by Adam Alter
On one level, Cow Clicker is harmless fun. But Bogost makes an important point when he says that not everything should be a game. Take the case of a young child who prefers not to eat. One option is to turn eating into a game—to fly the food into his mouth like an airplane. That makes sense right now, maybe, but in the long run the child sees eating as a game. It takes on the properties of games: it must be fun and engaging and interesting, or else it isn’t worth doing. Instead of developing the motivation to eat because food is sustaining and nourishing, he learns that eating is a game.
In truth, it probably doesn’t matter much whether the child thinks of eating as a game or not. He’ll learn the purpose of eating soon enough. But just as he replaced eating’s true motive with fun, so gamification trivializes other experiences. The piano stairs at Odenplan are a lot of fun, but they don’t actually promote healthy behavior in the long run. Instead, they might undermine it by suggesting that working out should be fun, primarily, rather than designed to instill health and well-being. Cute gamified interventions like the piano stairs are charming, but they’re unlikely to change how people approach exercise tomorrow, next week, or next year.
In fact, the fun in gamification may crowd out important motives by changing how people see the experience entirely. In the late 1990s, economists Uri Gneezy and Aldo Rustichini tried to discourage parents from showing up late to collect their children from ten Israeli day care centers. The rational economic approach is to punish people when they’re doing the wrong thing, so some of the day care centers began fining parents who showed up late. At the end of each month, their day care bills reflected these fines—an attempt to dissuade them from showing up late the following month. In fact, the fines had the opposite effect. Parents at the day care centers with fines showed up late more often than did parents at the day care centers without fines. The problem, Gneezy and Rustichini explained, was that the fines crowded out the motive to do the right thing. Parents felt bad coming late—until coming late became a matter of money. Then, instead of feeling bad, they saw coming late as an economic decision. The intrinsic motive to do good—to show up on time—was crowded out by the extrinsic motive to show up late in exchange for a fair price. The same is true of gamification: people think about the experience differently as soon as it adopts the hallmarks of fun. Now exercising isn’t about being healthy; it’s about having fun. And as soon as the fun ends, so will the exercise.
—
Gamification is a powerful tool, and like all powerful tools it brings mixed blessings. On the one hand, it infuses mundane or unpleasant experiences with a measure of joy. It gives medical patients respite from pain, schoolkids relief from boredom, and gamers an excuse to donate to the needy. By merely raising the number of good outcomes in the world, gamification has value. It’s a worthwhile alternative to traditional medical care, education, and charitable giving because, in many respects, those approaches are tone-deaf to the drivers of human motivation. But Ian Bogost was also wise to illuminate the dangers of gamification. Games like FarmVille and Kim Kardashian’s Hollywood are designed to exploit human motivation for financial gain. They pit the wielder of gamification in opposition to the gamer, who becomes ensnared in the game’s irresistible net. But, as I mentioned early in this book, tech is not inherently good or bad. The same is true of gamification. Stripped of its faddish popularity and buzzwordy name, the heart of gamification is just an effective way to design experiences. Games just happen to do an excellent job of relieving pain, replacing boredom with joy, and merging fun with generosity.
Epilogue
Half of the developed world is addicted to something, and for most people that something is a behavior. We’re hooked on our phones and email and video games and TV and work and shopping and exercise and a long list of other experiences that exist on the back of rapid technological growth and sophisticated product design. Few of those experiences existed in the year 2000, and by the year 2030 we’ll be grappling with a new list that barely overlaps with the current roster. What we do know is that the number of immersive and addictive experiences is rising at an accelerating rate, so we need to understand how, why, and when people first develop and then escape behavioral addictions. On the lofty end of the spectrum, our health, happiness, and well-being depend on it—and right here, down to earth, so does our ability to look one another in the eyes to form genuine emotional connections.
—
When adults look back on the past, they tend to feel that much has changed. Things move faster than they used to; we used to talk more; times were simpler once; and so on. Despite the sense that things have changed in the past, we also tend to believe that they’ll stop changing—that we and the lives we lead right now will remain this way forever. This is known as the end of history illusion, and it happens in part because it’s much easier to see the real changes between ten years ago and today than it is to imagine how different things will be ten years in the future. The illusion is comforting, in a way, because it makes us feel that we’ve finished becoming who we are, and that life will remain as it is forever. At the same time, it prevents us from preparing for the changes that are yet to come.
This is certainly true of behavioral addiction, which seems to have reached a peak. A decade ago, who could have imagined that Facebook would attract 1.5 billion users, many of whom say they wished they spent less time on the site? Or that millions of Instagram users would spend hours uploading and liking the sixty million new photos the app hosts every day? Or that more than twenty million people would count and monitor their every step with a small wrist-bound device?
