The development of effective interventions for COVID-19 vaccination has proven challenging given the unique and evolving determinants of that behavior. A tailored intervention to drive vaccination uptake through machine learning-enabled personalization of behavior change messages unexpectedly yielded a high volume of real-time short message service (SMS) feedback from recipients. A qualitative analysis of those replies contributes to a better understanding of the barriers to COVID-19 vaccination and demographic variations in determinants, supporting design improvements for vaccination interventions. Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine unsolicited replies to a text message intervention for COVID-19 vaccination to understand the types of barriers experienced and any relationships between recipient demographics, intervention content, and reply type. Method: We categorized SMS replies into 22 overall themes. Interrater agreement was very good (all κpooled . 0.62). Chi-square analyses were used to understand demographic variations in reply types and which messaging types were most related to reply types. Results: In total, 10,948 people receiving intervention text messages sent 17,090 replies. Most frequent reply types were “already vaccinated” (31.1%), attempts to unsubscribe (25.4%), and “will not get vaccinated” (12.7%). Within “already vaccinated” and “will not get vaccinated” replies, significant differences were observed in the demographics of those replying against expected base rates, all p . .001. Of those stating they would not vaccinate, 34% of the replies involved mis-/disinformation, suggesting that a determinant of vaccination involves nonvalidated COVID-19 beliefs. Conclusions: Insights from unsolicited replies can enhance our ability to identify appropriate intervention techniques to influence COVID-19 vaccination behaviors.

3:40 - 40 participants gives a 15% margin of error and 95% confidence level (binary metrics)

Big five trait scores for 307,313 people from many different countries.

The first objective was to provide an overview of all activities that were employed during the course of a research project to develop a relapse prevention intervention for interdisciplinary pain treatment programs. The second objective was to examine how co-design may contribute to stakeholder involvement, generation of relevant insights and ideas, and incorporation of stakeholder input into the intervention design.

Believe it or not, analyzing seemingly unrelated data can reveal hidden truths. Take the Pentagon, the nerve center of the U.S. military. While classified briefings and high-level meetings happen behind closed doors, open-source data can offer clues about what might be brewing. Here’s where things get interesting. We can use Google Trends data to track searches for “Pentagon pizza delivery” and nearby “gay bars.” Why pizza and bars? Increased late-night activity might indicate longer work hours for Pentagon staff, potentially signifying preparation for a major event.

Discover ideas that make money

Could this guide us towards a structured approach for assessing the level of community involvement in SBC programmes? At the highest level, “Citizen Control“, communities independently lead programmes with full decision-making authority. “Delegated Power“ and “Partnership“ designate significant community influence on programme decisions, either through majority control or collaborative governance. In contrast, “Placation“, “Consultation“, and “Informing“ indicate lower degrees of participation, where community input may be sought but is not necessarily instrumental in shaping outcomes.

In my research, I focus on three things that ran through people’s minds when they were working toward something. These three things are: inner thinking, thoughts, pondering, reasoning emotional reactions, feelings, moods guiding principles, personal rules

And remember, keeping screeners under 12 questions is the magic number to prevent attrition.

Ogilvy UK head of strategy, advertising, Matt Waksman, illustrates and interprets the role of the strategist within advertising and wider society

Thinking Styles are the archetypes that you would base characters on, like characters in TV episodes. (Try writing your scenarios like TV episodes, with constant characters.) Characters think, react, and made decisions based on their thinking style archetype. BUT they also switch thinking styles depending on context. For example, if you take a flight as a single traveler versus bringing a young child along–you’ll probably change your thinking style for that flight, including getting to the gate, boarding, and deplaning.

100+ open source innovation tools from the greatest design & strategy agencies in the world. ​ Ideal for both offline or online workshops. All tools are pixel perfectly packaged in a vectorized PDF or PNG and can be downloaded for free.

If you’re trying to think and act more creatively and more critically, focus on asking better, more interesting questions of the briefs you’re tasked with answering. What we teach children can and should be applied to our own professional lives, too. A focus on problems and solutions first, promotes consistent, ‘safe’ answers, but won’t move the work on. Spending time on asking and answering better questions will help refine the understanding of a problem and will create the conditions for new, interesting and challenging solutions.

I sometimes make a further suggestion to client teams who have years of experience working directly (via research) with the diversity of the people their organization supports. I suggest they abandon “persona” (a representation of a person) and replace it with “behavioral audience segment” (a representation of a group). (Note: I have begun calling these “thinking styles” to emphasize that a person can change to a different group based on context or experience.)This change allows those qualified teams to get away from names and photos. I don’t suggest this for everyone. Note: “Behavioral audience segment” is the name I use, although there may be a better one. In its defense, Susan Weinschenk uses “behavioral science” to mean what I am trying to represent. And “audience segment” is a common way to express a group an organization is focused on.

