The dual system: system 1 and system 2

the technology. The lens allows the user’s experience to be placed at the center.

By presenting the visibility of the technology’s challenges in relation to the user’s challenges, it also provides a richer framework that is increasingly accommodating discussion of the dynamics in-between. The next step is an examination of the dual system in relation to self-tracking by separately discussing the features of System 1 and System 2 in depth. The distinguished yet related systems are both addressed in relation to the desire to make sense of the personal data.

This section served as an introduction to give a general understanding of the core concepts of behavioral economics. The next section proceeds to look closer at a central concept that is applied in this research setting, namely the dual system.

System 2, as well as on the impressions and tendencies generated by System 1” (p.

1467). This means that the System 1 is mainly a reactive unit, and therefore deals with a quicker perception, whereas System 2 is slower and processes the impressions before making a decision on how to respond to the initial reaction.

System 1 System 2 Unconscious Conscious Automatic Controlled Implicit Explicit Effortless Effortful Associative Rule-governed

Low effort High effort Emotional Neutral

Table 2. Characteristics of System 1 and System 2 (Kahneman, 2003a)

System 1 is basic, evolutionary, automatic and operated by emotions. It operates largely on impressions and is thus often fast, automatic, effortless and associative.

As it reacts intuitively, System 1 operates in the background that leads it to make quick decisions with ease. System 1 is “a doer, not a planner” (Sunstein, 2012).

On the other hand, System 2 is slow, controlled, effortful, neutral and more flexible than System 1, which often relies on instant associations that are available to it, also known as the availability heuristic (Tversky and Kahneman, 1974;

Kahneman 2003b). System 2 is intentional, controlled and often more effortful, which makes it disruptive to intuition as it attempts to make judgments based on complex thought processes. However, regardless of the more effortful process of the cognitive System 2, the intuitive and emotional nature of System 1 maybe what determines the final decision made. The characteristics of the two systems are relevant to discuss in relation to self-tracking, for they bring a stronger understanding of different reactions users might have when exposed to data. For example, System 1 is linked to the immediate reactions to the initial experience of a tracked event, or to the reactions after exposure to personal data. On the other

hand, it is possible to examine whether and when System 2 is activated in relation to experience and exposure to personal data.

To further study the dual systems, heuristics and cognitive bias are necessary concepts to present. Both heuristics and cognitive bias are related primarily to the intuitive thinking of System 1. A heuristic is a mental shortcut adopted by individuals confronted by the event of a decision, and it is an important component in discussing behavioral economics. It is a shortcut that helps individuals to quickly make sense of the complex environment. Heuristics derive from the field of psychology, although much of the relevant work was developed by Tversky and Kahneman (1974). Heuristics proposes that decisions are made based on mental shortcuts, because “people are not accustomed to thinking hard, and are often content to trust a plausible judgment that quickly comes to mind”

(Kahneman, 2003b, p.1450). Instead, an individual trusts the “heuristic principles which reduce the complex tasks of assessing probabilities and predicting values to simpler judgmental operations” (Tversky and Kahneman, 1974, p.1124) which may lead to severe and systematic errors (Kahneman & Tversky, 1972, 1973;

Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). Heuristics may thus sometimes lead to an incorrect judgment, and thus a cognitive bias which is then considered to be a systematic error in thinking (Ariely & Norton, 2008).

In the context of this research, the individual is exposed to the personal data in a quantified form, which may stimulate the cognitive processes related to the dual system. Numbers and dealing with numbers, sometimes called computational thinking, is commonly related to cognitive thought processes that require more effort and control, such as those in System 2 (Kahneman, 2003b). This is relevant and interesting to this research project since the self-tracking user is both collecting and exposed to personal data through mobile interfaces. The exposure to personal data is meant to invoke awareness, reflection and action (I. Li et al., 2010). Commonly, the self-tracking system design attempts to analyze the data to the user so that minimal computational effort is needed. The individual effort is required as soon as the data is to be reinterpreted by the user, even though some level of interpretation has already occurred through the IT artifact’s system. At the moment of such exposure, the fast-paced and spontaneous System 1 might circumvent complex computation and the individual could make a fast decision, or in System 2 the individual might engage in a longer and more controlled thought

process that evaluates the visualized data. For instance, the individual might associate a personal result in the tool interface with a previous result and react accordingly. More specifically, the individual reviews the step-activity-data at midday and sees that less than 1/3 of the daily goal has been recorded. Based on System 1, the individual might react that this is the customary result and then proceed as usual, whereas based on System 2, the individual might insist on considering the pros and cons of this result, and conclude that an extra walk should be included in the lunch routine. Regardless of the outcome of such a scenario, this research project adopts this approach as a departure point for the upcoming discussion using empirical data.

The application of the dual system in an experiential computing context is valuable to consider because the personal data might be regarded as a simplification but also as a cognitive overload, according to the challenges that were identified in the previous chapter. Therefore, there is an indication the dual system can enhance understanding of how different cognitive processes may be at play when evaluating personal data. This is the departure point for the rest of the chapter, which discusses the possibilities and challenges of the dual system when positioned in front of personal data.

The next section proceeds to discuss the controlled and deliberate System 2 in relation to self-tracking activities, followed by the intuitive and effortless System 1.