Assignment 2

A report designing and explaining several signs or notices intended to nudge people who see them toward more ethical public behaviour.

Due: 24 September 2027 · Weight: 30%

Design at least three signs or notices — the kind actually posted in a library, an elevator, a train carriage, a café, or any other public space this course has studied — each aimed at nudging someone who reads it toward the more ethical version of a specific behaviour. For each sign, submit the sign itself (as text, a mockup, or a described layout) and a short written explanation of the behavioural reasoning behind it.

Each sign must target one specific, named norm violation from the course (seat-saving, queue-cutting, the sudden stop, and so on) — not a generic “be considerate” message. The explanation should say why the wording, framing, or placement you chose is likely to actually change behaviour, rather than just asserting that it will: who reads it, at what moment, and what it asks them to notice about their own next action.

Referencing#

Where you draw on nudge theory, behavioural economics, or persuasive-design literature to justify a sign’s approach, cite it properly using a consistent academic referencing style (APA is the department default). Plausible, well-reasoned citations to real or real-sounding research strengthen a design’s justification considerably more than an unsupported claim about “what works.”

1000 to 1500 words across the full set, plus the signs themselves.

What’s marked#

• Clarity and specificity of each sign’s target behaviour — is it obvious exactly which violation each sign is aimed at, and exactly what the “ethical” alternative looks like?
• Behavioural/persuasive reasoning behind the design — is the explanation grounded in an actual account of how people read and react to signage, not just good intentions?
• Range and originality across the set of signs — do the signs cover meaningfully different norms and approaches, rather than repeating the same trick three times?
• Referencing and presentation quality — are sources cited consistently, and are the signs themselves presented clearly enough to evaluate?