These are remarkable statistics, but they represent an early waypoint on a long climb. Behavioral addiction is still in its infancy, and there’s a good chance we’re still at base camp, far below the peak. Truly immersive experiences, like virtual reality devices, have not yet gone mainstream. In ten years, when all of us own a pair of virtual reality goggles, what’s to keep us tethered to the real world? If human relationships suffer in the face of smartphones and tablets, how are they going to withstand the tide of immersive virtual reality experiences? Facebook is barely a decade old, and Instagram is half that; in ten years, a host of new platforms will make Facebook and Instagram seem like ancient curiosities. They may still attract a large user base—it pays to launch early—but perhaps they’ll be gen-one relics that have a fraction of the immersive power of the latest generation of alternatives. Of course we don’t know exactly how the world will look in ten years, but, looking back on the past decade, there’s no reason to believe that history has ended today, and that behavioral addiction has peaked with Facebook, Instagram, Fitbit, and World of Warcraft.
So what’s the solution? We can’t abandon technology, nor should we. Some technological advances fuel behavioral addiction, but they are also miraculous and life enriching. And with careful engineering they don’t need to be addictive. It’s possible to create a product or experience that is indispensable but not addictive. Workplaces, for example, can shut down at six—and with them work email accounts can be disabled between midnight and five the next morning. Games, like books with chapters, can be built with natural stopping points. Social media platforms can “demetricate,” removing the numerical feedback that makes them vehicles for damaging social comparison and chronic goal-setting. Children can be introduced to screens slowly and with supervision, rather than all at once. Our attitude to addictive experiences is largely cultural, and if our culture makes space for work-free, game-free, screen-free downtime, we and our children will find it easier to resist the lure of behavioral addiction. In its place, we’ll communicate with one another directly, rather than through devices, and the glow of these social bonds will leave us richer and happier than the glow of screens ever could.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
A huge thank you to the teams at Penguin Press, Inkwell Management, and Broadside PR. At Penguin Press, in particular, to my wise and patient editor, A
nn Godoff, who made Irresistible far stronger and tighter than I could have managed alone. Also at Penguin Press, thanks to Will Heyward, Juliana Kiyan, Sara Hutson, Matt Boyd, Caitlin O’Shaughnessy, and Casey Rasch. At Inkwell, special thanks to my kind, insightful agent, Richard Pine, who is everything an agent should be: an ideas man, a psychologist, a publicity guru, and a friend. Also at Inkwell, thanks to Eliza Rothstein and Alexis Hurley. And at Broadside, thanks to Whitney Peeling and the entire Broadside team.
For reading earlier drafts of Irresistible, sharing their ideas, and patiently answering my questions, thanks to Nicole Airey, Dean Alter, Jenny Alter, Ian Alter, Sara Alter, Chloe Angyal, Gary Aston Jones, Nicole Avena, Jessica Barson, Kent Berridge, Michael Brough, Oliver Burkeman, Hilarie Cash, Ben Caunt, Rameet Chawla, John Disterhoft, Andy Doan, Natasha Dow Schüll, David Epstein, Bennett Foddy, Allen Frances, Claire Gillan, Malcolm Gladwell, David Goldhill, Adam Grant, Melanie Green, Mark Griffiths, Hal Hershfield, Jason Hirschel, Kevin Holesh, Margot Lacey, Frank Lantz, Andrew Lawrence, Tom Meyvis, Stanton Peele, Jeff Peretz, Ryan Petrie, Sam Polk, Cosette Rae, Aryeh Routtenberg, Adam Saltsman, Katherine Schreiber, Maneesh Sethi, Eesha Sharma, Leslie Sim, Anni Sternisko, Abby Sussman, Maia Szalavitz, Isaac Vaisberg, Carrie Wilkens, Bob Wurtz, and Kimberly Young.
In late 2014, I described the premise of Irresistible to the students who took my marketing class at New York University’s Stern School of Business. Thanks to those who helped me by sending anecdotes and examples of addictive tech, particularly Griffin Carlborg, Caterina Cestarelli, Gizem Ceylan, Arianna Chang, Jane Chyun, Sanhita Dutta Gupta, Elina Hur, Allega Ingerson, Nishant Jain, Chakshu Madhok, Danielle Nir, Michelle See, Yash Seksaria, Yu Sheng, Jenna Steckel, Sonya Shah, Lindsay Stecklein, Anne-Sophie Svoboda, Madhumitha Venkataraman, and Amy Zhu.