But she did explain how researching and designing for the majority or “average user” actually end up ignoring, othering, and harming the people our designs are meant to serve. Indi shared how she finds patterns in people’s behaviors, thoughts, and needs—and how she uses that data to create thinking styles that inform more inclusive design decisions. Indi talked about… Why researchers should look for patterns, not anecdotes, to understand real user needs. What are thinking styles and how to uncover and use them. Why your “average” user often doesn’t exist in the real world, and how we can do better.

Ikea researchers explore Kiwi homes before opening first NZ store Christine Gough, head of interior design at Ikea Australia, is one of 40 Ikea researchers visiting hundreds of Kiwi homes to gauge what products to stock in its Auckland mega store.

“significant” p-value ≠ “significant” finding: The significance of statistical evidence for the true X (i.e., statistical significance of the p-value for the estimate of the true X) says absolutely nothing about the practical/scientific significance of the true X. That is, significance of evidence is not evidence of significance. Increasing your sample size in no way increases the practical/scientific significance of your practical/scientific hypothesis. “significant” p-value = “discernible” finding: The significance of statistical evidence for the true X does tell us how well the estimate can discern the true X. That is, significance of evidence is evidence of discernibility. Increasing your sample size does increase how well your finding can discern your practical/scientific hypothesis.

Opt-in samples are about half as accurate as probability-based panels

If you have ever been tasked with influencing a behaviour, you will know that it is critical to understand that behaviour in context. You need to understand the issues faced by the people affected. At BIT, we refer to the process of understanding behaviour in context as Exploring. Exploring is about discovering what people do and crucially why.

The JTBD Canvas 2.0 is a tool to help you scope out your JTBD landscape prior to conducting field research. It frames your field of inquiry and scopes of your innovation effort. Jobs to be done

The Wheel of Progress® is a framework created by Eckhart Boehme and Peter Rochel leveraging jobs-to-be-done principles and methods to evaluate why customers “hire“ a given product or service to accomplish a Customer Job. Jobs to be done It provides a canvas to be used when conducting consumer research to evaluate the journey a customer takes from first thought to use of the solution (consumption/job satisfaction). In addition, it enables one to evaluate the four forces of progress at play (push, pull, habits, anxieties) in regards to 'switching behavior'. Finally, one is able to evaluate constraints (internal, external, time-based) that impact the customer journey.

This is SenseMaker in its most simple form, usually structured to have an open (non-hypothesis) question (commonly referred to as a ‘prompting question’) to collect a micro-narrative at the start. This is then followed by a range of triads (triangles), dyads (sliders), stones canvases, free text questions and multiple choice questions. The reason or value for using Sensemaker: Open free text questions are used at the beginning as a way of scanning for diversity of narratives and experiences. This is a way to remain open to ‘unknown unknowns’. The narrative is then followed by signifier questions that allow the respondent to add layers of meaning and codification to the narrative (or experience) in order to allow for mixed methods analysis, to map and explore patterns.

This Universal Design Playbook was created with the purpose of providing easy access to planning and facilitating universal design development work, whether it is short workshops or longer work sessions. That comes entirely down to what the user selects using the sorting functions on the page. The Playbook contains a collection of methods that can be used in any design process. Each method contains useful information so the user can be certain that they are selecting the most appropriate method to fulfil their purpose. The methods also include tips for how to accommodate participants with diverse abilities to ensure that everyone feels included in a workshop setting no matter what they are capable of.

This manual provides a quick overview of the steps required to develop an infodemic insights report that can be used during an emergency response or for routine health programming (where so-called low-level infodemics may be more common). The steps are: 1. Choose the question that infodemic management insights could help to answer 2. Identify and select the data sources and develop an analysis plan for each data source 3. Conduct an integrated analysis across those data sources 4. Develop strategies and recommendations 5. Develop an infodemic insights report 6. Disseminate the infodemic insights report and track the actions taken.

Info, research, questionnaires/scales, info on application to specific topics

this study presents a measurement instrument for evaluating susceptibility to seven social influence principles, namely social learning, social comparison, social norms, social facilitation, social cooperation, social competition, and social recognition. Each principle is represented by a construct containing six theory-driven items, both positively and negatively framed. Further, the study introduces a social influence research model that describes how the seven social influence constructs are correlated and impact each other.

This is a map of subcultures within an organization (it's called a fitness landscape). It's built from stories told by the people in the organization. What can you do with it? Understand where the culture(s) are and request changes by saying I want “More stories like these...“ and “Fewer like those...“ Dave Snowden and The Cynefin Company (formerly Cognitive Edge) are offering impactful ways to visualize culture, and communicate direction in a manner that is customized to where each subculture is now and where their next best step is. Watch this video until 48:48 for more on the science and method (Link at 44:33) https://lnkd.in/emuAzp6E Stories collected using The Cynefin Co's Sensemaker tool.