Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2021 | Commentary

Beyond choice architecture: advancing the science of changing behaviour at scale

Authors: Theresa M. Marteau, Paul C. Fletcher, Marcus R. Munafò, Gareth J. Hollands

Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2021

Abstract

Addressing the global threats to population and planetary health requires changing many behaviours at scale. This demands consideration not only of the effect size of an intervention but also its reach – the proportion of the population exposed to the intervention.

We propose that a relatively under-researched and generally poorly specified set of interventions involving changes to physical micro-environments – often referred to as Choice Architecture - has the potential to make a significant contribution to meeting this urgent challenge.

Realising the potential of Choice Architecture interventions requires integration of basic – i.e. laboratory-based – and applied – i.e. field-based – research, generating interventions that can be delivered at scale alongside advancing theory. We illustrate this with examples to highlight the complementarity of laboratory and field studies informed by and in turn updating the results of evidence synthesis. The examples comprise two sets of interventions – changing the relative availability of products and changing their size - to reduce consumption of meat, energy from food and alcohol across populations.

World Health Organization. Noncommunicable diseases [Internet]. WHO; [cited 2021 Jan 8]. Available from: https://www.who.int/westernpacific/health-topics/noncommunicable-diseases

IPCC — Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Internet]. [cited 2021 Jan 7]. Available from: https://www.ipcc.ch/

Global burden of disease (GBD 2019) [Internet]. Washington: Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation; 2014 Mar [cited 2021 Jan 7]. Available from: http://www.healthdata.org/gbd/2019

Watts D. Should social science be more solution-oriented? Nat Hum Behav. 2017;1(1):0015. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-016-0015.CrossRef

Muthukrishna M, Henrich J. A problem in theory. Nat Hum Behav. 2019 Mar;3(3):221–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0522-1.CrossRefPubMed

Michie S. The behaviour change wheel: a guide to designing interventions. Great Britain: Silverback; 2014.

Michie S, Richardson M, Johnston M, Abraham C, Francis J, Hardeman W, Eccles MP, Cane J, Wood CE. The behavior change technique taxonomy (v1) of 93 hierarchically clustered techniques: building an international consensus for the reporting of behavior change interventions. Ann Behav Med. 2013;46(1):81–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-013-9486-6.CrossRefPubMed

Kok G, Gottlieb NH, Peters G-JY, Mullen PD, Parcel GS, Ruiter RAC, et al. A taxonomy of behaviour change methods: an intervention mapping approach. Health Psychol Rev. 2016 Sep;10(3):297–312. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2015.1077155.CrossRefPubMed

Hollands G, Bignardi G, Johnston M, Kelly M, Ogilvie D, Petticrew M, et al. The TIPPME intervention typology for changing environments to change behaviour. Nat Hum Behav. 2017;1(8):0140. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0140.CrossRef

10.

Webb TL, Sheeran P. Does changing behavioral intentions engender behavior change? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychol Bull. 2006;132(2):249–68. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.2.249.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Bowers KS. Situationism in psychology: an analysis and a critique. Psychol Rev. 1973;80(5):307–36. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0035592.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Marteau TM, Fletcher PC, Hollands GJ, Munafò MR. Changing behavior by changing environments. In: Hamilton K, Cameron LD, Hagger MS, Hankonen N, Lintunen T, editors. The handbook of behavior change. Cambridge: Cambridge University press; 2020. [cited 2021 Jan 8]. p. 193–207. (Cambridge handbooks in psychology). Available from: Available from: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/handbook-of-behavior-change/changing-behavior-by-changing-environments/6A85E2FF1C668D0AF45FAE5403B874E9.

13.

Gilbert DT, Malone PS. The correspondence bias. Psychol Bull. 1995;117(1):21–38. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.1.21.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Marteau TM, Hollands GJ, Fletcher PC. Changing human behavior to prevent disease: the importance of targeting automatic processes. Science. 2012 Sep 21;337(6101):1492–5. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1226918.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Gestel LCV, Adriaanse MA, Ridder DTDD. Do nudges make use of automatic processing? Unraveling the effects of a default nudge under type 1 and type 2 processing. Compr Results Soc Psychol. 2020;0(0):1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/23743603.2020.1808456.CrossRef

16.

