To reduce speeding in certain areas, entering village centers, near schools etc. the government planted these things. They tell you how fast you’re driving, and if you’re speeding the display starts flashing or displays “You’re driving too fast!”.
I pass by a few on my way to work and pay no heed to any of them. (I rarely speed anyway)
Except this one.
Because instead of the flashing text message it displays a smiley when you’re okay and a sad face when you’re speeding.
The first time I noticed the thing, I got a sad face.
It really got to me and I’ve been trying to figure out why ever since. Is it because I’m a web person who values the power of an emoticon? Is it because the child-like simplicity reminds me I’m near a school and I really should drive slowly?
Either way in the ol’ Emotion vs. Reason debate you can chalk this one up for Emotion.
But there’s a subtlety to it.
It’s not the classic: communication-> causing an emotion -> that leads to action.
It’s my action (speeding) -> causing an emotion (sad face) -> causing another emotion (guilt, with me) -> causing an action (driving slowly).
So the power of the whole thing is the fact that it’s contextual/interactive.
If it was just a billboard with a sad face and “Don’t speed.” I’d ignore the thing. Here, because I drove too fast, Mr. Smiley Man turned sad and it was all my fault.
I’d be really interesting to see if they combined the contextual/interactive thing with a message based on reason. For instance the amount of the fine you would get for driving the speed you’re driving.
Also contextual/interactive but reason, not emotion.
Either way, it definitely works, as I always drive by there at a snail’s pace.
Because I’d hate to start my working day knowing that I made Mr. Smiley Man sad.
Tags: contextual, interactive, reason vs. emotion, smiley, traffic
Very smart. No doubt, positive influence of street artist Rose Woods: http://weaponofbeauty.wordpress.com/2008/11/15/rose-woods/
It’s a “totally new theory” ; It’s “cognitive dissonance”.
You have the idea of being a good guy, yet you make Mr. Smiley Man sad. These kinds of conflicts don’t fit in people’s little heads.
Consequently me too, I don’t believe in the indirect rational approach (showing speed) because this will only stimulate people to search for excuses instead of feeling guilty (“everybody knows this measurement is not correct/official/…” or “I’m a very good driver, this is for old popes” etc…)
On the other hand, your idea of showing the fine (direct rational approach) could work, i guess. Because this is AND rational: is me arriving earlier worth thàt amount of money? AND emotional: It reminds you of the last time you raged when you had to pay this.
One downside: the fine depends on your personal history? –> personalized messages?
Guillaume, thanks.
Kantman, when writing this I knew either you or Koen would bring up cognitive dissonance. If you buy me a beer I’ll write a post where you can bring up one of the other three expressions they taught you in your consumer psychology class.
Let’s say that i can’t cool me milk with “it’s about identity”.
And honestly, cognitive dissonance is the only one i remember because i failed the exam as i didn’t know this term. I must make up for this during the rest of my life.
[...] bookmarks tagged unbearable Zeppelin Repair » The unbearable lightness of an … saved by 3 others evildigigenius bookmarked on 02/11/09 | [...]
[...] Verschaeren, over at Zeppelin Repair, posts on a particularly engaging piece of soft infrastructure: a digital roadsign that responds to the speed of passing vehicles, delivering an emoticon to [...]
[...] The unbearable lightness of an emoticon 2. Digital advertising tip #1: Strange attractors 3. Swingers networks and IP positioning 4. The [...]
Ogilvy topman Rory Sutherland heeft het hierover in zijn TED lecture:
http://cecinestpasdelart.wordpress.com/2009/12/01/mad-man/
persuasion is better than compulsion zegt hij, daarom werkt zo’n smiley beter dan de verplichting een boete te betalen.