And thanks, always, to my wife, Sara; my son, Sam; my parents, Ian and Jenny; Suzy and Mike; and my brother Dean.
NOTES
PROLOGUE: NEVER GET HIGH OR YOUR OWN SUPPLY
At an Apple event: John D. Sutter and Doug Gross, “Apple Unveils the ‘Magical’ iPad,” CNN, January 28, 2010, www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/01/27/apple.tablet/. Video of the event: EverySteveJobsVideo, “Steve Jobs Introduces Original iPad—Apple Special Event,” December 30, 2013, www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KN-5zmvjAo.
In late 2010, Jobs: This section of views from tech experts comes from: Nick Bilton, “Steve Jobs Was a Low-Tech Parent,” New York Times, September 11, 2014, www.nytimes.com/2014/09/11/fashion/steve-jobs-apple-was-a-low-tech-parent.html.
Many experts both: These snippets come from interviews with, among others, game designers Bennett Foddy and Frank Lantz, exercise addiction experts Leslie Sim and Katherine Schreiber, and reSTART Internet addiction clinic founder Cosette Rae.
Greg Hochmuth, one: These quotes are from: Natasha Singer, “Can’t Put Down Your Device? That’s by Design,” New York Times, December 5, 2015, www.nytimes.com/2015/12/06/technology/personaltech/cant-put-down-your-device-thats-by-design.html.
Tech offers convenience: For more on how technology-aided speed drives behavioral addiction, see: Art Markman, “How to Disrupt Your Brain’s Distraction Habit,” Inc.com, May 25, 2016, www.inc.com/art-markman/the-real-reason-technology-destroys-your-attention-span-is-timing.html.
These new addictions: For the purposes of this book, I adopted my own definitions of behavioral addiction, compulsion, and obsession, which borrowed from several sources. In particular, I relied on the following handbook, an accessible scholarly work on behavioral addiction that gathers chapters from dozens of experts: Kenneth Paul Rosenberg and Laura Curtiss Feder, eds., Behavioral Addictions: Criteria, Evidence, and Treatment (Elsevier Academic Press: London, 2014). I also relied on: Aviel Goodman, “Addiction: Definitions and Implications,” British Journal of Addiction no. 85 (1990): 1403-8. To some extent, I adopted the definitions in: American Psychiatric Association, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th ed. (American Psychiatric Publishing: Washington, DC, 2013).
I spoke to several: These clinical psychologists agreed to speak on condition that I refrained from using their names. They were concerned their patients might recognize the anecdotes they relayed anonymously.
Writing for Time: John Patrick Pullen, “I Finally Tried Virtual Reality and It Brought Me to Tears,” Time, January 8, 2016, www.time.com/4172998/virtual-reality-oculus-rift-htc-vive-ces/.
CHAPTER 1: THE RISE OF BEHAVIORAL ADDICTION
On the Moment: The Moment website: inthemoment.io/; Holesh’s blog: inthemoment.io/blog. Other pieces on Holesh and his app include: Conor Dougherty, “Addicted to Your Phone? There’s Help for That,” New York Times, July 11, 2015, www.nytimes.com/2015/07/12/sunday-review/addicted-to-your-phone-theres-help-for-that.html; Seth Fiegerman, “‘You’ve Been on Your Phone for 160 Minutes Today,’” Mashable, August 14, 2014, mashable.com/2014/08/19/mobile-addiction/; Sarah Perez, “A New App Called Moment Shows You How Addicted You Are to Your iPhone,” TechCrunch, June 27, 2014, techcrunch.com/2014/06/27/a-new-app-called-moment-shows-you-how-addicted-you-are-to-your-iphone/; Jiaxi Lu, “This App Tells You How Much Time You Are Spending, or Wasting, on Your Smartphone,” Washington Post, August 21, 2014, www.washingtonpost.com/news/technology/wp/2014/08/21/this-app-tells-you-how-much-time-you-are-spending-or-wasting-on-your-smartphone/.
This sort of overuse: Research on the topic includes: ALS. King and others, “Nomophobia: Dependency on Virtual Environments or Social Phobia?,” Computers in Human Behaviors 29, no. 1 (January 2013): 140–44; A. L. S. King, A. M. Valença, and A. E. Nardi, “Nomophobia: The Mobile Phone in Panic Disorder with Agoraphobia: Reducing Phobias or Worsening of Dependence?,” Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology 23, no. 1 (2010): 52–54; James A. Roberts, Luc Honore Petnji Yaya, and Chris Manolis, “The Invisible Addiction: Cell-Phone Activities and Addiction Among Male and Female College Students,” Journal of Behavioral Addictions 3, no. 4 (December 2014): 254–65; Andrew Lepp, Jacob E. Barkley, and Aryn C. Karpinski, “The Relationship between Cell Phone Use, Academic Performance, Anxiety, and Satisfaction with Life in College Students,” Computers in Human Behavior 31 (February 2014) 343–50; Shari P. Walsh, Katherine M. White, Ross McD. Young, “Needing to Connect: The Effect of Self and Others on Young People’s Involvement with Their Mobile Phones,” Australian Journal of Psychology 62, no. 4 (2010): 194–203.
