Evaluation of Computer-Tailored Motivational Messaging in a Health Promotion Context

  • Jens E. d’HondtEmail author
  • Raoul C. Y. Nuijten
  • Pieter M. E. Van Gorp
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11939)


Persuasive messages have recently been shown to be more effective when tailored to the personality and preferences of the recipient. However, much of the literature on adaptive persuasion has evaluated the effectiveness of persuasive attempts by the direct reactions to those attempts instead of changes on the longer term (e.g. lifestyle changes). Results of this study suggest that adaptive persuasion improves attitudes towards persuasive attempts, but does not necessarily cause a change in longer term behavior. This was found through a randomized controlled trial evaluating the implementation an adaptive persuasive system in a health promotion intervention. This article provides a detailed description of this evaluation and encourages the research community to (1) become more skeptical towards the longer term effectiveness of adaptive persuasive techniques and (2) design more explicitly for longer term changes in behavior.


Persuasion Individual differences Health promotion 



This work is part of the research program ‘Gamification for Overweight Prevention and Active Lifestyle’ (443001101), which is partly financed by the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (ZonMw). The authors also thank Kalliopi Zervanou for feedback on an early version of this work


  1. 1.
    Allenby, G.M., Rossi, P.E.: Marketing models of consumer heterogene- Ity. J. Econometrics 89, 57–78 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cialdini, R., Trost, M., Newsom, J.: The development of a valid mea- sure and discovery of surprising behavioural implications. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 69(2), 318–328 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dijkstra, A.: Working mechanisms of computer-tailored health education: evidence from smoking cessation. Health Educ. Res. 20(5), 527–539 (2005). ISSN: 02681153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brent Donnellan, M., et al.: The Mini-IPIP scales: tiny-yet-effective mea- sures of the Big Five factors of personality. Psychol. Assess. 18(2), 192–203 (2006). ISSN: 10403590CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Goldberg, L.R.: An alternative “Description of Personality”: the big- five factor structure. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 59(6), 1216–1229 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Graziano, W.G., Eisenberg, N.: Agreeableness: a Dimension of Personality (1997). Scholar
  7. 7.
    Haugtvedt, C.P., Petty, R.E., Cacioppo, J.T.: Need for cognition and advertising: understanding the role of personality variables in consumer behavior. J. Consum. Psychol. 1(3), 239–260 (1992). ISSN: 10577408. 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hirsh, J.B., Inzlicht, M.: The devil you know: neuroticism predicts neural response to uncertainty. Psychol. Sci. 19(10), 962–967 (2008). ISSN: 09567976CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hirsh, J.B., Kang, S.K., Bodenhausen, G.V.: Personalized persuasion: tailoring persuasive appeals to recipients personality traits. Psychol. Sci. 23(6), 578–581 (2012). ISSN: 14679280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kaptein, M., Eckles, D.: Heterogeneity in the effects of online persuasion. J. Interact. Mark. 26(3), 176–188 (2012). ISSN: 10949968CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kaptein, M., Parvinen, P.: Advancing e-commerce personalization: process framework and case stud. Int. J. Electron. Commer. 19(3), 7–33 (2015). ISSN: 15579301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kaptein, M., Van Halteren, A.: Adaptive persuasive messaging to increase service retention: using persuasion profiles to increase the effectiveness of email reminders. Pers. Ubiquitous Comput. 17(6), 1173–1185 (2013). ISSN: 16174909CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    McCrae, R.R., Costa, P.T., Costa Jr., P.T.: Conceptions and correlates of openness to experience. In: Handbook of Personality Psychology May (1997), pp. 825–847. ISSN: 14222795. Scholar
  14. 14.
    Michie, S., van Stralen, M.M., West, R.: The behaviour change wheel: a new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions. Implementation Sci. 6(1), 42 (2011). ISSN: 17485908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Morris, M., Guilak, F.: Mobile heart health : project high-light. IEEE Pervasive Comput. 57–61 (2009).
  16. 16.
    Nuijten, R.C.Y., et al.: Evaluation of the impact of extrinsic rewards on user engagement in a health promotion context (2019)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Roberts, B.W., et al.: The structure of conscientiousness: an empirical investigation based on seven major personality questionnaires. Pers.l Psychol. 58(1), 103–139 (2005). ISSN: 0031–5826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Scott, S.L.: A modern Bayesion look at multi-armed bandit. Appl. Stoch. Models Bus. Ind. 26, 157–164 (2007). ISSN: 1524–1904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shao, L., et al.: Cross-cultural evidence for the fundamental features of extraversion. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 79(3), 452–468 (2005). ISSN: 0022–3514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stein, C.: Inadmissibility of the usual estimator for the mean of a multi-variate normal distribution. Proc. Third Berkeley Symp. Math. Stat. Probab. 1(4), 197–206 (1955). ISSN: 0097-0433MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wilcox, R.R.: A Review of the beta-binomial model and its extensions. J. Educ. Stat. 6(1), 3–32 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Eindhoven Unitversity of TechnologyEindhovenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations