Robert makes the bold claim that 'probability' underlies all knowledge and that behavioural scientist should always be thinking about knowledge and claims we make in terms of 'priors' (their judgement of the likelihood that something is true before gathering some evidence) and their 'posterior probabilities' (their judgement of the likelihood that it is true after having gathered some evidence), and should never be 100% certain about anything!

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

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

Last but not least in our miniseries on decision fails we have 'I didn't ask'. Even when we think we know it all, we should often ask for another opinion or perspective. And we should always reflect on our own limitations and be willing to consult experts for important decisions that require technical expertise. And even when we might not have asked for it, we should be prepared to listen to advice.

But there is a catch! How do we know when someone really is an expert, and is giving a knowledgeable and expert opinion? Jamie and Robert delve into this thorny topic and come up with some rules of thumb.

What to comment or suggest a topic? Go to the Contact Us page on the UBC website.

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

In the mini-series on decision fails - common things that we fail to do that result in mistakes when making decisions - this episode covers our failures of imagination. Robert thinks this plays a large part in the well-known phenomenon of 'temporal discounting' - failing adequately to concern ourselves about things the further in the future they may occur. But failing to imagine goes far beyond this, which is why we often go to great lengths to make the possible outcomes of decisions vividly real for people to help ensure they take them seriously.

Want to contact us, for example to suggest topics to cover? Go to the contact page on the UBC website.

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

Continuing on the ‘Top 5 Decision Fails’, Robert and Jamie discuss: ‘I didn’t think’. Why don’t leaders appear to think through the consequences of starting wars? When will the AI bubble burst?

Thinking things through comes in three main flavours: depth of analysis, breadth of analysis, and choice of 'decision rule'. Depth in the sense of tracing the possible consequences and their consequences far enough ahead, and breadth in terms of thinking about the whole 'system' that is affected by the decision. The 'decision rule' is about what criteria you are going to use to make the choice.

Feel free to suggest future topics via the contact page in the Unlocking Behaviour Change Website.

All this and more in today’s episode . . .

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

In this mini-series on the top five decision fails, Robert and Jamie discuss five important things we fail to do, or do properly, that lead to mistakes in decision-making. We don't claim that this is the be-all and end-all, but we put them forward as ones that are probably really worth paying attention to in order to improve the way we make decisions.

This episode covers 'I didn't check'. We have information that is relevant to the decision, or think we have, but we don't take the time or make the effort to check that the information is correct. Of course, we can take checking too far, but mostly we should probably dial checking up rather than down ... If something doesn't look right - check!

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