
55. Buettner, R., Sauer, S., Maier, C., Eckhardt, A.: Real-time Prediction of User Performance based on Pupillary Assessment via Eye-Tracking. AIS Trans. HCI, 10, 26–56 (2018).
56. Buettner, R., Scheuermann, I.F., Koot, C., Roessle, M., Timm, I.J.: Stationarity of a user’s pupil size signal as a precondition of pupillary-based mental workload evaluation. Information Systems and Neuroscience, 25, 195–200 (2018).
57. Buettner, R.: The relationship between visual website complexity and a user’s mental workload. Information Systems and Neuroscience, 16, 107–113 (2017).
58. Buettner, R., Baumgartl, H., Sauter, D.: Microsaccades as a Predictor of a User’s Level of Concentration. Information Systems and Neuroscience, 29, 173–177 (2018).
59. Buettner, R.: Asking both the User’s Brain and its Owner using Subjective and Objective Psychophysiological NeuroIS Instruments. In: ICIS 2017 Proceedings. AIS (2017).
60. Buettner, R., Rieg, R., Frick, J.: High-performance detection of epilepsy in seizure-free EEG recordings: A novel machine learning approach using very specific epileptic EEG sub-bands. In: ICIS 2019 Proceedings. AIS (2019).
61. Buettner, R., Bachus, L., Konzmann, L., Prohaska, S.: Asking Both the User’s Heart and Its Owner: Empirical Evidence for Substance Dualism. Information Systems and Neuroscience, 29, 251–257 (2018).
62. Buettner, R., Schunter, M.: Efficient machine learning based detection of heart disease. In: IEEE Healthcom 2019 Proceedings, IEEE, in press, (2019).
63. Eckhardt, A., Maier, C., Buettner, R.: The Influence of Pressure to Perform and Experience on Changing Perceptions and User Performance: A Multi-Method Experimental Analysis. In: ICIS 2012 Proceedings. AIS (2012).
64. Eckhardt, A., Maier, C., Hsieh, J.J., Chuk, T., Chan, A.B., Hsiao, J.H., Buettner, R.: Objective measures of IS usage behavior under conditions of experience and pressure using eye fixation data. In: ICIS 2013 Proceedings. AIS (2013).
65. Buettner, R.: A user’s cognitive workload perspective in negotiation support systems: An eye-tracking experiment. In: PACIS 2016 Proceedings. AIS (2016).
66. Buettner, R.: Social inclusion in eParticipation and eGovernment solutions: A systematic laboratory-experimental approach using objective psychophysiological measures. Lecture Notes in Informatics, P-221, 260–261 (2013).
67. Buettner, R.: Cognitive Workload of Humans Using Artificial Intelligence Systems: Towards Objective Measurement Applying Eye-Tracking Technology. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 8077, 37–48 (2013).
68. Buettner, R., Daxenberger, B., Eckhardt, A., Maier, C.: Cognitive Workload Induced by Information Systems: Introducing an Objective Way of Measuring based on Pupillary Diameter Responses. In: SIGHCI 2013 Proceedings. AIS (2013).
69. Delacroix, E., Jourdan, P.: Consumer Tendency to Regret: Validation of a Measurement Scale. Rech. Appl. En Mark. Engl. Ed. 22, 25–43 (2007).

Most viewed articles

Meist angesehene Beiträge

GITO events | library.gito