Melnikoff DE, Bargh JA. The mythical number two. Trends Cogn Sci. 2018 Apr 1;22(4):280–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2018.02.001.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Teufel C, Fletcher PC. Forms of prediction in the nervous system. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2020 Apr;21(4):231–42. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41583-020-0275-5.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Swinburn B, Egger G, Raza F. Dissecting obesogenic environments: the development and application of a framework for identifying and prioritizing environmental interventions for obesity. Prev Med. 1999;29(6 Pt 1):563–70. https://doi.org/10.1006/pmed.1999.0585.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Rutter H, Savona N, Glonti K, Bibby J, Cummins S, Finegood DT, et al. The need for a complex systems model of evidence for public health. Lancet Lond Engl. 2017;390(10112):2602–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31267-9.CrossRef

20.

Pechey R, Spiegelhalter D, Marteau TM. Impact of plain packaging of tobacco products on smoking in adults and children: an elicitation of international experts’ estimates. BMC Public Health. 2013 Dec;13(1):1–7.CrossRef

21.

Maynard OM, Leonards U, Attwood AS, Bauld L, Hogarth L, Munafò MR. Effects of first exposure to plain cigarette packaging on smoking behaviour and attitudes: a randomised controlled study. BMC Public Health. 2015;15(1):240. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-015-1586-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

McNeill A, Gravely C, Hitchman SC, Bauld L, Hammond D, Hartmann-Boyce J. Tobacco packaging design for reducing tobacco use. Cochrane Datab Syst Rev. 2017;(Issue 4):CD011244. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011244.pub2.

23.

Hiscock R, Augustin NH, Branston JR, et al. Longitudinal evaluation of the impact of standardised packaging and minimum excise tax on tobacco sales and industry revenue in the UK Tobacco Control. Published Online First: 12 July 2020. doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2019-055387

24.

West R, Michie S. A brief introduction to the COM-B model of behaviour and the PRIME theory of motivation [v1]. Qeios, vol. 7; 2020.

25.

West R, Godinho CA, Bohlen LC, Carey RN, Hastings J, Lefevre CE, et al. Development of a formal system for representing behaviour-change theories. Nat Hum Behav. 2019 May;3(5):526–36. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0561-2.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Hagger MS, Luszczynska A. Implementation intention and action planning interventions in health contexts: state of the research and proposals for the way forward. Appl Psychol Health Well-Being. 2014 Mar;6(1):1–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/aphw.12017.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Pinder C, Vermeulen J, Cowan BR, Beale R. Digital behaviour change interventions to break and form habits. ACM Trans Comput-Hum Interact. 2018;25(3):15 1–15:66.CrossRef

28.

Sarink D, Peeters A, Freak-Poli R, Beauchamp A, Woods J, Ball K, et al. The impact of menu energy labelling across socioeconomic groups: a systematic review. Appetite. 2016 Apr 1;99:59–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2015.12.022.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Lorenc T, Petticrew M, Welch V, Tugwell P. What types of interventions generate inequalities? Evid Syst Rev. 2013;67(2):190–3. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2012-201257.CrossRef

30.

McGill R, Anwar E, Orton L, Bromley H, Lloyd-Williams F, O’Flaherty M, et al. Are interventions to promote healthy eating equally effective for all? Systematic review of socioeconomic inequalities in impact. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:457.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

31.

Adams J, Mytton O, White M, Monsivais P. Why are some population interventions for diet and obesity more equitable and effective than others? The role of individual agency. PLoS Med. 2016 Apr;13(4):e1001990. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001990.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Thaler R, Sunstein CR. Nudge: improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven: Yale University Press; 2008.

33.

Hollands GJ, Shemilt I, Marteau TM, Jebb SA, Kelly MP, Nakamura R, et al. Altering micro-environments to change population health behaviour: towards an evidence base for choice architecture interventions. BMC Public Health. 2013 Dec 21;13(1):1218. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-1218.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

34.

Czajkowski SM, Powell LH, Adler N, Naar-King S, Reynolds KD, Hunter CM, et al. From ideas to efficacy: the ORBIT model for developing behavioral treatments for chronic diseases. Health Psychol. 2015;34(10):971–82.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

35.

