Daniel Kahneman, Nobel prize-winning psychologist and author of the book Thinking Fast and Slow, introduced the world to two distinct ways of thinking inside the human mind. He called them System 1 and System 2.
System 1 is fast, automatic, subconscious, and intuitive. It operates with little to no effort and helps us to make quick decisions based on patterns and experiences. System 2, on the other hand, is slower, deliberative, and conscious, requiring more intentional effort. It helps us to analyze and solve complex problems.
So, when are System 1 and System 2 being used? Think of the following scenario. You are commuting to work, as always, via the subway. You walk to the subway station, exit at the same stop, and walk to your office. Your mind wanders while you engage in these behaviors because they are effortless. You are using System 1. One day, however, the subway line is down. You need to think of alternative routes. Should I take the bus instead? Is it too cold to walk? How much would a rideshare cost? You are now using System 2.
While effective behavioral programming designs for both System 1 and System 2 thinking, we’ll focus on System 1 in this post. System 1 works best for quick decisions and habitual behaviors. Think of waste sorting, water use, or transportation choices. In these cases, it is best to make the most sustainable choice the default. Examples include automatic enrollment in green energy programs, defaulting to double-sided printing in municipal offices, and standard green procurement options. Defaults bypass thoughtful consideration and rely on automatic behavior.
One successful example of a default being used is in retirement savings. In the United States, behavioral economists noticed that when employees were given a raise, few would take action to increase their savings rate. They realized that this lack of action was likely due to an overreliance on System 1 thinking. The default option at the time kept the savings rate the same unless an employee took action to increase it. To address this problem, an intervention was designed that automatically increased an employee’s savings rate whenever they were given a raise. In this way, the automatic increase took advantage of employees’ System 1 thinking to increase savings rates in the United States.
To learn more about System 1 and System 2 thinking, click on the Decision Lab’s website here. To learn more about defaults, click here.
System 1 is fast, automatic, subconscious, and intuitive. It operates with little to no effort and helps us to make quick decisions based on patterns and experiences. System 2, on the other hand, is slower, deliberative, and conscious, requiring more intentional effort. It helps us to analyze and solve complex problems.
So, when are System 1 and System 2 being used? Think of the following scenario. You are commuting to work, as always, via the subway. You walk to the subway station, exit at the same stop, and walk to your office. Your mind wanders while you engage in these behaviors because they are effortless. You are using System 1. One day, however, the subway line is down. You need to think of alternative routes. Should I take the bus instead? Is it too cold to walk? How much would a rideshare cost? You are now using System 2.
While effective behavioral programming designs for both System 1 and System 2 thinking, we’ll focus on System 1 in this post. System 1 works best for quick decisions and habitual behaviors. Think of waste sorting, water use, or transportation choices. In these cases, it is best to make the most sustainable choice the default. Examples include automatic enrollment in green energy programs, defaulting to double-sided printing in municipal offices, and standard green procurement options. Defaults bypass thoughtful consideration and rely on automatic behavior.
One successful example of a default being used is in retirement savings. In the United States, behavioral economists noticed that when employees were given a raise, few would take action to increase their savings rate. They realized that this lack of action was likely due to an overreliance on System 1 thinking. The default option at the time kept the savings rate the same unless an employee took action to increase it. To address this problem, an intervention was designed that automatically increased an employee’s savings rate whenever they were given a raise. In this way, the automatic increase took advantage of employees’ System 1 thinking to increase savings rates in the United States.
To learn more about System 1 and System 2 thinking, click on the Decision Lab’s website here. To learn more about defaults, click here.
