Exploring the Links Between Persuasion, Personality and Mobility Types in Personalized Mobility Applications

Recent approaches on tackling the problem of sustainable transportation involve persuasive systems and applications. These systems focus on changing citizens’ behavior towards adopting transportation habits that rely more on the use of public transportation, bicycles and walking and less on private cars. A main drawback of existing applications is the limited use or lack of personalization aspects that consider differences in users’ susceptibility to persuasive strategies. In this paper, we explore two user traits that can be used for personalizing the persuasive strategies applied to end users: personality and mobility type. More specifically, we present the results of a study where we examined the perceived persuadability of eight persuasive strategies on users of five personality types and three mobility types.

[1]  Paul Holleis,et al.  TRIPZOOM: a System to Motivate Sustainable Urban Mobility , 2012 .

[2]  O. John,et al.  Big Five Inventory , 2012, Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences.

[3]  Julita Vassileva,et al.  Modeling the efficacy of persuasive strategies for different gamer types in serious games for health , 2014, User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction.

[4]  James A. Landay,et al.  UbiGreen: investigating a mobile tool for tracking and supporting green transportation habits , 2009, CHI.

[5]  Jillian Anable,et al.  Golden Questions and Social Marketing Guidance Report. , 2013 .

[6]  Julita Vassileva,et al.  Gender and Persuasive Technology: Examining the Persuasiveness of Persuasive Strategies by Gender Groups , 2014 .

[7]  Joseph F. Hair,et al.  Partial Least Squares Strukturgleichungsmodellierung (PLS-SEM): Eine anwendungsorientierte Einführung , 2017 .

[8]  D. Hodgkinson,et al.  Mitigation of Climate Change: The International Context , 2009 .

[9]  Julie A. Kientz,et al.  Personality and Persuasive Technology: An Exploratory Study on Health-Promoting Mobile Applications , 2010, PERSUASIVE.

[10]  Antti Jylhä,et al.  MatkaHupi: a persuasive mobile application for sustainable mobility , 2013, UbiComp.

[11]  Marko Sarstedt,et al.  Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM): An emerging tool in business research , 2014 .

[12]  H. Eysenck.  The structure of human personality , 1953 .

[13]  Antti Jylhä,et al.  Design challenges in motivating change for sustainable urban mobility , 2014, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[14]  H. Kelley,et al.  Communication and Persuasion: Psychological Studies of Opinion Change , 1982 .

[15]  G. Bodenhausen,et al.  Personalized Persuasion , 2012, Psychological science.

[16]  Rudolf R. Sinkovics,et al.  The Use of Partial Least Squares Path Modeling in International Marketing , 2009 .

[17]  Panagiotis G. Ipeirotis,et al.  Running Experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk , 2010, Judgment and Decision Making.

[18]  B. J. Fogg,et al.  Persuasive technology: using computers to change what we think and do , 2002, UBIQ.

[19]  Johann Schrammel,et al.  Persuasive Technologies for Sustainable Urban Mobility , 2016, ArXiv.

[20]  L. Dijkstra,et al.  Promoting safe walking and cycling to improve public health: lessons from The Netherlands and Germany. , 2003, American journal of public health.

[21]  Costas Panagopoulos,et al.  Big Five Personality Traits and Responses to Persuasive Appeals: Results from Voter Turnout Experiments , 2013 .

[22]  Gregoris Mentzas,et al.  Recommender systems for nudging commuters towards eco-friendly decisions , 2015, Intell. Decis. Technol..

[23]  Corrie van der Lelie,et al.  The value of storyboards in the product design process , 2006, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[24]  M. Kosinski,et al.  Computer-based personality judgments are more accurate than those made by humans , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[25]  Julita Vassileva,et al.  Tailoring persuasive health games to gamer type , 2013, CHI.

[26]  Sonia M. Arteaga,et al.  Combating obesity trends in teenagers through persuasive mobile technology , 2009, ASAC.

[27]  H. Kaiser.  An index of factorial simplicity , 1974 .

[28]  Ingwer Borg,et al.  The measurement equivalence of Big Five factor markers for persons with different levels of education. , 2010, Journal of research in personality.

[29]  Massimo Zancanaro,et al.  Adaptivity and Personalization in Persuasive Technologies , 2016, PPT@PERSUASIVE.