Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The application of persuasive technology to educational settings

  • Development Article
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Persuasive technology is a sub-discipline of Human–Computer Interaction that has emerged within the last 10 years, and which has generated increasing interest in the application of persuasion to systems design. Most applications have to date been developed in commercial contexts, as well in the domain of health promotion. We present a mainly theoretical consideration of how persuasive technology could be used in educational contexts, particularly in school settings. We consider how persuasive technology design may need to be modified to meet the needs of complex educational settings. We propose four design principles for the use of persuasive technology in instructional design, including credibility and Kairos. We derive these from theoretical considerations, as well as from our experience with the HANDS project, which has developed a mobile persuasive application for positive behaviour change in young people with Autistic Spectrum Disorders. We conclude that persuasive technology has the potential to be used effectively to bring about positive behavior and attitude change in school settings.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adomavicius, G., & Tuzhilin, A. (2005). Toward the next generation of recommender systems: A survey of the state-of-the-art and possible extensions. Knowledge Creation Diffusion Utilization, 17(6), 734–749.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, P. A., Fives, H., Buehl, M. M., & Mulhern, J. (2002). Teaching as persuasion. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 795–813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amber, N., Schrodt, P., Witt, P., Elledge, N., Jernberg, K., & Larson, L. (2009). A meta-analytical review of teacher credibility and its associations with teacher behaviors and student outcomes. Communication Education, 58(4), 516–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, B. (2006). Captology: A critical review. In W. IJsselsteijn, Y. de Kort, C. Midden, B. Eggen, & E. van den Hoven (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1st international conference on persuasive technology (pp. 171–182). New York: Springer.

  • Chaiken, S., & Trope, Y. (Eds.). (1999). Dual process theories in social psychology. New York: Guildford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaterjee, S., & Dev, P. (Eds.). (2009). Proceedings of the 4th international conference on persuasive technology (pp. article no. 2). New York: ACM Press.

  • Chen, G., Wei, F., Wang, C., & Lee, J. (2007). Extending E-Book with contextual knowledge recommender for reading support on a web-based learning system. International Journal on E-Learning, 6(4), 605–622.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drascher, H., Hummel, H., van den Berg, B., Eshuis, J., Waterink, W., Nadolski, R., et al. (2009). Evaluating the effectiveness of personalised recommender systems in learning networks. In R. Koper (Ed.), Learning network services for professional development. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egan, K. (2002). Getting it wrong from the beginning: Our progressivist inheritance from Spencer, Herbert and Piaget. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez-Luque, L., Karlesen, R., & Vognild, L. (2009). Challenges and opportunities of using recommender systems for personalized health education. In K. Adlassnig, B. Blobel, J. Mantas, & I. Masic (Eds.), Medical informatics in a united and health Europe. Netherlands: IOS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fogg, B. J. (2003). Persuasive technology: Using computers to change what we think and do. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fogg, B. J. (2009). A behavior model for persuasive design. In S. Chaterjee & P. Dev (Eds.). Proceedings of the 4th international conference on persuasive technology (pp. article no. 2). New York: ACM Press.

  • Fogg, B. J., & Eckles, D. (2007). Mobile persuasion. 20 perspectives on the future of behavior change. Stanford: Stanford Captology Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fogg, B. J., & Tseng, H. (1999). Credibility and computing. Communications of the ACM, 42(6), 39–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • HANDS. (2010). HANDS consortium project website. Retrieved November 25, 2010 from: http://www.hands-project.eu.

  • Howlin, P. (2004). Autism and Asperger syndrome: Preparing for adulthood. London: Routledge.

  • Hovland, C., Janis, I., & Kelley, H. (1953). Communication and persuasion: Psychological studies of opinion change. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jason, J. T., & Herring, J. E. (2005). Teacher influence in the classroom: A preliminary investigation of perceived instructor power, credibility, and student satisfaction. Communication Research Reports, 22(3), 235–246. doi:10.1080/00036810500230685.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. (2004). Review of the book Persuasive technology: Using computers to change what we think and do, by B.J. Fogg. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 18, 251–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, R. (2005). Managing autism and Asperger’s syndrome in current educational provision. Pediatric Rehabilitation, 8(2), 104–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaptein, M., Lacroix, J., & Saini, P. (2010). Individual differences in persuadability in the health promotion domain. In T. Ploug, P. Hasle, & H. Oinas-Kukkonen (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th international conference on persuasive technology (pp. 106–116). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, T., Hong, H., & Magerko, B. (2010). Designing for persuasion: Toward ambient eco-visualization for awareness. In T. Ploug, P. Hasle, & H. Oinas-Kukkonen (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th international conference on persuasive technology (pp. 106–116). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lockton, D., Harrison, D., Holley, T., & Stanton, N. (2009). Influencing interaction: Development of the design with intent method. In S. Chaterjee & P. Dev (Eds.). Proceedings of the 4th international conference on persuasive technology (pp. article no. 2). New York: ACM Press.

