L’effet du cadrage (positif vs négatif) de messages de prévention n’est que très rarement étudié dans le domaine de la sécurité routière alors qu’il est souvent exploré dans le domaine de santé publique. Les messages qu’on y trouve sont souvent textuels, parfois audiovisuels, mais très peu se distinguent par leur mode de présentation (présence ou non d’une image accompagnant un texte). De plus, la plupart du temps, les messages sont relativement longs, nécessitant plusieurs minutes de lecture. L’objectif de ce travail doctoral est d’étudier l’effet du cadrage de messages textuels courts, accompagnés ou non d’une image, en faveur du respect des limitations de vitesse dans le domaine de la prévention routière. Un message est cadré positivement quand les informations qu’il délivre sont formulées en termes de gains, il est cadré négativement quand les informations qui le composent sont formulées en termes de pertes. Les conclusions issues des recherches portant sur l’effet du cadrage sont très contradictoires, certaines suggérant que le cadrage positif est plus efficace, d’autres que le cadrage négatif est plus efficace, et d’autres encore n’observent pas de différence en termes d’efficacité persuasive entre un cadrage positif et un cadrage négatif. Les explications théoriques sont elles aussi très hétérogènes. Pour certains, l’effet du cadrage dépendrait du degré selon lequel les individus se sentent personnellement concernés par le message. Pour d’autres, l’effet du cadrage dépendrait du type de comportement visé. Pour d’autres encore, l’effet du cadrage dépendrait du niveau d’élaboration du message. Enfin pour d’autres, l’effet du cadrage dépendrait tantôt du degré d’implication personnelle, tantôt du degré d’implication par rapport au risque. Nous avons réalisé 5 études (N = 914)visant à présenter des messages de prévention (de 14 à 30 mots) encourageant les gens à respecter les limitations de vitesse. Ces messages ont été présentés dans deux études menées en passation collective dans des salles de cours auprès d’étudiants de première et deuxième année et dans trois études menées dans des conditions plus écologiques, à savoir auprès d’automobilistes assis dans leur véhicule attendant leur tour pour passer le contrôle technique obligatoire. Nos résultats semblent indiquer que, comparé au cadrage positif, le cadrage négatif est plus efficace pour amener les gens à percevoir que le risque d’accident à cause du dépassement de la vitesse est plus élevé, à avoir des attitudes plus favorables à l’égard de la sécurité routière et à avoir davantage l’intention de respecter les limitations de vitesse durant les prochains mois. Ces résultats ont été discutés, tout en soulignant les limites méthodologiques et en apportant de nouvelles perspectives de recherches. / Message framing effects (positive vs. negative) of health appeals have rarely been studied on traffic safety issues whereas it has often been explored in public health issues. The messages these studies contain are often textual, sometimes audiovisual, but very few studies make a distinction between textual messages alone and textual messages accompanied by a picture. Most of the time, textual messages are quite long, sometimes requiring several minutes to be read. The objective of this doctoral work is to test message framing effects of short textual messages both with and without pictures aiming to make people comply with speed limitations. A message is considered positively framed when the information it delivers is formulated in terms of gain. On the contrary, a message is considered negatively framed when the information it contains is formulated in terms of loss. The results of studies aiming to test message framing effects are very contradictory, some suggesting that positively framed messages are more effective, other suggesting that negatively framed ones are more effective, and others are not able to find differences of persuasive effectiveness between positively and negatively framed messages. The theoretical explanations given in these studies are also very heterogeneous. For some, message framing effects depend on personal relevance to the message issue. For others, message framing effects depend on the type of behavior. Others showed that message framing effects depend on participant message elaboration. Finally, for others, message framing effects depend on both personal involvement and risk involvement. We conducted 5 studies (N = 914) where road safety messages (14 to 30 words) were presented to encourage people to respect speed limitations. These messages were presented in two studies conducted in laboratory situations among students and in three field studies among drivers sitting and waiting in their cars at the technical inspection. Our results suggest that negatively framed messages, compared to positively framed ones, are more effective in bringing people to perceive higher the risk of accidents due to high speed, to have more favorable attitudes related to traffic safety and to comply with speed limitations in the coming months. Our results were discussed, as well as the methodological limitations of our work and we finally provided opportunities for future studies.

