Robert and Jamie discuss the ubiquitous phenomenon, illustrated by one of the episodes in The Odyssey, that the first priority of our motivational system is not necessarily our best interests, or even what we most enjoy - it's something else. Because humans kind of know this, we are sometimes willing to put in place regulation and barriers on our own and others' behaviour to counter this. When it comes to AI, we face a very dangerous situation in which the speed of progress is so fast that we may be overtaken by events so that we don't get a chance to learn from our mistakes when it comes to regulation or lack of it.

And Robert uses the opportunity to plug his short scripts for comedy radio plays called 'The Turing Test' which you can find here. Turns out the Turing Test is a low bar because humans are not very good at judging it! Here's an excerpt:

**********************

John: Have you ever been delirious?

Ailsa: Absolutely. One time my programmer forgot to put an end condition in a ‘do loop’. I couldn’t stop laughing. He had to turn me off then on again.

**********************

Want more? Check out our latest books:

Energise: The Secrets Of Motivation: https://shorturl.at/bbA7y

React: Harness Your Animal Brain: https://shorturl.at/yiFQ9

Sign up to Robert’s Substack: https://robertwest100.substack.com/

Subscribe to the UBC YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@unlockingbehaviourchange

Ask a question at: https://www.unlockingbehaviourchange.com

In the second half of a two-parter, Robert explains the limitations of the Theory of Planned Behaviour and how the COM-B model addresses these. The Theory of Planned Behaviour is EXTREMELY widely used and increasingly so despite its age. Among the limitations of the TPB that COM-B addresses are: 1) TPB focuses on beliefs and intentions when emotions, drives, desires, habit, instinct, physical and psychological capabilities and our social and physical environment clearly play a crucial role in behaviour. 2) It doesn't address the intention-action gap. 3) It uses between-person variation to suggest what might be a good target for an intervention, when behaviour change requires a very different kind of analysis. The COM-B model aims to bring in these crucial factors in a relatively simple framework that can be used by researchers, policy-makers and practitioners.

Want more? Check out our latest books:

Energise: The Secrets Of Motivation: https://shorturl.at/bbA7y

React: Harness Your Animal Brain: https://shorturl.at/yiFQ9

Sign up to Robert’s Substack: https://robertwest100.substack.com/

Subscribe to the UBC YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@unlockingbehaviourchange

Ask a question at: https://www.unlockingbehaviourchange.com

The COM-B model of behaviour was put forward in 2011 as a comprehensive model of behaviour, capturing influences that lay within individuals (capability and motivation) as well as the outside world (opportunity). It has become popular, with some 17,000 citations to the original paper, but nothing like as popular as the Theory of Planned Behaviour, whose primary reference, published in 1991, currently has 186,000 citations! In 2025 alone, the COM-B paper was cited almost 3,000 times, but the TPB was cited almost 22,000 times!

With that in mind, Robert thought it would be interesting to compare the two models. In the first part of this two-parter, Robert explains the origins of the TPB and covers its main strengths and limitations as well as how it has evolved over the years. In the next episode, he will describe how the COM-B model differs and what that means for using these models to develop behaviour-change interventions.

Want more? Check out our latest books:

Energise: The Secrets Of Motivation: https://shorturl.at/bbA7y

React: Harness Your Animal Brain: https://shorturl.at/yiFQ9

Sign up to Robert’s Substack: https://robertwest100.substack.com/

Subscribe to the UBC YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@unlockingbehaviourchange

Ask a question at: https://www.unlockingbehaviourchange.com/contact-us