1

1

Behavior Design

Stanford University

Dear Mrs. Susan Weersing, Mrs. Sheila Booth, and IDM Committee,

I have finally found a direction that aligns with my fascination for life-

optimizing psychology and technology entrepreneurship. Since sixth

grade, I have been fascinated about human memory, learning, motivation,

and productivity. I wanted to find ways to optimize how we could live.

At 20 years of age, I have discovered that creating life-optimizing

solutions is through Behavior Design—using technology to create lasting

behavior change. Whether it is increasing the behavior of daily exercising,

decreasing work-related stress, or creating a habit of daily appreciation for

life, these behavior endeavors are through effective behavior design. This

is behavior design: design solutions that create lasting behavior change in

our lives. With the help of Dr. BJ Fogg, Professor Jeremy Bailenson,

Professor Cliff Nass, and Professor Carol Dweck, I have found an

academic direction and support for my interests of psychology and

technology entrepreneurship—an IDM in Behavior Design.

I hope you may all share my vision as well.

Proposal for an Individually

Designed Major David Ngo, Class of 2013

Behavior Design Statement

- Introduction

- Motivation and Goal

- Courses

- Conclusion

Outline

Study Plan

1

2

Introduction

“The best design

solutions today

change human

behavior. Yet despite

decades of research,

challenges remain

for people who

design to influence.”

– Dr. BJ Fogg, Director of

Stanford Persuasive Tech Lab

3

Anecdotes from Students,

Faculty, & Alumni

Anticipated Questions

4

David Ngo IDM Proposal 2011 2

I am ready to challenge

convention and discover the

seemingly impossible.

“In the next 50 years, the increasing

importance of designing spaces for human

communication and interaction will lead to

expansion in those aspects of computing that

are focused on people, rather than

machinery.” --Terry Winograd, Bringing Design to Software

My personal motivation and goal for an IDM in Behavior Design is to

optimize my Stanford experience. Never will I be able to study at Stanford

as an undergraduate again. It has taken me two years of trying, failing, and

self-searching to discover the direction of Behavior Design. But, I rather

take two years now than 10 years later to find what I have found: the field

of Behavior Design that bridges psychology and technology

entrepreneurship in ways that existing majors have not yet combined—a

new found love. I am ready to challenge convention and discover the

seemingly impossible.

My academic motivation and goal is to help spearhead the field of Behavior

Design with the help of Dr. BJ Fogg, Professor Jeremy Bailenson

(Communication), Professor Cliff Nass (Communication, courtesy in CS),

and Professor Carol Dweck (Psychology): to build new bridges between

Computer Science, Psychology, Product Design, and Human-Computer

Interaction in order to create solutions that improves our lives through

behavior change. Although Human-Computer Interaction Design is

designing for technology that embraces simplicity and intuition of the

mind, HCI is only one component of creating human-centered technology.

I believe the second component, Behavior Design, is also needed because it

focuses on designing for the long-term behavior change of using that new

technology.

I hope my passion, vision, and hard-work can be seen in this proposal and

in our face-to-face meetings. I have spent 17 hours researching the current

coursework, and 23 hours crafting this proposal. It is not perfect, but I am

very happy with it. I know that I have much to learn not only in formal

academics, but also in writing and conveying my mission to others in a

more professional setting—such as trying to gather faculty support.

Because Stanford actually gives their students the option to individually

design majors, I am thankful for this opportunity and thank you Mrs. Susan

Weersing, Mrs. Sheila Booth and IDM Committee for your time and

consideration.

Motivation and Goal

David Ngo IDM Proposal 2011 3

Computer Science is invaluable to create new technology:

It is the implementation of creating new technology. In

other words the ability to program iPhone, Android, and

other platforms will be essential in designing behavior

changing technology. Professor BJ Fogg asserts that

implementing “mobile technology is the future.” And the

future starts now.

CS106/108 provide strong a fundamental understanding of

CS in Java and C++. Furthermore, CS147/247 establish a

solid technical perspective in the Human-Computer

Design relationship. Having technical background is only

one facet in behavior design. Although these CS classes

are extremely hands-on, the exercises are pre-made

problems. The next component allows direct application

to solve real world problems with infinite possible

solutions.

