Behavioral Resources & Case Studies

Here is a list of the resources (1) and case studies (2) posted on this website. Please expand the relevant sections to see all the content.

1. RESOURCES

The resources below are organized according to the 3 Lenses of Analysis that forms my ICAR Behavior Analysis Framework: Incentives, Choice Architecture and Repetition, with general Behavioral Interventions best practices listed first.

For each Lens of Analysis, you will find:

• Best Practices: these will help you in planning and completing the analysis.
• Behavioral Tools: these are the practical tools you can make use of to shape behaviors.
• Behavioral Tendencies: these are the human tendencies at play for each Lens. They are the theoretical reasons behind the Behavioral Tools. Read them to dig a bit deeper on a particular Tendency.

Please click on each title (Best practices, Tools or Tendencies) to expand the section and see the related resources. Tools are further organized within each Lens according to the dimensions listed in the ICAR Framework.

Lens 1: Incentives

Incentives analysis is the first phase of the ICAR Framework and the layer that carries the most weight in shaping behaviors. It can be tricky distinguishing finely what is a Tendency and what is a Tool for this layer. For example, people tend to act according to the modulations (positive or negative) they expect to get in terms of self-esteem from a specific behavior. This is a Tendency. This is also a Tool however, in that it can be used directly in a intervention. So note that some Tendencies are also applicable Tools for this layer.

Lens 2: Choice Architecture

The second phase of analysis is Choice Architecture.

Lens 3: Repeated Behavior

An optional layer of analysis, if relevant, when the goal is to create repeated behaviors over time.

2. CASE STUDIES

Below are most of the case studies posted on this website, sorted by Domains of application, and then by type. RCT stands for Randomized Controlled Trials and I am also distinguishing between repeated or isolated academic studies, because many isolated study results have proven wrong or at least exaggerated.