Integrating Systems Thinking and Behavioural Science

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard Standard

Integrating Systems Thinking and Behavioural Science. / Parkinson, John A.; Gould, Ashley; Knowles, Nicky et al.
In: Behavioral Science, Vol. 15, No. 4, 21.03.2025.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

HarvardHarvard

Parkinson, JA, Gould, A, Knowles, N, West, J & Goodman, AM 2025, 'Integrating Systems Thinking and Behavioural Science', Behavioral Science, vol. 15, no. 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15040403

APA

CBE

MLA

VancouverVancouver

Parkinson JA, Gould A, Knowles N, West J, Goodman AM. Integrating Systems Thinking and Behavioural Science. Behavioral Science. 2025 Mar 21;15(4). doi: 10.3390/bs15040403

Author

Parkinson, John A. ; Gould, Ashley ; Knowles, Nicky et al. / Integrating Systems Thinking and Behavioural Science. In: Behavioral Science. 2025 ; Vol. 15, No. 4.

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Integrating Systems Thinking and Behavioural Science

AU - Parkinson, John A.

AU - Gould, Ashley

AU - Knowles, Nicky

AU - West, Jonathan

AU - Goodman, Andrew M.

PY - 2025/3/21

Y1 - 2025/3/21

N2 - Traditional approaches to changing health behaviours have primarily focused on education and raising awareness, assuming that increased knowledge leads to better decisions. However, evidence suggests these methods often fail to result in sustained behavioural change. The dual-process theory of decision-making highlights that much of our behaviour is driven by automatic, intuitive processes, which educational interventions typically overlook. Compounding this challenge, behavioural research is often conducted on small groups, making it difficult to scale insights into broader societal issues, where behaviour is influenced by complex, interconnected factors. This review advocates for integrating behavioural science with systems approaches (including systems thinking and approaches to complex adaptive systems) as a more effective approach to resolving complex societal issues, such as public health, sustainability, and social equity. Behavioural science provides insights into individual decision-making, while systems approaches offer ways of understanding, and working with, the dynamic interactions and feedback loops within complex systems. The review explores the commonalities and differences between these two approaches, highlighting areas where they complement one another. Design thinking is identified as a useful structure for bridging behavioural science and systems thinking, enabling a more holistic approach to problem-solving. Though some ideological challenges remain, the potential for creating more effective, scalable solutions is significant. By leveraging the strengths of both behavioural science and systems thinking, one can create more comprehensive strategies to address the “wicked problems” that shape societal health and well-being.

AB - Traditional approaches to changing health behaviours have primarily focused on education and raising awareness, assuming that increased knowledge leads to better decisions. However, evidence suggests these methods often fail to result in sustained behavioural change. The dual-process theory of decision-making highlights that much of our behaviour is driven by automatic, intuitive processes, which educational interventions typically overlook. Compounding this challenge, behavioural research is often conducted on small groups, making it difficult to scale insights into broader societal issues, where behaviour is influenced by complex, interconnected factors. This review advocates for integrating behavioural science with systems approaches (including systems thinking and approaches to complex adaptive systems) as a more effective approach to resolving complex societal issues, such as public health, sustainability, and social equity. Behavioural science provides insights into individual decision-making, while systems approaches offer ways of understanding, and working with, the dynamic interactions and feedback loops within complex systems. The review explores the commonalities and differences between these two approaches, highlighting areas where they complement one another. Design thinking is identified as a useful structure for bridging behavioural science and systems thinking, enabling a more holistic approach to problem-solving. Though some ideological challenges remain, the potential for creating more effective, scalable solutions is significant. By leveraging the strengths of both behavioural science and systems thinking, one can create more comprehensive strategies to address the “wicked problems” that shape societal health and well-being.

KW - behaviour

KW - change

KW - systems

KW - complexity

KW - design thinking

KW - public health

KW - dual-process

KW - nudge

KW - multidisciplinary

U2 - 10.3390/bs15040403

DO - 10.3390/bs15040403

M3 - Article

VL - 15

JO - Behavioral Science

JF - Behavioral Science

SN - 2076-328X

IS - 4

ER -