Courses

“Designing for behavior change

via social and mobile tech is new,

with no leading books or

conferences to provide

guidance. Our goal is to explain

human nature clearly and map

those insights onto the emerging

opportunities in technology.”

– Dr. BJ Fogg

CS 106A: Programming Methodology

5

CS 106B: Programming Abstractions

5

CS 108: Object-Oriented Systems Design

4

CS 147: Intro. to Human-Computer Interaction Design 4

CS 247: Human-Computer Interaction Design Studio

4

Computer Science & HCI – 22 units

Entrepreneurship – 12 Units

MS&E 175: Innovation, Creativity, and Change

4

ENGR 145: Technology Entrepreneurship

4

ENGR 245: Tech. Entrepreneurship and Lean Startups

4

Entrepreneurship is the source of introducing

revolutionizing change: it is the creation of something

that did not exist before—finding novel solutions to

existing problems, or perhaps identifying latent problems

that have never been noticed.

MS&E 175 directly studies creativity and innovation.

These classes are hands-on, providing the opportunity to

learn the processes of creativity, innovation and

application of computer science knowledge.

ENGR145/245 revolve around technology

entrepreneurship. These classes allow real-world

application of Behavior Design.

David Ngo IDM Proposal 2011 4

Psychology and Human Factors –30 Units

Design Thinking – 15 Units

ME 101: Visual Thinking 3

ME 115A: Introduction to Human Values in Design

3

ME115B: Product Design Methods 3

ME 115C: Design and Business Factors

3

DANCE 138: Liquid Flow: Dance, Design, and Engineering

1

Drama 105V Improv & Design 2

Although CS147/247 (HCI depth) create bridges

between CS and Psychology, it does not provide enough

depth from the Human perspective.

Psych55/205/249 provide substantial understanding of

Motivation and Cognition (memory, learning, decision-

making, language). Psych 198 is the capstone project.

EDUC 364/176X/196X dive deeper into cognition and

learning by applying CS and Psych knowledge in

education, specifically in the learning process.

CS377T is another hands-on class that will create real-

world applications that bridges the gap between CS and

Psychology. CS377T presents a unique opportunity to

create real-world solutions to significant problems.

CS377T Behavioral Design: Creating Calming

Technologies will allow us to create new technology to

relieve stress and improve health. If successful, we will

be invited to share our ideas at Mobile Health 2011 in

May 4-5, 2011. Dr. Fogg, the teacher of this course, has

been a big supporter of my IDM.

Psych 55: Intro. to the Brain and Cognition* (WIM)

4

Psych 131: Language and Thought 4

Psych 198: Senior Honors Thesis 5

Psych 205: Foundations of Cognition

3

Psych 249: Human Motivation 3

EDUC 364: Cognition and Learning

3

CS 377T: Behavior Design: Using Technology to Creating Calming Habits

4

EDUC 176X: The Design of Technologies for Casual Learning - Lab

1

EDUC 196X: The Design of Technologies for Casual Learning

3

Product Design adds another facet to Behavioral Design & Innovation: design thinking. According to one of Stanford

d.school’s statement [on their website], “design thinking is the catalyst for innovation and bringing new things into the

world.” Design thinking is key to creating new technology that will influence behavior.

ME101 is a fundamental pillar of design thinking. ME115 series teaches the importance of human values, methods, and

business of product design. Dance138 and Drama 105V provide two very unconventional, but innovative ways to

practice design thinking—from Liquid Flow Dance and Improvisation. Collectively, these courses provide a strong

foundation and unique approaches to learn design thinking.

“We believe

is a catalyst

and bringing

the

design thinking

for innovation

new things into

world.”

Design

Thinking,

d.school

website

David Ngo IDM Proposal 2011 5

Core Sequence from

HCI Concentration in

Symbolic Systems

Units

CS147: Intro. to Human-

Computer Interaction

Design

4

CS247: Human-

Computer Interaction

Design Studio

4

Comm169: Computers

and Interfaces

5

Psych131: Language

and Thought

4

CS108: Object-Oriented

Programming

4

Comm168:

Experimental Research

in Adv. User Interfaces

5

The ability to effectively communicate one's ideas, whether through writing or

speech, is extremely important. If people cannot understand the message, then they

cannot use or contribute to the mission. Last winter in ENGR 145, David

Morgenthaler, founder of Morgenthaler Ventures, told the class to take drama

courses: “Captivate people because I hear a lot of ideas, but I can tell who is

enthusiastic about his/her idea and who is not." (paraphrased, C. Crosland).