Collins LM, Murphy SA, Strecher V. The multiphase optimization strategy (MOST) and the sequential multiple assignment randomized trial (SMART): new methods for more potent eHealth interventions. Am J Prev Med. 2007;32(5 Suppl):S112–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2007.01.022.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

36.

Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Hardeman W, et al. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2015 Mar 19;350(mar19 6):h1258. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h1258.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

37.

Cadario R, Chandon P. Which healthy eating nudges work best? A meta-analysis of field experiments. Mark Sci. 2020 May;39(3):465–86. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2018.1128.CrossRef

38.

Hollands GJ, Carter P, Anwer S, King SE, Jebb SA, Ogilvie D, et al. Altering the availability or proximity of food, alcohol, and tobacco products to change their selection and consumption. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;(9). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD012573.pub3.

39.

Bianchi F, Garnett E, Dorsel C, Aveyard P, Jebb SA. Restructuring physical micro-environments to reduce the demand for meat: a systematic review and qualitative comparative analysis. Lancet Planet Health. 2018 Sep;2(9):e384–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(18)30188-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

Pechey R, Hollands GJ, Carter P, Marteau TM. Altering the availability of products within physical micro-environments: a conceptual framework. BMC Public Health. 2020 Jun 29;20(1):986. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-09052-2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

41.

Reynolds JP, Kosīte D, Rigby Dames B, Brocklebank LA, Pilling M, Pechey R, et al. Increasing the proportion of healthier foods available with and without reducing portion sizes and energy purchased in worksite cafeterias: protocol for a stepped-wedge randomised controlled trial. BMC Public Health. 2019 Dec 2;19(1):1611. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-7927-2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

42.

Reynolds JP, Ventsel M, Kosīte D, Rigby Dames B, Brocklebank LA, Masterton S, et al. Impact of decreasing the proportion of higher energy foods and reducing portion sizes on energy purchased in worksite cafeterias: a stepped-wedge randomised controlled trial. Rev. PLOS med; in press.

43.

Garnett EE, Balmford A, Sandbrook C, Pilling MA, Marteau TM. Impact of increasing vegetarian availability on meal selection and sales in cafeterias. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019 Oct 15;116(42):20923–9. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1907207116.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

44.

Pechey R, Hollands GJ, Marteau TM. Explaining the effect on food selection of altering availability: two experimental studies on the role of prior preferences. Under review. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/fkqvh.

45.

Clarke N, Pechey E, Pechey R, Ventsel M, Mantzari E, De-loyde K, et al. Size and shape of plates and size of wine glasses and bottles: impact on selection of food and alcohol. Under review. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/gzsa3.

46.

Pechey R, Marteau TM. Availability of healthier vs. less healthy food and food choice: an online experiment. BMC Public Health. 2018;18(1):1296.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

47.

Abrahamse W. How to effectively encourage sustainable food choices: a mini-review of available evidence. Front Psychol. 2020;11 [cited 2021 Jan 8]. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7701282/.

48.

Hollands GJ, Shemilt I, Marteau TM, Jebb SA, Lewis HB, Wei Y, et al. Portion, package or tableware size for changing selection and consumption of food, alcohol and tobacco. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;(9). https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011045.pub2.

49.

Pechey R, Attwood AS, Couturier D-L, Munafò MR, Scott-Samuel NE, Woods A, et al. Does glass size and shape influence judgements of the volume of wine? PLoS One. 2015 Dec 23;10(12):e0144536. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0144536.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

50.

Langfield T, Pechey R, Pilling MA, Marteau TM. Glassware design and drinking behaviours: a review of impact and mechanisms using a new typology of drinking behaviours. Health Psychol Rev. 2020;0(0):1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2020.1842230.CrossRef

51.

Pechey R, Couturier D-L, Hollands GJ, Mantzari E, Munafò MR, Marteau TM. Does wine glass size influence sales for on-site consumption? A multiple treatment reversal design. BMC Public Health. 2016 Jun 7;16(1):390. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3068-z.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

52.

Pechey R, Couturier D-L, Hollands GJ, Mantzari E, Zupan Z, Marteau TM. Wine glass size and wine sales: a replication study in two bars. BMC Res Notes. 2017 Aug 1;10(1):287. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-017-2610-0.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

53.

