Advertisement

Persuasive Practices: Learning from Home Security Advisory Services

  • Mateusz DolataEmail author
  • Tino Comes
  • Birgit Schenk
  • Gerhard Schwabe
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9638)

Abstract

Research on persuasive technologies (PT) focuses, primarily, on the design and development of IT for inducing change of individual’s behavior and attitude through computer-human and computer-mediated influence. The issue of practices in co-located human-human persuasive encounters remained unattended in the PT community. This study uses the notion of persuasive practices to understand the course of events in face-to-face home security advisory sessions – it specifies and illustrates such practices and discusses their impact on the persuasiveness of the encounter. Furthermore, it presents potential of IT to support such persuasive practices thus opening new research possibilities of PT research.

Keywords

Advisory encounter Human-Human influence Practices F2F 

References

  1. 1.
    Arroyo, E., et al.: Waterbot: exploring feedback and persuasive techniques at the sink. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 631–639. ACM (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blundel, R.: Effective organisational communication: perspectives, principles, and practices. Financial Times Prentice Hall, Harlow, England; New York (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Budde, R., Züllighoven, H.: Software tools in a programming workshop. In: Floyd, C., Züllighoven, H., Budde, R., Keil-Slawik, R. (eds.) Software Development and Reality Construction, pp. 252–268. Springer, Heidelberg (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cialdini, R.B.: Influence: the psychology of persuasion. Collins, New York (2007)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Comes, T., Schwabe, G.: From fuzzy exploration to transparent advice: insights into mobile advisory services. In: Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos, USA (2016)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fogg, B.J.: A behavior model for persuasive design. In: Proceedings of the 4rd International Conference on Persuasive Technology. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Garfinkel, H.: Studies in Ethnomethodology. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1967)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Harjumaa, M., Oinas-Kukkonen, H.: Persuasion theories and IT design. In: de Kort, Y.A., IJsselsteijn, W.A., Midden, C., Eggen, B., Fogg, B.J. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2007. LNCS, vol. 4744, pp. 311–314. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heinrich, P., et al.: Microworlds as the locus of consumer education in financial advisory services. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hutchby, I., Wooffitt, R.: Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices, and Applications. Polity Press, Cambridge (1998)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kanji, G.K.: 100 Statistical Tests. SAGE Pub., London, Thousand Oaks (2006)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kress, G.: Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication. Routledge, Abingdon, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kuutti, K., Bannon, L.J.: The turn to practice in HCI: towards a research agenda. In: Proceedings of the Conference Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 3543–3552. ACM Press (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Leeper, J.D., Hartman, J.: Choosing the Correct Statistical Test (CHS 627: University of Alabama), http://bama.ua.edu/~jleeper/627/choosestat.html
  15. 15.
    Lehto, T. et al.: Factors affecting perceived persuasiveness of a behavior change support system. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mettler, T., et al.: On the use of experiments in design science research: a proposition of an evaluation framework. Commun. AIS. 34(1), 223–240 (2014)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Muntean, C.I.: Raising engagement in e-learning through gamification. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Virtual Learning, pp. 323–329 (2011)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nicolini, D.: Practice Theory, Work, and Organization: An Introduction. Oxford University Press, Oxfor (2012)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nussbaumer, P., et al.: “Enforced” vs. “Casual” transparency – findings from IT-supported financial advisory encounters. ACM Trans. Manag. Inf. Syst. 3(2), 11:1–11:19 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Oinas-Kukkonen, H., Harjumaa, M.: Persuasive systems design: Key issues, process model, and system features. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 24(1), 28 (2009)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Oinas-Kukkonen, H., Harjumaa, M.: Towards Deeper Understanding of Persuasion in Software and Information Systems. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Advances in Human-Computer Interaction. IEEE (2008)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    O’Keefe, D.J.: Persuasion: Theory & Research. Sage Pub, Thousand Oaks, CA (2002)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rogers, Y.: Moving on from weiser’s vision of calm computing: engaging UbiComp experiences. In: Dourish, P., Friday, A. (eds.) UbiComp 2006. LNCS, vol. 4206, pp. 404–421. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schwabe, G., et al.: Advancing collaboration engineering: new ThinkLets for dyadic problem solving and an application for mobile advisory services. In: Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Los Alamitos, USA (2016)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Simons, H.W., Jones, J.: Persuasion in society. Routledge, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Stibe, A.: Advancing typology of computer-supported influence: moderation effects in socially influencing systems. In: MacTavish, T., Basapur, S. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2015. LNCS, vol. 9072, pp. 253–264. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Suchman, L.A.: Human-machine reconfigurations. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mateusz Dolata
    • 1
    Email author
  • Tino Comes
    • 1
  • Birgit Schenk
    • 2
  • Gerhard Schwabe
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of InformaticsUniversity of ZurichZurichSwitzerland
  2. 2.University of Applied Science LudwigsburgLudwigsburgGermany

Personalised recommendations