CEE151 teaches the important skill to negotiate. Supplementing with live practice,

DRAMA103 allows students to convey one’s vision with clarity, passion in

impromptu.

COMM166, taught by my primary advisor Jeremy Bailenson, is key to

understanding how behavior design can be applied to virtual people—digital human

representations. COMM 168/169 further enhances the behavior design by bridging

the disciplines between CS and PSYCH: this is another hands-on opportunity to

master designing technology for behavior design. Because Behavior Design is a

relatively new field, Behavior Designers must be able to effectively convey the

importance and their contribution to designing new technology that will improve

human lives. Furthermore, these “Communication” courses give another

perspective to learn about behaviors and design—how we are persuaded, come to

compromises, interact with interfaces, and improvise.

CEE 151: Negotiation 3

COMM 166: Virtual People 5

COMM 168: Experimental Research in Adv. User Interfaces

5

COMM 169: Computers and Interfaces

5

DRAMA 103 Beginning Improv 3

Communication – 21 Units

Total IDM units: 100

IDM Units completed: 22

Conclusion

“We must dare to

dream the seemingly

impossible, if we want

the seemingly

impossible to become

reality.”

– Vaclav Havel,

President of Czech

Republic

“When Dr. Fogg began studying how technology could influence behavior back in 1992,

he faced some resistance to his ideas. But today he's one of the most sought-after

thinkers in Silicon Valley” (CNNMoney). I hope and wish that I can contribute to this

field by spearheading a new Individually Designed Major in Behavior Design &

Innovation.

Behavior Design can be applied to every technology company—any company or mission

that desires to create a behavior change. Whether it is encouraging middle school

students to adopt recycling habits, or designing a product so that millions of high school

teachers can use, these endeavors require designing for behavior change.

When I was applying to Stanford, I included a quote in my essay by Czech Republic

President Vaclav Havel: “We must dare to dream the seemingly impossible, if we want the seemingly impossible to become reality.” Before, I dreamed of the seemingly

impossible to attend Stanford. Now, I dream of helping to pave the unconventional path

of creating next-generation technologies through behavior design. Thank you all for

your time.

David Ngo IDM Proposal 2011 6

Why does Behavior Design belong to

Humanities and Sciences? Why not an IDMEN?

Anticipated Questions

Behavior Design belongs to the Humanities & Sciences department because it attempts to create a unique bridge

between Psychology and Technology Entrepreneurship first rooted in Psychology, and then second in other

engineering perspectives. In other words, Behavior Design is fundamentally grounded in Humanities & Sciences

courses as its primary component, and heavily supplemented with Engineering courses as its secondary component.

Although the Engineering courses are the secondary component in Behavior Design, there are still many courses from

the School of Engineering. This may initially seem to merit Behavior Design as not fit for the school of Humanities

and Sciences; the courses, however, do not make Behavior Design an IDMEN because of three major reasons:

All proposed courses from the Engineering Department do not require any Math or Science

prerequisites. Speaking with Mrs. Darlene Lazar, Students Affairs Administrator, creating Behavior

Design as an IDMEN would not be recommended due to this fact of prerequisites.

All proposed courses from the Engineering Department are” non-technical”. In other words, they do

not require a certain level in Math or Science. Only CS147/247 require technical prerequisites—

CS106A/B (which are already completed). The upper CS courses heavily focus on Human-Computer

Interaction from the “human” perspective (not coding). Although ME101 and ME106A/B/C constitute

a part of the Product Design core, these courses teach “design thinking.” Design thinking is taught

from the School of Engineering, but it is not constrained to only technical or engineering perspectives.

Design thinking can be integrated into H&S disciplines, especially into Behavior Design because it

allows a new, creative way of thinking which further builds a unique bridge between Psychology and

Technology Entrepreneurship.

A historical comparison can drive Behavior Design to its home in Humanities & Sciences: Former

president of Sony, Norio Ohga, is often credited with the creation of the CD. He had a passion for

classical music and wanted to compile all of Beethoven’s 9th Symphony on a single piece of media.

