For better or for worse, we're saving our brain resources

“If you want people to do something, make it easy.” R. Thaler

At the brain level, humans evolved with the need to act quickly to stay alive in an environment that was hostile to him. Thus, over time, cognitive functioning has therefore developed by giving priority to decision system for very rapid action.

Even today, we have consistently tendency to save our brain resources, but paradoxically, this economical mode has sometimes become a barrier to behavior. In this case, nudges can be used to encourage action, whether to reduce the cost associated with thinking or to facilitate relevant attentional focus—at the right time. ‍

The cost of thinking

A group of Canadian researchers conducted a recent study to highlight the fact that we are ready for a lot of things to avoid thinking... even to suffer physically! Todd Vogel and his collaborators (2020) asked the participants in his experiment to choose between two options: a task that requires some cognitive effort (this is a so-called N-back task for connoisseurs*) and an experience of physical pain (more precisely, a burning sensation on the wrist). Note that this was a forced choice, meaning that participants were forced to select one of the two options presented. And both the intensity of the cognitive demand and the intensity of the physical pain varied over the course of the experiment. The idea was to oppose two so-called aversive behaviors, in order to see which one would take precedence over the other. The results show that overall, participants prefer to accept the experience of physical pain when the cognitive task requires too much effort.

The key thing to remember from this experience is simply that our brain function has a systematic tendency to avoid thinking (when possible). And that is normal. In other words, in our decisions to act as well, we choose - most often without realizing it - the simplest option... So, when we choose an action to take, the gap between our intentions and our behaviors seems to be explained by this desire to save our resources.

To fully understand, let's take an example of behavioral inertia, from a professional context. We all intend to increase the frequency of feedback sent to our manager. But it's not that easy - literally. Although the company culture favors this kind of practice, this exercise is difficult and requires a certain amount of cognitive effort - regardless of the courage that you also need. Result: you prefer to do nothing and you back off, rather than venturing into the murky waters of feedback... ‍

The need to focus attention - at the right time

Another fundamental limitation of our cognitive functioning that is responsible for explaining the intention-action gap mentioned above is our... selective attention. We have the ability to select one stimulus among others in the environment in order to focus our attention on it; this focus implies an orientation of attention to the stimulus of interest and therefore an inhibition of the other stimuli present.

You may be familiar with the so-called invisible gorilla experiment that studies this phenomenon, conducted about twenty years ago (Simon & Chabris, 1999). In this study, participants had to watch a video in which two youth teams (one with white T-shirts, the other with black T-shirts) passed each other with a ball. Note that in the middle of the video (and the passes between players), an individual disguised as a black gorilla was crossing the scene. Based on the hypothesis of selective attention, the authors asked the participants to count the number of passes by the team dressed in white and then asked them if they had seen an unexpected event - the gorilla. Results:Only 42% of participants answered in the affirmative.

This experience underscores the idea that some elements escape our attention because our attention is focused on other things. The selective nature of attention can also appear as a barrier to action: we sometimes do not think about doing a certain behavior, simply because we did not pay attention to the trigger for the action.

If we go back to our example, whoever has never forgotten to give an instant feedback after a meeting - regardless of the difficulty of the exercise - throw the first stone...

All our attention/brain needs... is a little push !

Richard Thaler, Nobel Prize in Economics in 2017 thanks to The Nudge Theory, explains to us that it is possible to encourage individuals to act in accordance with their intentions. How? By encouraging them to choose a certain action (i.e. the best option).

To be chosen, we first noted that the option must be inexpensive in terms of cognitive resources, and therefore require little effort. Then, it is essential that an option trigger be attentively focused - at the right time. In our case, how can we encourage employees to give more Feedback to their manager after a meeting?

• First, by using a Nudge to simplify behavior. Typically, by selecting the OSCAR (Outcome, Situation, Choice, Action, Review) feedback method that reduces the mental effort associated with the action.

This is also what BJ Fogg, a behavioral scientist at Stanford University and designer of the B=MAP framework, calls for a Facilitator nudge: literally a boost that makes it easier to take action by increasing the sense of capacity of individuals.

• Second, by adding a behavioral reminder nudge to catch our eye and train attention - at the right time. And to further increase the probability of taking action, the best thing is to combine this reminder with the Facilitator described above! For example, by setting up an agenda reminder following the meeting with the manager, such as “Give feedback to Jeanne following our meeting using the OSCAR method”.

Warning: do not think that the more nudges you accumulate to encourage a given behavior, the more it increases the chances of taking action. The effectiveness of a nudge depends on its context and certain interactions between incentive mechanisms would not be recommended. The scientific literature is not unanimous on these questions, and behavioral scientists continue their experimental research on the subject...

Take Home Message

Nudges are particularly effective in encouraging action, as long as individuals intend to do so. Indeed, they rely on our real cognitive functioning, which in particular tends to avoid engaging in behavior that requires significant cognitive effort - no matter what the cost. Some devices specialize in these types of incentive mechanisms, encouraging individuals to realize their ambitions (i.e. in the behavioral sense of the term) in the field of vocational training for example.

‍

Fifty, leader in eDoing, makes it possible to reduce this Intention-Action Gap in contexts of training or transformation in companies. Thanks to various types of nudges associated with personalized micro-actions and its learning algorithm, Fifty helps employees to really act in a work situation.

‍

References

Fogg, B.J. (2019). Tiny Habits: The Small Changes That Change Everything Eamon Dolan Books.

Simons, D.J., & Chabris, C.F. (1999). Gorillas in Our Midst: Sustained Inattentional Blindness for Dynamic Events Perception, 28 (9), 1059-1074.

Thaler, R.H., & Sunstein, C.R. Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness

Vogel, T.A., Savelson, Z. M., Z. M., Otto, A.R., & Roy, M. (2020). Forced choices reveal a trade-off between cognitive effort and physical pain. Elife, 9, e59410.

‍

-----

*The n-back task is a recognition task where participants indicate whether an item presented in a list is similar to an item presented in a front position. Depending on the magnitude of the N, the exercise is more or less difficult. In the study presented, the difficulty of the task varies between N=0 and N=4.