The present study is concerned with the effects of different levels of "cohesiveness" on the persuasiveness and persuasibility of individuals in a two person verbal interaction situation. In particular, changes is verbal behavior over time are obtained. Now the sex of the participants affects the discussion and outcome is also investigated. The results indicated that favorably predisposed subjects are more persuasible than unfavorably predisposed subjects. Further, male subjects speak more than female subjects and this is reflected in the member of positive, negative and neutral statements they emit. Over-all decreases in the emission of positive statements and over-all increases in the emission of negative statements were found to accompany opinion change. / Thesis / Master of Arts (MA)

This thesis explores the relationship between usability and persuasion in the design of the interface for a smart-phone application. Using a usability study of an I-phone app combined with interviews with users and the designers, the roles of usability and persuasion in the design of the app and their influence on each other as design goals is discussed from both the users’ and designers’ perspectives. The application’s purpose is to support behavior change in users by giving them feedback on their electricity use in order to encourage them to switch their pattern of usage to reduce CO² emissions. This thesis should be of interest to interaction designers faced with the challenge of designing interfaces that are simultaneously both user-friendly and persuasive. While it is generally accepted that usability has a positive effect on the potential of a design to be persuasive little is known about the effects, if any, of persuasion on usability. This thesis proposes that the relationship between these two design principles is more complex than is generally assumed and that in certain situations they may even be traded off against one another.  This trade-off could be useful for designers framing design challenges involving usability and persuasion.

Since the emergence of Recommender Systems (RS), most of the research has focused on improving the capability of a recommender system to predict and provide an accurate recommendation. However, the literature has demonstrated increasing evidence that providing accurate recommendations is not sufficient to increase users’ acceptance of the provided recommendations. Hence, it is vital for a recommender system to focus not only on the accuracy of the provided recommendations but also on other factors that influence the acceptance of recommendations and the extent to which these recommendations are convincing or persuasive. Consequently, there becomes a need for new research paradigms to help improve the capabilities of recommender systems, which goes beyond the recommendation accuracy. One of the recently emerged research directions that consider this need fosters the idea of adopting human-related theories from the social sciences domain, such as persuasiveness of social communication. In this context, however, a challenging, non-trivial, and not fully explored issue that arises is: how to integrate human-related theories into a recommender system to be one of its intrinsic characteristics in order to improve its performance beyond its accuracy? This thesis aims to address the above issue from two angles: first, it investigates improving recommender systems by increasing users’ acceptance of the recommendations. To achieve this, the influence of persuasion principles on users of recommender systems is investigated. Then a reference architecture framework to adapt and integrate persuasion features as a substantial characteristic of recommender systems is proposed. The proposed framework, named Personalized Persuasive RS (PerPer), adopts concepts from the social sciences literature, namely personality traits and persuasion principles. In addition, PerPer adapts machine learning concepts, in particular, the Learning Automata, to support its learning capabilities. Second, the thesis discusses evaluating recommender systems beyond their accuracy. Particularly, it proposes two evaluation approaches that aim to evaluate recommender systems in a comprehensive way that goes beyond evaluating accuracy only. The first evaluation approach is called the Comprehensive Performance evaluation (ComPer). It adopts concepts from the human learning domain and provides a simple, thorough, and setting-independent evaluation approach for recommenders. The essence of ComPer is to consider a recommender system as a human being, and hence the former’s outcomes (i.e., recommendations) can be evaluated and validated in a way similar to how humans’ learning outcomes are evaluated. The second evaluation approach adopts goal-oriented modeling to provide an evaluation that does not only assess recommenders beyond their accuracy but also considers the multi-stakeholders of RSs. We demonstrate, empirically, and by user studies, the feasibility and usefulness of the proposed approaches. The contributions of the thesis are: (1) A characterization of recommender systems as systems supported with human traits and features, which goes beyond the conventional recommender systems known in the literature. (2) A user study that examines the impact of persuasive principles on users of recommender systems. (3) A Personalized Persuasive RS (PerPer) reference architecture framework to enrich recommender systems with persuasion capabilities that are personalized and adaptive for different users. (4) A mapping between human’s cognitive skills and the recommendation process. (5) The Comprehensive Performance evaluation (ComPer) framework to provide a comprehensive assessment of recommender systems considering multiple evaluation dimensions other than accuracy. And (6) a goal-oriented evaluation approach to assess the impact of multiple alternatives for recommendation approaches on the satisfaction of RSs stakeholders’ goals.

No description available.

Den här studien handlar om hur hållbar digital mathandel kan stödjas med hjälp av övertalande design. Hållbar utveckling har blivit ett centralt diskussionsämne de senaste decenniet och mat står för en betydande del av en individs miljöpåverkan. Genom en designstudie har en workshop använts för att undersöka kontexten och dess användare. Tre designprinciper formades med hjälp av empirin från workshopen och den relaterade litteraturen. Dessa principer byggdes in i en prototyp som utvärderades i den tilltänkta kontexten. Studiens resultat är tre designprinciper som är specifika för kontexten hållbar digital mathandel: transparens, representativitet och personifiering.

