Adapting Healthy Eating Messages to Personality

  • Rosemary Josekutty Thomas
  • Judith Masthoff
  • Nir Oren
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10171)

Abstract

This paper considers how persuasive messages – within the healthy eating domain – should be communicated to individuals with different personality types. Following a personality assessment, subjects imagined themselves in a scenario and evaluated the effectiveness of messages constructed using Cialdini’s principles of persuasion. Our results suggest that messages exploiting the principle of authority are the most effective across a range of personality types. In addition, personality had a statistically significant impact on the persuasiveness of messages, with “conscientious” subjects more willing to be persuaded than others. Finally, we found that positively framed messages were more preferred than negatively ones. We also found some interaction effects between personality traits and Cialdini’s principles and framing on persuasiveness.

Keywords

Personalisation Framing Nutrition Persuasion Personality 

References

  1. 1.
    Churchill, S., Good, A., Pavey, L.: Promoting the avoidance of high-calorie snacks. The role of temporal message framing and eating self-efficacy. Appetite 80, 131–136 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lo, S.H., Smith, S.G., Taylor, M., Good, A., von Wagner, C.: The effect of temporal framing on behavioral intentions, expectations, and behavior: the case of healthy eating. J. Appl. Biobehav. Res. 17(3), 202–213 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mazzotta, I., de Rosis, F., Carofiglio, V.: Portia: a user-adapted persuasion system in the healthy-eating domain. IEEE Intell. Syst. 22(6), 42–51 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berkovsky, S., Freyne, J.: Group-based recipe recommendations: analysis of data aggregation strategies. In: Proceedings of the 4th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, pp. 111–118. ACM, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cialdini, R.B.: Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion. Harper Collins, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Masthoff, J., Grasso, F., Ham, J.: Preface to the special issue on personalization and behavior change. User Model. User-Adap. Inter. 24(5), 345–350 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Orji, R., Vassileva, J., Mandryk, R.L.: Modeling the efficacy of persuasive strategies for different gamer types in serious games for health. User Model. User-Adap. Inter. 24(5), 453–498 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Smith, K.A., Dennis, M., Masthoff, J.: Personalizing reminders to personality for melanoma self-checking. In: Proceedings of the 2016 Conference on User Modeling Adaptation and Personalization, pp. 85–93 (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Michie, S., Richardson, M., Johnston, M., Abraham, C., Francis, J., Hardeman, W., Eccles, M.P., Cane, J., Wood, C.E.: The behavior change technique taxonomy (v1) of 93 hierarchically clustered techniques: building an international consensus for the reporting of behavior change interventions. Ann. Behav. Med. 46(1), 81–95 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Miceli, M., De Rosis, F.D., Poggi, I.: Emotional and non-emotional persuasion. Appl. Artif. Intell. 20(10), 849–879 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Grasso, F.: Rhetorical coding of health promotion dialogues. In: Dojat, M., Keravnou, E.T., Barahona, P. (eds.) AIME 2003. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2780, pp. 179–188. Springer, Heidelberg (2003). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-39907-0_26 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grasso, F., Cawsey, A., Jones, R.: Dialectical argumentation to solve conflicts in advice giving: a case study in the promotion of healthy nutrition. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 53(6), 1077–1115 (2000)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kaptein, M., Lacroix, J., Saini, P.: Individual differences in persuadability in the health promotion domain. In: Ploug, T., Hasle, P., Oinas-Kukkonen, H. (eds.) PERSUASIVE 2010. LNCS, vol. 6137, pp. 94–105. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-13226-1_11 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kaptein, M., Markopoulos, P., de Ruyter, B., Aarts, E.: Personalizing persuasive technologies: explicit and implicit personalization using persuasion profiles. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 77, 38–51 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kaptein, M., van Halteren, A.: Adaptive persuasive messaging to increase service retention: using persuasion profiles to increase the effectiveness of email reminders. Pers. Ubiquit. Comput. 17(6), 1173–1185 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kaptein, M.C., Markopoulos, P., de Ruyter, B., Aarts, E.: Persuasion in ambient intelligence. J. Ambient Intell. Hum. Comput. 1(1), 43–56 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Higgins, E.T.: Beyond pleasure and pain. Am. Psychol. 52(12), 1280–1300 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dijkstra, A., Rothman, A., Pietersma, S.: The persuasive effects of framing messages on fruit and vegetable consumption according to regulatory focus theory. Psychol. Health 26(8), 1036–1048 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    de Graaf, A., van den Putte, B., de Bruijn, G.J.: Effects of issue involvement and framing of a responsible drinking message on attitudes, intentions, and behavior. J. Health Commun. 20(8), 989–994 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Godinho, C.A., Alvarez, M.J., Lima, M.L.: Emphasizing the losses or the gains: comparing situational and individual moderators of framed messages to promote fruit and vegetable intake. Appetite 96, 416–425 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Amazon: Amazon mechanical turk (2016). www.mturk.com. Accessed 30 May 2016
  22. 22.
    Taylor, W.L.: Cloze procedure: a new tool for measuring readability. Journalism Q. 30, 415–433 (1953)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Randolph, J.J.: Free-marginal multirater kappa (multirater k[free]): an alternative to fleiss fixed-marginal multirater Kappa. In: Joensuu Learning and Instruction Symposium 2005 (2005)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Goldberg, L.R.: The structure of phenotypic personality traits. Am. Psychol. 48(1), 26–34 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dennis, M., Masthoff, J., Mellish, C.: The quest for validated personality trait stories. In: Proceedings of the 2012 ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, pp. 273–276. ACM, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Smith, K.A., Dennis, M., Masthoff, J., Tintarev, N.: A method of bootstrapping adapation using personality stories. In progressGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    J. Thomas, R., Masthoff, J., Oren, N.: Personalising healthy eating messages to age, gender and personality: using Cialdini’s principle’s and framing. In: IUI 2017 Companion. ACM (2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rosemary Josekutty Thomas
    • 1
  • Judith Masthoff
    • 1
  • Nir Oren
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computing ScienceUniversity of AberdeenAberdeenUK

Personalised recommendations