Clarke N, Pechey R, Pilling M, Hollands GJ, Mantzari E, Marteau TM. Wine glass size and wine sales: four replication studies in one restaurant and two bars. BMC Res Notes. 2019 Jul 17;12(1):426. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-019-4477-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

54.

Pilling M, Clarke N, Pechey R, Hollands GJ, Marteau TM. The effect of wine glass size on volume of wine sold: a mega-analysis of studies in bars and restaurants. Addiction. 2020;115(9):1660–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.14998.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

55.

Zupan Z, Pechey R, Couturier DL, Hollands GJ, Marteau TM. Micro-drinking behaviours and consumption of wine in different wine glass sizes: a laboratory study. BMC Psychol. 2017 Jun 12;5(1):17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-017-0183-2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

56.

Langley T, Szatkowski L, Lewis S, McNeill A, Gilmore AB, Salway R, et al. The freeze on mass media campaigns in England: a natural experiment of the impact of tobacco control campaigns on quitting behaviour. Addict Abingdon Engl. 2014;109(6):995–1002. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.12448.CrossRef

57.

Kuipers MAG, Beard E, West R, Brown J. Associations between tobacco control mass media campaign expenditure and smoking prevalence and quitting in England: a time series analysis. Tob Control. 2018 Jul;27(4):455–62. https://doi.org/10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2017-053662.CrossRefPubMed

58.

Reitzel LR, Cromley EK, Li Y, Cao Y, Dela Mater R, Mazas CA, et al. The effect of tobacco outlet density and proximity on smoking cessation. Am J Public Health. 2011 Feb;101(2):315–20. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2010.191676.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

59.

Chaiton MO, Mecredy G, Cohen J. Tobacco retail availability and risk of relapse among smokers who make a quit attempt: a population-based cohort study. Tob Control. 2018 Mar;27(2):163–9. https://doi.org/10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2016-053490.CrossRefPubMed

60.

National Diet and Nutrition Survey: Results from years 1–4 (Combined) of the Rolling Programme (2008/2009–2011/12): Executive Summary [Internet]. London: Public Health England; 2014 May [cited 2021 Jan 8]. (Bates B, Lennox A, Prentice A, Bates C, Page P, Nicholson S, et al., editors. National Diet and Nutrition Survey (NDNS)). Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/national-diet-and-nutrition-survey-results-from-years-1-to-4-combined-of-the-rolling-programme-for-2008-and-2009-to-2011-and-2012

61.

Armitage CJ, Conner M, Prestwich A, de Bruin M, Johnston M, Sniehotta F, et al. Investigating which behaviour change techniques work for whom in which contexts delivered by what means: Proposal for an international collaboratory of Centres for Understanding Behaviour Change (CUBiC). Br J Health Psychol. 2021; Available from: https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/bjhp.12479.

62.

Michie S, Thomas J, Mac Aonghusa P, West R, Johnston M, Kelly MP, et al. The human behaviour-change project: an artificial intelligence system to answer questions about changing behaviour [version 1; peer review: not peer reviewed]. Wellcome Open Res. 2020;5:122. https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.15900.1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

63.

Sumner JA, Carey RN, Michie S, Johnston M, Edmondson D, Davidson KW. Using rigorous methods to advance behaviour change science. Nat Hum Behav. 2018 Nov 5;2(11):797–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0471-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Beyond choice architecture: advancing the science of changing behaviour at scale
Authors: Theresa M. Marteau
Paul C. Fletcher
Marcus R. Munafò
Gareth J. Hollands
Publication date: 01-12-2021
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: BMC Public Health / Issue 1/2021
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-11382-8

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Springer Medicine

Beyond choice architecture: advancing the science of changing behaviour at scale

Abstract

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2021

Probabilities of ICU admission and hospital discharge according to patient characteristics in the designated COVID-19 hospital of Kuwait

Sleep problems among sexual minorities: a longitudinal study on the influence of the family of origin and chosen family

Opioid use in medical cannabis authorization adult patients from 2013 to 2018: Alberta, Canada

Cultural adaptation, translation and validation of the Spanish version of Past-day Adults’ Sedentary Time

Summary measures of socioeconomic and area-based inequalities in fertility rates among adolescents: evidence from Ethiopian demographic and health surveys 2000–2016

The relationship between socioeconomic position and health literacy among urban and rural adults in regional China