Norio Ohga, however, did not invent the CD technology, nor did he possess the original patents for the

process. The technical grounding of the CD belonged to James Russell, an American who brought the

idea to life in 1965.

But it was not until 1985, that Norio Ohga and Sony started to see the potential in Russell’s CD

technology. Although Norio Ohga did not possess the technical background, he helped revolutionize

the music industry through his love for music. Like Norio’s skill set, Behavior Design does not

necessarily equip me with the technical background, but it does allow me to integrate my love for

Psychology into the world of Technology Entrepreneurship from the home of the Humanities &

Sciences.

David Ngo IDM Proposal 2011 7

CS HCI Psychology Product Design STS

Psych 55 Introduction to Cognition and the Brain

CS 103---Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science

Psych 1 Introduction to Psychology

Can fit Product Design proposed courses

PSYCH 221: Applied Vision and Image Systems

CS 106B---Programming Abstractions

Psych 20-95 Can fit CS proposed courses

Psych 30 Intro. to Perception

CS 121---Introduction to Artificial Intelligence -----

Cannot fit Psychology or Communication proposed courses

Psych 205: Foundations of Cognition ----- ----- -----

http://bit.ly/dX7YAq http://bit.ly/dZ0ssj http://bit.ly/e8Davk In-person Colleen Connors

Anticipated Questions

Why not major in CS HCI, Psychology,

Product Design, STS, or SymSys HCI?

CS HCI Psychology Product Design STS

Psych 55 Introduction to Cognition and the Brain

CS 103---Discrete Mathematics for Computer Science

Psych 1 Introduction to Psychology

Can fit Product Design proposed courses

PSYCH 221: Applied Vision and Image Systems

CS 106B---Programming Abstractions

Psych 20-95 Can fit CS proposed courses

Psych 30 Intro. to Perception

CS 121---Introduction to Artificial Intelligence -----

Cannot fit Psychology or Communication proposed courses

Psych 205: Foundations of Cognition ----- ----- -----

http://bit.ly/dX7YAq http://bit.ly/dZ0ssj http://bit.ly/e8Davk In-person Colleen Connors

Why not major in CS HCI, Psychology,

Product Design, STS, or SymSyms HCI?

Limitations

CS HCI: Psych 30 and Psych 55 are suggested as options to satisfy the CS HCI Science requirements. Psych 55,

however, is also suggested under as a Depth Track Course. Psych 205 is the continuation of Psych 55, which bridges

CS and Psych to a certain extent, but is simply not enough to capture the important of the human perspective in

Human-Computer Interaction.

Psychology: The Cognitive Science Track is the only Psychology track (out of 4) that attempts to bridge connections

between Psychology and Computer Science. Although the Cognitive Science track allows several CS courses to be

part of the Psychology major, the 3 possible CS courses does not satisfy the bridge between CS and Psych that I

desire. CS 103 is discrete Math-- the theory behind Computer science. Although this is important in stretching the

mind and understanding advanced (graduate level) CS courses, it does not directly strengthen the relationship between

Human-Computer Interaction or Behavior Design. CS106B, I must agree is essential to creating more bridges

between CS and Psych because it provides a foundation for programming knowledge. CS 121 introduces artificial

intelligence, and although interesting, it does not contribute to the major which I wish to pursue.

Product Design: Product Design is essential in Behavior Design & Innovation. It teaches us another perspective of

thinking--- design thinking, which is different from perspectives in psychology and computer science. Product Design,

however, only requires two courses in Behavioral Sciences -- Psych 1 and any course from Psych 20 to 95. This does

not provide enough depth in understanding the human perspective enough to design for Behavior or human-computer

interaction.

STS: Individually designed tracks are unable to incorporate the proposed courses in Psychology and Communications.

Symbolic Systems HCI: SymSys HCI is the closest major that provides that flexibility and attempt to have a strong

balance between Human and Computer interaction. The drawback to Symbolic Systems is that it includes substantial

requirements in Philosophy and Linguistics. Again, although these courses are interesting and beneficial to

challenging the mind, it does not satisfy my thirst for substantial bridges between Computer science and Psychology

(Memory, Learning, Motivation, and Cognition).

