sunscreen project final presentation

8

Click here to load reader

Upload: ekinariwala

Post on 05-Jul-2015

576 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Sunscreen Project Final Presentation

habits.stanford.edu

An E-mail Based Intervention for Daily Sunscreen Application on MBA Students

Page 2: Sunscreen Project Final Presentation

Goal: Persuade 5 MBA Students to Apply Sunscreen Daily

Method: Daily E-mail Reminder and E-mail Response

Persuasive Elements:-Attach Daily E-mail to Existing Routine (morning hygiene routine)-Humorous Daily E-mail creates reason to open e-mail (staves off reminder attrition)

outline

Page 3: Sunscreen Project Final Presentation

participants

Eight first year MBA students at the Stanford Graduate School of Business

2 Women and 6 Men

All have sunscreen or moisturizer

Frequent (and obsessive) e-mail users

All own smartphones (mostly iPhones)

Busy and erratic schedules; Outdoor daily

[insert student photos here]

Page 4: Sunscreen Project Final Presentation

trigger

daily e-mail at ~7am with short description of the weather and a humorous image

Page 5: Sunscreen Project Final Presentation

responsestudents read e-mail in morning during morning routine; responded via smartphone or desktop indicating application at various points during the day. Students enjoyed the humorous images

Page 6: Sunscreen Project Final Presentation

results

6

4

5

6

5

4 4

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Friday Saturday Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday

Daily Total Responding

eight total participants received daily e-mails

Page 7: Sunscreen Project Final Presentation

results

7 7

5

0

7

1

5

2

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Chase Peter Sarah Aaron Tee Javier Mullins Mooney

Individual Responses

eight total participants received daily e-mails

Page 8: Sunscreen Project Final Presentation

summary

Overall five of eight students showed high response rates (86% average)

Women were more responsive than men (100% response rate among women, 73% for men)

Frequent e-mail users and typically quick responders had better response rates