Lowering the cognitive burden of an environment can also change behavior by allowing time for a more reasoned approach.

As behavioral scientists, we have to lean into that multiplicity.

myth that is really just about privilege and stacking the deck with high cards. Adam Grant thoroughly debunked this in Originals and he’s hardly the only one; the focus on risk taking is a product of cognitive bias. Remember what The Streets said—validation is what makes a low straight work—and add in a little boxing wisdom: slow is smooth, smooth

By creating specifically to produce a behavior change, you accept responsibility for the result of that behavior change.

Intervention design is really just the translation of pressures into something we can actually create; if pressures are the levers, interventions are how we pull them, hopefully in the right order and with the right strength.

staying focused on your outcomes and being wary of your love of any specific intervention is one of the most important skills of a behavioral scientist.

intention-action gap and the intention-goal gap.

If: your outcome behavior is not the result of any of the population’s motivations or the benefit of your outcome behavior or an intervention to produce it does not outweigh the cost to an alternative motivation or you are unwilling to publicly describe and take responsibility for the outcome behavior or intervention it is unethical.

you don’t have to do the thought experiment, you just intuitively know how quickly you would mindlessly eat through the close one while the far one went untouched. All pressures exist along a spectrum. Availability isn’t black and white, and by adjusting the strength of the inhibiting pressure that is availability—that is, by putting M&M’s in y