  • Loken, B. (2006). Consumer psychology: Categorization, inferences, affect and persuasion. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 453–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGinnes, E., & Ward, C. (1980). Better liked than right: Trustworthiness and expertise in credibility. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6, 467–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintz, J., Branch, C., March, C., & Lerman, S. (2012). Key factors mediating the use of a mobile technology tool designed to develop social and life skills in children with Autistic Spectrum Disorders. Computers & Education, 58(1), 53–62. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morten, J. F., & Campbell, M. (2008). Information source affects peers’ initial attitudes towards autism. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 29(3), 189–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, P. K. (2001). Teaching as persuasion: A new metaphor for a new decade. Theory into Practice, 40, 224–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nass, C., Steuer, J., & Tauber, E. R. (1994). Computers are social actors. Conference companion on human factors in computing systems – CHI ’94, 204. New York, NY: ACM Press. doi:10.1145/259963.260288.

  • Oinas-Kukkonen, H., & Harjumaa, M. (2008). A systematic framework for designing and evaluating persuasive systems. In H. Oinas-Kukkonen, P. Hasle, M. Harjumaa, & K. Segerstahl (Eds.), Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on persuasive technology (pp. 164–176). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petty, R. E., & Brinol, P. (2008). Persuasion: From single to multiple metacognitive processes. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3(2), 137–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ploug, T., Hasle, P., & Oinas-Kukkonen, H. (Eds.). (2010). Proceedings of the 5th international conference on persuasive technology. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reardon, K. (1981). Persuasion: Theory and context. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricci, F., Rokach, L., Shapira, B., & Kantor, P. B. (Eds.). (2011). Recommender systems handbook. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salam, A., Yahaya, T., & Ali, A. (2010). Using persuasive design principles in motivational feeling towards children’s dental anxiety (CDA). In T. Ploug, P. Hasle, & H. Oinas-Kukkonen (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th international conference on persuasive technology (pp. 223–237). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simkins, S., & Maier, M. (2004). Using Just-in-Time teaching techniques in the principles of economics course. Social Science Computer Review, 22(4), 444–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soonthornphisaj, N., Rojsattarat, E., & Yim-ngam, S. (2006). Smart E-learning using recommender system. In D. Huang & G. Irwin (Eds.), Proceedings of the international conference on intelligent computing 2006 (pp. 518–523). Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanguay, S., & Heywood, P. (2007). MyFoodPhone: The start of a mobile health revolution. In B. J. Fogg & D. Eckles (Eds.), Mobile persuasion. 20 perspectives on the future of behavior change (pp. 21–27). Stanford: Stanford Captology Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thweatt, K. S., & McCroskey, J. C. (1998). The impact of teacher immediacy and misbehaviors on teacher credibility. Communication Education, 47(4), 348–358. doi:10.1080/03634529809379141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaalberg, R., & Midden, C. (2010). Enhancing human responses to climate change risks through simulated flooding experiences. In T. Ploug, P. Hasle, & H. Oinas-Kukkonen (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th international conference on persuasive technology (pp. 106–116). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research (http://www.hands-project.eu/) is supported by the European Commission, Grant No. 224216. Thanks are due to other members of the consortium including teachers and other professionals at test site schools, for their support and assistance in the work described in this project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Education, London South Bank University, London, SE1 0AA, UK

    Joseph Mintz

  2. Department of Communication and Psychology, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark

    Morten Aagaard

Authors
  1. Joseph Mintz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Morten Aagaard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joseph Mintz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mintz, J., Aagaard, M. The application of persuasive technology to educational settings. Education Tech Research Dev 60, 483–499 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9232-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-012-9232-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation