Submind YouTube summaries
Thumbnail for How Designers Use Behavioural Psychology

How Designers Use Behavioural Psychology

Watch on YouTube

Video summary

The video explores how top-tier products leverage behavioral psychology, using Duolingo as a prime example of an application that utilizes both effective and manipulative psychological tactics. On one hand, the app excels at gamification and social interaction to keep users engaged; on the other, it employs "dark psychology" by triggering loss aversion through emotional triggers like changing its icon into an angry bird when lessons are missed or sending sarcastic notifications asking why a user isn't playing. While these strategies can be effective in driving immediate engagement, they also risk alienating customers if overused, as users may eventually feel the interactions are unfair rather than helpful. A more balanced approach to behavioral psychology is demonstrated by companies like Spotify and TfL (Transport for London), which successfully integrate psychological insights without crossing into manipulation. In one notable instance involving a premium account cancellation screen, instead of simply asking "Are you sure?", the interface highlighted valuable assets users would lose, such as ad-free listening and thousands of downloaded items. This copywriting technique effectively appealed to user sentiment by framing the decision in terms of what they stand to gain or lose, thereby improving the overall experience. Similarly, TfL worked with designers who translated complex psychological concepts into plain English for stakeholders, avoiding jargon entirely to ensure everyone understood how these principles could improve their product without needing specialized knowledge. A significant challenge discussed throughout the video is communicating behavioral insights to non-designer stakeholders who are often focused purely on metrics like gross profit and retention numbers rather than user behavior. Junior designers frequently struggle when trying to explain psychological nuances, only to be met with requests for simple solutions that ignore underlying biases. The speaker notes a pivotal career moment where they learned to strip away scientific terminology and relate concepts to everyday experiences, such as how people instinctively pick items from the middle shelf in a supermarket rather than reaching high or low shelves. By anchoring abstract psychological theories in familiar real-world scenarios, designers can bypass resistance and help stakeholders see that these principles are essentially common sense applied to better decision-making. Ultimately, the video concludes that while many companies do not openly discuss their use of behavioral psychology due to fear of appearing manipulative, thoughtful application leads to significantly better products. The key takeaway for designers is to master the art of simplification: removing jargon and connecting ideas directly to the audience's daily life so that even those focused on financial figures can grasp the value proposition. Researching user behaviors early in the design process allows teams to filter out biases and address real needs, but this must be communicated with clarity and empathy. As designers grow professionally, they learn to pivot away from passionate tangents filled with technical words toward clear, relatable messages that persuade stakeholders by showing exactly why a psychological approach is beneficial for both users and business goals.
Read the full video transcript
Do you think the best products in the world take into account behavioral psychology? >> Who's doing it well and who's not doing it well? There's some that take it to the extreme. Dualingo is a is example of both ends. It's hard to kind of pinpoint something they're not doing from a psychology perspective. They do certain things really well, but there are other things they're doing that actually misuse psychology. They do a hell of a lot of gamification, but they do a lot of, you know, social interaction and [music] bringing people in. That is dark psychology in so many ways. >> Are there any war stories around trying to communicate biases to stakeholders? >> Psychology is common sense. You take away the scientific jargon, simplify it into a way that everybody speaks. As long as you're associating it to understandable in your everyday life, that is where I've seen the worst. Do you think the best products in the world take into account behavioral psychology? And uh do you have some examples of like your favorite products that you're just like, "Oh my god, they just nailed it." [laughter] >> Yeah, I mean I suppose so there's some that take it to the extreme. The one we're all aware of is going to be Duolingo. Um you know that is uh dark psychology in so many ways. you know, especially on an emotional level when you see your uh app icon change to an angry bird because you've not done your language lessons for the day. Like that's really kind of honing in on that uh you know, loss aversion of oh god, you know, I'm I'm really missing out here and this thing is angry because it's happening. Um, and yeah, they they do a lot, you know, they do a hell of a lot of gamification, but they do a lot of, you know, social interaction and bringing people in, but, you know, there's there's so many aspects they it's hard to kind of pinpoint something they're not doing from a psychology perspective. And I think to your question there around like, you know, who's doing it well and who's not doing it well, Dualingo is a is example of both ends. like they do certain things really well from a psychological perspective, but there are other things they're doing that actually misuse psychology and if anything of the factor are losing customers. So, you know, when you're getting the notifications from uh Dualingo to say, "What's up?" Like, "Why are you not playing with me?" kind of thing in a really sarcastic way. All, you know, I'm sure it's humorous and everything, but when you've seen that a few times in a couple of days, it's kind of like, "No, I'm done with this. That's not fair." Um, so yeah, they're really interesting one. They do a lot. Um, I think generally there's outwardly not many companies talk about the psychology behind the product. I think there are some that that do talk about it, but I'd love to hear more companies talk about how they've considered psychology because when I've done a lot of different case studies and I've seen where psychology is in practice, I can see there's been some thought there. I think I saw one the other day with Spotify with um I think I was I was testing cancelling my account from a premium account and the copy they used was something like are you sure you want to lose out on you know adree listening and thousands of downloaded items and that kind