In this paper we theoretically reflect upon persuasive technology usage under the light of technology appropriation. The intended usage of technology often fails, meaning that the designers’ intended use is not always translated into user behavior. This is also true for persuasive technology, since technology will always be used within a context involving users’ own intentions that may not always be anticipated by designers. This clashes with Fogg’s framing of captology, which explicitly focuses on endogenous intent, i.e., a persuasive intent that is designed into a technology. With this paper we open up an initial theoretical discourse around these two concepts, highlighting how the design of persuasive technologies can be informed by existing knowledge around technology appropriation. This is done by reflecting upon three identified ‘action points’: (1) learning from appropriation, (2) designing for appropriation, and (3) designing for personal differences and ambiguity of interaction.
CITATION STYLE
Krischkowsky, A., Maurer, B., & Tscheligi, M. (2016). Captology and technology appropriation: Unintended use as a source for designing persuasive technologies. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol. 9638, pp. 78–83). Springer Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31510-2_7
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.