Advertisement

Engaging Bystanders Using Persuasive Technology: A Meta-analysis of Influencing Factors on Moral Courage

  • Kathrin RödererEmail author
  • Julia Himmelsbach
  • Stephanie Schwarz
  • Manfred Tscheligi
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11433)

Abstract

Interventions in emergency situations with an aggressor are characterized by potentially high costs but no or very little direct reward for an intervening person. In such moral courage situations, the willingness to act is critical for the safety and well-being of others. Persuasive technology has a high potential for changing attitudes and behavior and thus, supporting such a behavior for the greater good. Aiming at identifying promising persuasive strategies, a meta-analysis to identify factors relevant for moral courage was conducted. Findings highlight seven attitude and competence factors with high potential for attitude and behavior change towards morally courageous behavior. By that, the process model of helping behavior as well as social and motivational psychology results can inform evidence-based persuasive design for technology for moral courage.

Keywords

Moral courage Evidence-based persuasion strategies Meta-analysis 

References

  1. 1.
    Fogg, B.J.: Persuasive Technology: Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do. Morgan Kaufmann, Burlington (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Latané, B., Darley, J.M.: Help in a Crisis: Bystander Response to an Emergency. General Learning Press, Morristown (1976)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Osswald, S., Greitemeyer, T., Fischer, P., Frey, D.: What is moral courage? Definition, explication and classification of a complex construct. In: Pury, C., Lopez, S. (eds.) Psychology of Courage, pp. 149–164. APA, Washington (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Penner, L.A., Dovidio, J.F., Piliavin, J.A., Schroeder, D.A.: Prosocial behavior: multilevel perspectives. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 56, 365–392 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Darley, J.M., Latané, B.: Bystander intervention in emergencies: diffusion of responsibility. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 8, 377–383 (1968)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fogg, B.: A behavior model for persuasive design. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Persuasive Technology - Persuasive 2009, p. 1. ACM Press, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ananthabhotla, I., Rieger, A., Greenberg, D., Picard, R.: MIT community challenge: designing a platform to promote kindness and prosocial behavior. In: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI EA 2017, pp. 2352–2358. ACM Press, New York (2017)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lee, S., Chung, W.Y., Ip, E., Schiphorst, T.: The laughing dress. In: Proceedings of the Extended Abstracts of the 32nd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI EA 2014, pp. 2143–2148. ACM Press, New York (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Greitemeyer, T., Osswald, S.: Effects of prosocial video games on prosocial behavior. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 98, 211–221 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Osswald, S., Frey, D., Streicher, B.: Moral courage. In: Kals, E., Maes, J. (eds.) Justice and Conflicts, pp. 391–405. Springer, Heidelberg (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19035-3_24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jonas, K.J., Brandstätter, V.: Zivilcourage. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie. 35, 185–200 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lopez, S.J., O’Byrne, K.K., Petersen, S.: Profiling courage. In: Positive Psychological Assessment: A Handbook of Models and Measures, pp. 185–197. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Halmburger, A., Baumert, A., Schmitt, M.: Anger as driving factor of moral courage in comparison with guilt and global mood: a multimethod approach. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 45, 39–51 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kayser, D.N., Greitemeyer, T., Fischer, P., Frey, D.: Why mood affects help giving, but not moral courage: comparing two types of prosocial behavior. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 40, 1136–1157 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Difranzo, D., Taylor, S.H., Bazarova, N.N.: Upstanding by design: bystander intervention in cyberbullying. In: Proc. SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems – CHI 2018, pp. 1–12 (2018)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    van der Zwaan, J.M., Dignum, V., Jonker, C.M., van der Hof, S.: On technology against cyberbullying. In: van der Hof, S., van den Berg, B.S. (eds.) Minding Minors Wandering the Web: Regulating Online Child Safety, pp. 211–228. TMC Asser Press, The Hague (2014)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cooper, H.M.: Research Synthesis and Meta-analysis: a Step-by-Step Approach. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks (2010)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fagin-Jones, S., Midlarsky, E.: Courageous altruism: personal and situation correlates of rescue during the Holocaust. J. Posit. Psychol. 2, 136–147 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Oinas-Kukkonen, H., Harjumaa, M.: Towards deeper understanding of persuasion in software and information systems. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interaction, ACHI 2008, pp. 200–205 (2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chang, T.-R., Kaasinen, E., Kaipainen, K.: Persuasive design in mobile applications for mental well-being: multidisciplinary expert review. Wirel. Mob. Commun. Healthc. 61, 154–162 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wais-Zechmann, B., Gattol, V., Neureiter, K., Orji, R., Tscheligi, M.: Persuasive technology to support chronic health conditions: investigating the optimal persuasive strategies for persons with COPD. In: Ham, J., Karapanos, E., Morita, P.P., Burns, C.M. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2018. LNCS, vol. 10809, pp. 255–266. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78978-1_21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cohen, J.: Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Academic Press, New York (1988)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fogg, B.J.: A behavior model for persuasive design. In: Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Persuasive Technology - Persuasive 2009, vol. 1 (2009)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Baumert, A., Halmburger, A., Schmitt, M.: Interventions against norm violations: dispositional determinants of self-reported and real moral courage. Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 39, 1053–1068 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kathrin Röderer
    • 1
    Email author
  • Julia Himmelsbach
    • 1
  • Stephanie Schwarz
    • 1
  • Manfred Tscheligi
    • 1
  1. 1.Austrian Institute of TechnologyViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations