B. J. Fogg
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
Mother Nature knows best--How engineered organizations of the future will resemble natural-born systems.
- 1. Based on the preliminary report of the Seal Beach, CA, Police Department (June 8, 2002) and the police log of the Long Beach (CA) News-Enterprise (June 12, 2002), p. 18.Google Scholar
- 2. B. Reeves and C. Nass, The Media Equation: How People Treat Computers, Television, and New Media Like Real People and Places (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996). Google ScholarDigital Library
- 4. P. Zimbardo and M. Leippe, The Psychology of Attitude Change and Social Influence (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1991).Google Scholar
- 6. B. J. Fogg, Charismatic Computers: Creating More Likable and Persuasive Interactive Technologies by Leveraging Principles from Social Psychology, doctoral dissertation, Stanford University (1997). Google ScholarDigital Library
- 7a. B. J. Fogg, Charismatic Computers: Creating More Likable and Persuasive Interactive Technologies by Leveraging Principles from Social Psychology, doctoral dissertation, Stanford University (1997). Google ScholarDigital Library
- 7b. B. J. Fogg and C. I. Nass, How users reciprocate to computers: An experiment that demonstrates behavior change, in Extended Abstracts of the CHI97 Conference of the ACM/SIGCHI (New York: ACM Press, 1997). Google ScholarDigital Library
- 7c. B. J. Fogg and C. I. Nass, Silicon sycophants: The effects of computers that flatter, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 46: 551-561 (1997). Google ScholarDigital Library
- 7d. C. I. Nass, B. J. Fogg, and Y. Moon, Can computers be teammates? Affiliation and social identity effects in human-computer interaction, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45(6): 669-678 (1996). Google ScholarDigital Library
- 8a. E. Berscheid and E. Walster, Physical attractiveness, in L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 7, (New York: Academic, 1974), pp. 158-216.Google Scholar
- 8b. S. Chaiken, Communicator physical attractiveness and persuasion, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37: 1387-1397 (1979).Google ScholarCross Ref
- 9. H. Sigall and N. Osgrove, Beautiful but dangerous: Effects of offender attractiveness and nature of crime on juridic judgement, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31: 410-414 (1975).Google ScholarCross Ref
- 10a. K. L. Dion, E. Bersheid, and E. Walster, What is beautiful is good, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 24: 285-290 (1972).Google Scholar
- 10b. A. H. Eagly, R. D. Ashmore, M. G. Makhijani, and L. C. Longo, What is beautiful is good, but..:Ameta-analytic review of research on the physical attractiveness stereotype, Psychological Bulleting, 110: 109-128 (1991).Google ScholarCross Ref
- 13. S. Parise, S. Kiesler, L. Sproull, and K. Waters, Cooperating with life-like interface agents, Computers in Human Behavior, 15 (2): 123-142 (1999). Available online as an IBM technical report at http://domino.watson.ibm.com/cambridge/research.nsf/2b4f81291401771785256976004a8d13/ce1725c578ff207d8525663c006b5401/$FILE/decfac48.htm.Google ScholarCross Ref
- 14a. M. Cunningham, P. Druen, and A. Barbee, Evolutionary, social and personality variables in the evaluation of physical attractiveness, in J. Simpson and D. Kenrick (eds.), Evolutionary Social Psychology (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1997), 109-140.Google Scholar
- 14b. J. H. Langlois, L. A. Roggman, and L. Musselman, What is average and what is not average about attractive faces? Psychological Science, 5: 214-220 (1994).Google ScholarCross Ref
- 17. H. Tajfel, Social Identity and Intergroup Relations (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1982).Google Scholar
- 18. R. B. Cialdini, Influence: Science and Practice, 3rd ed. (New York: HarperCollins, 1993).Google Scholar
- 19. Persuasion scholar Robert Cialdini writes, "As trivial as ..similarities may seem, they appear to work..even small similarities can be effective in producing a positive response to another." Robert B. Cialdini, Influence: Science & Practice (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 2000). See also H. Tajfel, Human Groups and Social Categories (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981).See also H. Tajfel, Social Identity and Intergroup Relations (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1982).Google Scholar
- 20. C. I. Nass, Y. Moon, B. J. Fogg, B. Reeves, and D. C. Dryer, Can computer personalities be human personalities? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 43: 223-239 (1995). Google ScholarDigital Library
- 21. For each study, we adapted the desert survival task from J. C. Lafferty and P. M. Eady, The Desert Survival Problem (Plymouth, MI: Experimental Learning Methods, 1974).Google Scholar