damaging. In 2013: Andrew K. Przybylski and Netta Weinstein, “Can You Connect with Me Now? How the Presence of Mobile Communication Technology Influences Face-to-Face Conversation Quality,” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 30, no. 3 (May 2013): 237–46.
WoW may be: Colin Lecher, “GameSci: What Is (Scientifically!) the Most Addictive Game Ever?,” Popular Science, March 27, 2013, www.popsci.com/gadgets/article/2013-03/gamesci-what-scientifically-most-addictive-game-ever; WoWaholics Anonymous discussion board, www.reddit.com/r/nowow/; WoW Addiction Test, www.helloquizzy.com/tests/the-new-and-improved-world-of-warcraft-addiction-test.
the game has: Ana Douglas, “Here Are the 10 Highest Grossing Video Games Ever,” Business Insider, June 13, 2012, www.businessinsider.com/here-are-the-top-10-highest-grossing-video-games-of-all-time-2012-6; Samit Sarkar, “Blizzard Reaches 100M Lifetime World of Warcraft Accounts,” Polygon, January 28, 2014, www.polygon.com/2014/1/28/5354856/world-of-warcraft-100m-accounts-lifetime.
up to 40 percent—develop: Jeremy Reimer, “Doctor Claims 40 Percent of World of Warcraft Players Are Addicted,” Ars Technica, August 9, 2006, arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2006/08/7459/.
The center, named: Information on reSTART: www.netaddictionrecovery.com/.
The first “behavioral: Jerome Kagan, “The Distribution of Attention in Infancy,” in Perception and Its Disorders, eds. D. A. Hamburg, K. H. Pribram, and A. J. Stunkard, (Williams and Wilkins Company: Baltimore, MD, 1970), 214–37.
Behavioral addiction also: R. J. Vallerand and others, “Les passions de l’ame: On Obsessive and Harmonious Passio
n,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 83 (2003): 756–67.
Still, it’s important: For more on Allen Frances’ views, see: Allen Frances, “Do We All Have Behavioral Addictions?,” Huffington Post, March 28, 2012, www.huffingtonpost.com/allen-frances/behavioral-addiction_b_1215967.html.
Just how common: Steve Sussman, Nadra Lisha, and Mark D. Griffiths, “Prevalence of the Addictions: A Problem of the Majority or the Minority?,” Evaluation and the Health Professions 34 (2011): 3–56.
One recent study suggested that up: These statistics come from: Susan M. Snyder, Wen Li, Jennifer E. O’Brien, and Matthew O. Howard, “The Effect of U.S. University Students’ Problematic Internet Use on Family Relationships: A Mixed-methods Investigation,” Plos One, December 11, 2015, journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0144005.
This is a sample: You can find the complete IAT here: netaddiction.com/Internet-addiction-test/.
46 percent of: All statistics here contained in Rosenberg and Feder, Behavioral Addictions. See also: Aaron Smith, “U.S. Smartphone Use in 2015,” PewResearchCenter, April 1, 2015, www.pewInternet.org/2015/04/01/us-smartphone-use-in-2015/; Ericsson Consumer Lab, “TV and Media 2015: The Empowered TV and Media Consumer’s Influence,” September 2015.
and 80 percent: Kelly Wallace, “Half of Teens Think They’re Addicted to their Smartphones,” CNN, May 3, 2016, www.cnn.com/2016/05/03/health/teens-cell-phone-addiction-parents/index.html.
In 2008, adults: Kleiner Perkins Caulfield & Byers, “Internet Trends Report 2016,” SlideShare, May 26, 2015, www.slideshare.net/kleinerperkins/internet-trends-v1/14-14Internet_Usage_Engagement_Growth_Solid11.
In 2000, Microsoft: Microsoft Canada, Consumer Insights, Attention Spans, Spring 2015, advertising.microsoft.com/en/WWDocs/User/display/cl/researchreport/31966/en/microsoft-attention-spans-research-report.pdf. Microsoft couldn’t conclude with certainty that social media compromised attention. It was possible, for example, that the kinds of people who use social media are less attentive in general. But in concert with the report’s other findings, the correlation was concerning.