Limitations

David Ngo IDM Proposal 2011 8

Quotes & Picture Sources

BJ Fogg http://captology.stanford.edu/projects/beha

viordesign.html

D.school http://dschool.stanford.edu/manifesto.html

Lemelson-MIT Program http://web.mit.edu/invent/iow/russell.html

Stanford University http://stanford.edu

Terry Winograd Designing for a new Foundation in Design

Academic Council Advisors

Jeremy Bailenson, Communications

Clifford Nass, Computer Science

Carol Dweck, Psychology

Informal Advisors

BJ Fogg, Persuasive Tech Lab

Junior Year

Fall Quarter 2011-2012

HUMBIO139: Sports

Medicine (GER- NatSci) 4

ME 101: Visual Thinking 3

ME 115A: Introduction to

Human Values in Design

3

DRAMA: 103 Beginning

Improv

3

MS&E 175: Innovation,

Creativity, and Change

4

Winter Quarter 2011-2012

ME 115B: Product Design

Methods

3

Psych 205: Foundations of

Cognition

3

EDUC 196X: The Design of

Technologies for Casual

Learning

3

EDUC 176X: The Design of

Technologies for Casual

Learning - Lab

1

DANCE 138: Liquid Flow:

Dance, Design, and

Engineering

1

AFRICAAM 21: African

American Vernacular

English (GER-AmerCul)

5

Spring Quarter 2011-2012:

Study Abroad

GER Global Comm 5

CS108: Object-Oriented

Systems Design

4

Start Capstone Senior Thesis

Senior Year

Fall Quarter 2012-2013

CS 147: Introduction to

Human-Computer

Interaction Design

4

ENGR 145: Technology

Entrepreneurship

4

CEE 151: Negotiation 3

Phil 50: Introductory Logic

(GER-Math)

4

PSYCH198: Senior Thesis 5

Winter Quarter 2012-2013

CS 247: Human-Computer

Interaction Design Studio

4

ENGR 245: Technology

Entrepreneurship and Lean

Startups

4

COMM 168: Experimental

Research in Advanced User

Interfaces

5

EDUC 364: Cognition and

Learning

3

HUMBIO140: Sex Differences

in Human Physiology &

Disease (GER-Gender)

3

Spring Quarter 2012-2013

COMM 169: Computers

and Interfaces

5

ME 115C: Design and

Business Factors

3

PSYCH 249 Human

Motivation

3

Drama 105V Improv &

Design

2

COMM166: Virtual People 5

Study Plan

NOTE: Completed Courses on Hard

Copy Four-Year Curricular Plan

David Ngo IDM Proposal 2011 9

Anecdotes from

Students,

Faculty, &

Alumni

“This is great. I think if students don’t study something that really love when they are here at Stanford, they

will surely miss out on what Stanford had to offer.”

– Professor Herbert Clark, Psychology

“Your major sounds very interesting.”

– Professor Lera Boroditsky, Psychology

“You’re at the best place to do what you’re doing: Stanford pushes barriers and creates cross-disciplinary

discoveries. Your coursework does just that.”

– Dr. BJ Fogg, Director of Persuasive Tech Lab

“I am happy to get updates on what you are doing. It sounds very interesting.”

– Professor Tina Seelig, Co-Director of STVP

“I do think there is legitimacy in studying Behavior Design. I think your current proposal [including a Senior

Capstone Project] is fine as an IDM.”

– Professor Mehran Sehami, Computer Science

“I finally had some time to read through it. Overall it looks good. It's clear that you have put a lot of thought

into this IDM. Nice job.”

– Stephanie Hsieh, Alumni 94’

“Especially, in the field of my own specialty, in electronic commerce, behavioral design can not only help

companies to improve their electronic business processes but can also make online buying much easier for

customers, who vary vastly with regard to IT behavior. As Hauser et al. (2009) demonstrated in their highly

recognized research (Website Morphing), delicately designed e-commerce systems, where different cognitive

personality types of consumers are detected and taken into account, help consumers to make right decision and,

therefore, lead to better conversion rates. At the moment, when the level of technology is generally high, it is

extremely important to pay attention to behavioral elements in electronic environments.”

– Jerry Lindholm, Visiting Scholar from Finland 2011