- 22. J. M. Digman, Personality structure: An emergence of the five-factor model, The Annual Review of Psychology, 41: 417-440 (1990).Google ScholarCross Ref
- 23. C. I. Nass, B. J. Fogg, and Y. Moon, Can computers be teammates? Affiliation and social identity effects in human-computer interaction, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45(6): 669-678 (1996). Google ScholarDigital Library
- 24. B. J. Fogg, Charismatic Computers: Creating More Likable and Persuasive Interactive Technologies by Leveraging Principles from Social Psychology, doctoral dissertation, Stanford University (1997). Google ScholarDigital Library
- 25. S. Shavitt and T. C. Brock, Persuasion: Psychological Insights and Perspectives (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon, 1994).Google Scholar
- 28. To get a sense of how computers can use emotions to motivate and persuade, see R. Picard, Affective Computing (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1997). See also the readings on Dr. Picard's Web site: http://affect.media.mit.edu/AC_readings.html.Google Scholar
- 29. C. Marshall and T. O. Maguire, The computer as social pressure to produce conformity in a simple perceptual task, AV Communication Review, 19: 19-28 (1971).Google Scholar
- 30a. B. Shneiderman, Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction (Reading, MA: Addison Wesley Longman, 1998). Google Scholar
- 30b. B. Shneiderman and P. Maes, Direct manipulations vs. interface agents, Interactions, 4(6): 42-61 (1997). Google ScholarDigital Library
- 31a. B. Reeves and C. Nass, The Media Equation: How People Treat Computers, Television, and New Media Like Real People and Places (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996). Google ScholarDigital Library
- 31b. B. Shneiderman and P. Maes, Direct manipulations vs. interface agents, Interactions, 4(6): 42-61 (1997). Google ScholarDigital Library
- 33a. E. Berscheid and E. H. Walster, Interpersonal Attraction, 2nd ed. (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1978).Google Scholar
- 33b. E. E. Jones, Interpersonal Perception (New York: W. H. Freeman, 1990).Google Scholar
- 33c. J. Pandey and P. Singh, Effects of Machiavellianism, other-enhancement, and power-position on affect, power feeling, and evaluation of the ingratiator, Journal of Psychology, 121: 287-300 (1987).Google ScholarCross Ref
- 34a. B. J. Fogg, Charismatic Computers: Creating More Likable and Persuasive Interactive Technologies by Leveraging Principles from Social Psychology, doctoral dissertation, Stanford University (1997). Google ScholarDigital Library
- 34b. B. J. Fogg and C. I. Nass, Silicon sycophants: The effects of computers that flatter, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 46: 551-561 (1997). Google ScholarDigital Library
- 35a. Erik Strommen and Kristin Alexander, Emotional interfaces for interactive aardvarks: Designing affect into social interfaces for children, Proceeding of the CHI 99 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems: The CHI Is the Limit, 528-535 (1999). Google ScholarDigital Library
- 35b. Erik Strommen, When the interface is a talking dinosaur: Learning across media with ActiMates Barney, Conference Proceedings on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 228-295 (1998). Google ScholarDigital Library
- 37. A. W. Gouldner, The normof reciprocity: A preliminary statement, American Sociological Review, 25: 161-178 (1960).Google ScholarCross Ref
- 38. B. J. Fogg, Charismatic Computers: Creating More Likable and Persuasive Interactive Technologies by Leveraging Principles from Social Psychology, doctoral dissertation, Stanford University 1997. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 39. His book is entitled Computer Power and Human Reason(San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1976).Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Persuasive technology: using computers to change what we think and do
Recommendations
Mobile Persuasive Technology: Promoting Positive Waste Management Behaviors in Developing African Nations
CHI EA '19: Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsMy research examines new ways of persuading citizens to change their behavior towards waste management, and protect the environment. As a first step towards contributing to research, I conducted a user-based study, to find what strategies could be used ...
Three possible futures for persuasive technology
Persuasive '09: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Persuasive TechnologyI will share three possible paths that persuasive technologies might take in the coming years: MixMasters, Swishers, and MegaMonkeys. These speculative futures may help us reevaluate our methods for research and design. Even if my three scenarios never ...
Comments