You conduct research at the intersection of psychology, sustainability, and digital innovation. In your dissertation, you designed green nudges. How did that come about?
I studied psychology and became interested early on in applying psychological insights in practical ways, especially in the field of sustainability. Together with a friend, I founded the Nachhaltigkeitswerkstatt, where we helped companies and individuals to operate and live more sustainably. I am also very enthusiastic about the diverse potential that digitalization offers. During further training at the HPI d-school, I met Falk Uebernickel, and together we identified the topic of green nudges as my PhD thesis. All my interests are combined in this thesis: psychology, sustainability, and digitalization. How can we use psychological insights to promote sustainable behavior? And which technologies can support us in this? That's what excites me.
The term “nudging” is gaining more popularity, but it is often misunderstood. What does nudging really mean?
Nudging originates from behavioral economics. It describes measures that attempt to steer people's behavior in a desired direction. This can be achieved by changing the decision-making architecture or by providing targeted information. It’s important to note that nudging does not involve coercion or prohibition. A classic example: If fruit is placed at eye level and sweets further down, we are more likely to reach for the fruit.
The term is often misunderstood because many forms of influence can be seen as nudges. According to current thinking, there are three different forms of nudges that intervene in human behavior to varying degrees:
Structural nudges
Information nudges
Assistance or goal-setting nudges
Originally, only structural nudges existed. They change the actual structure of decision-making situations. A well-known example of this is a default, e.g., in navigation systems that are automatically set to energy-saving routes.
Information nudges encourage people to make informed decisions on their own. For example, if I receive monthly information about my energy consumption, this could lead me to save more electricity in the future. Finally, assistance nudges can help people achieve their self-imposed goals; for example, fitness apps provide feedback on the users' progress. These two types of nudging are considered less ethically controversial because they create transparency and do not directly interfere with the decision-making architecture.
Nudging is based on the psychological model of fast (system 1) and slow thinking (system 2). Structural nudges mostly exploit system 1 thinking, as they actively influence the decision-making situation. Information and assistance nudges, on the other hand, strengthen system 2 thinking, thus encouraging people to think reflectively.
In your project “Conversations with a Future Self,” you want to encourage people to prioritize long-term benefits over immediate gratification when making dietary decisions. One critique of nudging is that it manipulates people. Where do you draw the line between helpful encouragement and undue influence?
Nudging becomes critical when it isn’t transparent and leads people to make decisions that are not in their best interests. That’s why it’s essential that behavioral interventions are presented transparently and empower people's own freedom of choice. A core problem is that, as designers of nudges, we bring our own assumptions to the table without really knowing the needs of the people we are designing for.
This is where design thinking can be very helpful: When designing behavioral interventions, it is crucial to involve people from the very beginning. Through this co-design process, we can avoid ethical challenges by consulting with the people we are designing for, thereby incorporating their needs and goals. Plus, we can then test nudges and assess whether they are effective. As researchers, we should not make decisions for people but rather design nudges that enable them to make informed decisions on their own.
That’s what the project “Conversations with a Future Self” is all about: Last year, we collaborated with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and used artificial intelligence to encourage people to imagine their desired future. We wanted to find out whether conversations with a future self encourage people to make dietary decisions that have a lasting positive impact. With the help of such informational and assistance nudges, we can help people steer their behavior in a positive direction. The project was part of the HPI-MIT Designing for Sustainability Program. This year, we are researching the characteristics of problematic social media consumption.
Which findings from your research surprised you most?
I was surprised that nudging is only part of the answer. As I explained earlier, nudging is a broad field, which is why it can work in very different ways. Nudging doesn’t work automatically. It’s essential to closely examine which mechanisms work—and which aren’t useful. We need to closely investigate the interventions we design, including their specific purpose and environment. Only then can we design nudges that actually lead to more sustainable behavior.
In one experiment, we provided more than 950 households with weekly feedback on their water and electricity consumption using a technology called smart metering. In a different, large-scale experiment, we sent out letters informing roughly 70,000 households about their consumption once a month. Interestingly, households with smart meters and weekly consumption information actually reduced their energy consumption by around nine percent. People who received monthly consumption information in the large-scale field experiment, on the other hand, showed savings of less than one percent.
From this, we can see that new technologies certainly offer a potential for sustainability. However, it is crucial that households are equipped with them—and that the technologies are designed in such a way that encourages their actual use. This is where politics also has a role to play.
Can nudging save the climate?
No. It goes without saying that we need to change our behavior to mitigate the climate crisis. Nudging can help us create important solutions to encourage people to eat more sustainably and use resources more responsibly. However, the responsibility is shifted onto individuals too often. We must instead look much closer at the system level. The economic and social system in which we live does not exactly encourage a sustainable lifestyle. Nudges alone will not be enough to stop the climate crisis. But knowing how people behave in reality is a crucial building block for creating solutions that are actually effective and accepted.
Thank you very much for the interview!
