In 2018, the then editor of Impact invited The Behavioural Architects to write a regular column on the latest thinking in behavioural science for market researchers. Since then, we have published more than 24 articles examining how new findings in behavioural science can help researchers better understand consumers and create more effective research methodologies and practices.

We have explored a breadth of behavioural science concepts, many of them new or evolving, ranging from sludge and shifting baseline syndrome to social tipping points and the intention-action gap. We’ve also looked at the power of combining behavioural science with adjacent fields, such as data science and social network analysis.

In our final Impact article, we celebrate six years of behavioural science insights. If it weren’t for these advancements in behavioural understanding, what wouldn’t we know? What wouldn’t we be doing? What impact has this new knowledge had in our sector?

1 ) Two articles looked at how behavioural insights can better inform perceptions of age, and how age can affect our decision-making.

Our very first article, ‘The socially driven teenage brain’, published in October 2018, explored how young adult brains often continue to develop and mature until at least our mid-20s. Up until this time, young adults may be more impulsive and take more risks, particularly if driven by social rewards from their peers.

These findings have led to changes in the law. For example, in 2022 Scotland amended its sentencing guidelines based on a review of evidence; in cases where defendants are under 25, judges must “have regard to the intellectual and emotional maturity of the young person at the time the offence was committed”. Many other countries already consider the ages of 18 to 25 a grey area, and only recognise someone as an adult when they reach 21 (Germany) or 25 (Switzerland).

For researchers, these findings mean it is especially important to consider the context in which teenagers may be deciding: are they alone or among peers; how is information framed; does it highlight any social rewards or risks? Interventions that leverage adolescent impulsiveness in search of a reward, or that use peer influence – particularly of popular, high-status peers – have been found to be more effective.

In ‘The age effect on making decisions’, published in July 2020, we looked at how younger people tend to rely more on their analytical and reasoning skills – known as fluid intelligence – to make decisions. As people age, they tend to make decisions by drawing on their knowledge and experience – known as crystallised intelligence. As we approach our 70s, it is more likely we will see a noticeable cognitive decline.

The older we get, the more likely it is that we’ll have a positive outlook and be drawn to positive information, which rather goes against the ‘cantankerous old people’ stereotype. Younger people, however, tend to be drawn more to negative information. Surveys have found that younger people appear to be more anxious about climate change. A 2021 Ipsos Global Advisor survey found that 20% of young people believe it is too late to fix climate change, compared with only 12% of over-50s, but these attitudes are understandable given the findings above.

These insights have implications for how we communicate with different age groups. If older people struggle with complex decision-making, we need to make provisions for that, trying to find ways to facilitate decision-making, or perhaps designing the process so that tried and tested experience and learned rules of thumb can play a part. Similarly, if we want to get the attention of older people, presenting them with positive information and positive stimuli could be more effective. Conversely, to get the attention of young adults, we might do better with negative stimuli.

2 ) Sometimes in research, what matters is what you don’t do, rather than what you do do.

In our January 2020 article ‘The limit of reading facial movements’, we voiced our doubts about increasingly popular facial-coding technologies. Robust behavioural science found flaws – namely that facial expressions and movements that might express emotion are not uniform. For example, a scowl might not necessarily mean someone is angry, and a neutral expression may mask angry feelings.

Even more significantly, focusing only on the face might mean we miss other non-verbal signals. Alan Cowen, at University of California, Berkeley, found that emotion might be more easily communicated via tone, body language and touch.

In 2022, the Information Commissioner’s Office advised against the use of emotion artificial intelligence (AI) and facial coding, saying:

“Developments in the biometrics and emotion AI market are immature. They may not work yet, or indeed ever.” Similarly, NielsenIQ stated that:

“Following our recent completion of a multi-year, multi-country evaluation of facial coding, we have concluded that the methodology shows little correlation with what people feel, and even less correlation with what they do.”

3 ) We also recognised that with great knowledge comes great power.

In our increasingly online world, sludge or deceptive design has become more common – an issue we have discussed in our articles. Sludge can intentionally use deceptive or manipulative techniques to prevent us from doing something that’s in our interest, or pressure and persuade us to do something that isn’t. It can also be unintentional; caused by poor design or legacy technology.

However, researchers, regulators, consumers and consumer bodies have all been working to call out sludge. It is now a defined and recognised concept with a growing, weighty body of research to back it up.

Many regulators and governments are also tackling it. The New South Wales government in Australia has developed a sludge audit to stamp out sludge in government policy and it has partnered with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Behavioural Insights Team to run International Sludge Academies for governments interested in running similar audits.

In many ways, the recognition of sludge has also informed the Financial Conduct Authority’s new consumer duty in the UK; financial providers must ensure consumers face little to no friction in achieving outcomes in their best interest. Behavioural scientists including Professor Leonhard Lades and Dr Stuart Mills have explored the detrimental impact of sludge on adopting environmental behaviours. In the Republic of Ireland, for example, the high administrative burden to apply for and install free solar panels on school roofs means almost no schools apply, and Lades is investigating how that burden can be reduced to increase uptake.

Finally, our April 2023 article ‘The adult years of behavioural science’ discussed how behavioural science has come through the ‘teenage years’. It has withstood big shocks and developments to enter the calmer waters of adulthood. Our article ‘The Devil is in the detail’, published in April 2019, looked at how the replication crisis was less a crisis and more of a learning point, and how it has been a chance to improve research practice.

While many weird and wonderful concepts in psychology (and other fields) could not be replicated, many frequently used concepts from behavioural science – such as anchoring, loss framing and sunk-cost fallacy – did replicate.

We have loved sharing these insights with you over the years. The world of behavioural science will continue to build a deeper understanding of human behaviour and decision-making every day.

Crawford Hollingworth is co-founder at The Behavioural Architects

This article was first published in the July issue of Impact