of thing and it really generally pulled on something that you know made my experience better. So it wasn't just a are you sure you want to cancel this? it actually kind of like pulled on some a good reason for why I wouldn't. >> So I think that was a really good example where clearly they thought about it. They thought about the psychology of the copy. Um but yeah, I think there there's still as people might see from the case studies I've done on uxologists and and other resources as well that do it that yeah, there's a lot of places where people just miss some of those key points of if you'd have just thought about it like this, >> this could have been a ton better. >> Right. Right. Um, are there any war stories around trying to communicate biases to stakeholders and for them just being like, "Yeah, but I don't really care. Like, we we should do this anyway, but you're like, "Oh, but really, like, you know, like this this could go really wrong. Like, this could be really bad." Any any war stories around that or something like against the Yeah, >> yeah, like what what's happened for sure in the past? I mean definitely when I was a much more junior designer and you know yeah in your mind you know what's right and you're going to people the the thing we often find is you know especially when you're talking to stakeholders that are all about the figures and they're all about the money side of things and you're trying to talk to them about psychology and it's not really getting through to them and they said look can we not just do something simple here and just let's see if it creates the uplift that kind of thing that is that's where I've always found the problem. I think kind of growing through my career, the moment that changed, I think was when I really learned psychology and learned how to communicate the understanding of that. And the thing that I often say to people, as I kind of said earlier, is that psychology is kind of common sense. Like when you boil it, when you kind of you know simplify it into a way that everybody speaks, you take away the scientific jargon and you explain it in a way of like we did with the being overwhelmed with how much information there is. Keeping [clears throat] it simple to that we can say look in general studies have found that people you know need specific piece of information. It's got to be relevant. If there's too much information it just it doesn't work. People don't know where to click that kind of stuff. Um, as long as you're putting it into plain English, generally stakeholders understand. We did a a project at my last company. We worked we did a little project with with Train Line, uh, which was really nice. Um, lovely team that we wor with over at Train Line and they just wanted to understand kind of, you know, we started talking about behavioral psychology and how we were using it at global. Um, and sorry, not Train Line, TfL. TfL, that's a different company. Um and they wanted to understand yeah how we were really psychology and how we could or how they could use it in their product. Um and when we presented it um you know we we use a bit of the jargon in there but you know when we spoke to them in person about it we just kept to the plain English >> and the important thing that we did do as well is that we we associated it to an everyday thing in life. So like I said the supermarket story >> you know when you are in there how do you normally pick a product do you go low do you go high or do you go middle most people go middle and you know that's the kind of winning one you're kind of betting there it's going to be that stakeholder in the room that always goes top shelf but you know that as long as you're associating it to a un something that's understandable in your everyday life it takes them out of the mindset of specifically looking at the product and thinking about this as if they would tackle any other situation of a similar context. That is where I've seen the win. So yeah, it's war stories is definitely always just it's down to the misunderstanding if anything. >> Yeah. Yeah, that that that makes a ton of sense. Yeah. Um yeah, the the minute you kind of uh spout like jargon and design or psychology only terms, you've lost 90% of the room, right? Unless you're speaking to a bunch of designers or psychology geeks, like it's just know your audience, right? Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Makes sense. >> Yeah. Exactly. You learn this as you grow as a designer, right? Like I remember so many times being told, "Ban, you talk so much fluff." Like, you know, you you tell a really great point and then you go off on this massive tangent and it gets completely lost. And I go on a tangent because one, you know, we're passionate, right? like we want to talk about all the great stuff of it, but but also like what I'm trying to get across is all my knowledge and I'm like, "Oh, but I know these words. This is so good." They don't care. They don't care. I know these words. They just want me to get to the point, right? So, yeah, you just learn to say, "Right, what's going to hit that simple message I can give them that relates to them and helps them understand why this is a good idea?" >> Yeah. Um, it's funny because we we do all like as designers I I think we try our best to cater our message to the people that we we speak to, we pitch to, we try to persuade. However, sometimes >> uh the stakeholders don't do the same, right? They they will just say, you know, like I don't know, gross profit or retention and and then maybe for some junior designers, they're like, what are they talking about? What what does it mean? So uh but in general I think uh good teams try to keep it to a level where everybody in the room can understand and are on the same page and and that's also just uh yeah and and from your workshops today you guys have probably done that as well right lots of different stakeholders and designers in the room just tried to be like okay well what are we talking about what's the simplest way to say this and and then move forward from there I wanted to go back to this question that Allison asked because we we said to understand the biases and the behaviors. Re research is probably a a great place to start, right? Start asking questions, getting in the room uh before you do anything and start just talking to people, right? But are there any sort of strategies or or things that you and your team do or have done to sort of like filter out these behaviors and actions and and needs and wants and biases? >> Well, listen to the full conversation. Click the video on screen now. Subscribe to the channel if you want to join us live. Oh, wait. Okay, fine. You don't have to join us for the live stream, but if you like stuff like this, then click that subscribe button. I'll see you on the inside. Bye.