Background: The process of shared decision making (SDM), a key component of interprofessional (IP) practice, provides an opportunity for the separate and shared knowledge and skills of care providers to synergistically influence the client / patient care provided. The aim of this study was to understand how different professional groups perceive IPSDM, their role as effective participants in the process and how they ensure their voices are heard. Methods: A sequential explanatory mixed methods design was used consisting of a realist review of the literature about IPSDM in intensive care, a survey of the IP team (n=96; RR-81.4%) about collaboration and satisfaction with the decision making process in NICU, semi-structured interviews with a sample of team members (n=22) working in NICU, and observation of team decision making interactions during morning rounds over a two week period. A tertiary care NICU in Canada was the study setting. Findings: The study revealed a number of key findings that are important to our increased understanding of IPSDM. Healthcare professionals’ (HCP) views differ about what constitutes IPSDM. The nature of the decision (triage, chronic condition, values sensitive) is an important influencing factor for IPSDM. Four key roles were identified as essential to the IPSDM process: professional expert, leader, synthesizer and parent. IPSDM involves collaboration, sharing, weighing and building consensus to overcome diversity. HCPs use persuasive knowledge exchange strategies to ensure their voices are heard during IPSDM. Buffering power differentials and increasing agreement about best options lead to well-informed decisions. A model was developed to illustrate the relationships among these concepts. Conclusions: Findings from this study improve understanding of how different members of the team participate in the IPSDM process, and highlight effective strategies to ensure professional voices are heard, understood and considered during deliberations.

Background: The process of shared decision making (SDM), a key component of interprofessional (IP) practice, provides an opportunity for the separate and shared knowledge and skills of care providers to synergistically influence the client / patient care provided. The aim of this study was to understand how different professional groups perceive IPSDM, their role as effective participants in the process and how they ensure their voices are heard. Methods: A sequential explanatory mixed methods design was used consisting of a realist review of the literature about IPSDM in intensive care, a survey of the IP team (n=96; RR-81.4%) about collaboration and satisfaction with the decision making process in NICU, semi-structured interviews with a sample of team members (n=22) working in NICU, and observation of team decision making interactions during morning rounds over a two week period. A tertiary care NICU in Canada was the study setting. Findings: The study revealed a number of key findings that are important to our increased understanding of IPSDM. Healthcare professionals’ (HCP) views differ about what constitutes IPSDM. The nature of the decision (triage, chronic condition, values sensitive) is an important influencing factor for IPSDM. Four key roles were identified as essential to the IPSDM process: professional expert, leader, synthesizer and parent. IPSDM involves collaboration, sharing, weighing and building consensus to overcome diversity. HCPs use persuasive knowledge exchange strategies to ensure their voices are heard during IPSDM. Buffering power differentials and increasing agreement about best options lead to well-informed decisions. A model was developed to illustrate the relationships among these concepts. Conclusions: Findings from this study improve understanding of how different members of the team participate in the IPSDM process, and highlight effective strategies to ensure professional voices are heard, understood and considered during deliberations.

Across two studies I examined how making an intergroup ideology salient affected White Canadians’ openness to persuasive appeals and their support for increased government funding to provide clean running water to First Nations communities. In Study 1, 247 White Canadian participants were exposed to either multicultural or colour-blind ideology or no ideology and read six strong arguments in favor of increased government funding. Participants then rated their support for increased funding. Results revealed that White Canadians exposed to multiculturalism allocated less government funding to the issue than did those in the no-ideology condition. In Study 2, 74 White Canadian participants completed all the same measures except they did not read the strong arguments prior to rating their support. Results revealed that White Canadians exposed to multicultural or colour-blind ideology showed greater support for government funding than did those in the no-ideology condition. Implications are discussed. / October 2015

Background: The process of shared decision making (SDM), a key component of interprofessional (IP) practice, provides an opportunity for the separate and shared knowledge and skills of care providers to synergistically influence the client / patient care provided. The aim of this study was to understand how different professional groups perceive IPSDM, their role as effective participants in the process and how they ensure their voices are heard. Methods: A sequential explanatory mixed methods design was used consisting of a realist review of the literature about IPSDM in intensive care, a survey of the IP team (n=96; RR-81.4%) about collaboration and satisfaction with the decision making process in NICU, semi-structured interviews with a sample of team members (n=22) working in NICU, and observation of team decision making interactions during morning rounds over a two week period. A tertiary care NICU in Canada was the study setting. Findings: The study revealed a number of key findings that are important to our increased understanding of IPSDM. Healthcare professionals’ (HCP) views differ about what constitutes IPSDM. The nature of the decision (triage, chronic condition, values sensitive) is an important influencing factor for IPSDM. Four key roles were identified as essential to the IPSDM process: professional expert, leader, synthesizer and parent. IPSDM involves collaboration, sharing, weighing and building consensus to overcome diversity. HCPs use persuasive knowledge exchange strategies to ensure their voices are heard during IPSDM. Buffering power differentials and increasing agreement about best options lead to well-informed decisions. A model was developed to illustrate the relationships among these concepts. Conclusions: Findings from this study improve understanding of how different members of the team participate in the IPSDM process, and highlight effective strategies to ensure professional voices are heard, understood and considered during deliberations.