How I'm using biological data to tell better stories -- and spark social change

What kinds of stories move us to act? To answer this question, creative technologist Heidi Boisvert is measuring how people's brains and bodies unconsciously respond to different media. She shows how she's using this data to determine the specific narrative ingredients that inspire empathy and justice -- and spark large-scale social change.

For the past 15 years I've been trying
to change your mind.

In my work I harness pop culture
and emerging technology

to shift cultural norms.

I've made video games
to promote human rights,

I've made animations to raise awareness
about unfair immigration laws

and I've even made location-based
augmented reality apps

to change perceptions around homelessness

well before Pokémon Go.

(Laughter)

But then I began to wonder
whether a game or an app

can really change attitudes and behaviors,

and if so, can I measure that change?

What's the science behind that process?

So I shifted my focus
from making media and technology

to measuring their
neurobiological effects.

Here's what I discovered.

The web, mobile devices,
virtual and augmented reality

were rescripting our nervous systems.

And they were literally changing
the structure of our brain.

The very technologies I had been using
to positively influence hearts and minds

were actually eroding functions
in the brain necessary for empathy

and decision-making.

In fact, our dependence
upon the web and mobile devices

might be taking over
our cognitive and affective faculties,

rendering us socially
and emotionally incompetent,

and I felt complicit
in this dehumanization.

I realized that before I could continue
making media about social issues,

I needed to reverse engineer
the harmful effects of technology.

To tackle this I asked myself,

"How can I translate
the mechanisms of empathy,

the cognitive, affective
and motivational aspects,

into an engine that simulates
the narrative ingredients

that move us to act?"

To answer this, I had to build a machine.

(Laughter)

I've been developing
an open-source biometric lab,

an AI system which I call the Limbic Lab.

The lab not only captures

the brain and body's unconscious response
to media and technology

but also uses machine learning
to adapt content

based on these biological responses.

My goal is to find out what combination
of narrative ingredients

are the most appealing and galvanizing

to specific target audiences

to enable social justice, cultural
and educational organizations

to create more effective media.

The Limbic Lab consists of two components:

a narrative engine and a media machine.

While a subject is viewing
or interacting with media content,

the narrative engine takes in and syncs
real-time data from brain waves,

biophysical data like heart rate,
blood flow, body temperature

and muscle contraction,

as well as eye-tracking
and facial expressions.

Data is captured at key places
where critical plot points,

character interaction
or unusual camera angles occur.

Like the final scene
in "Game of Thrones, Red Wedding,"

when shockingly,

everybody dies.

(Laughter)

Survey data on that
person's political beliefs,

along with their psychographic
and demographic data,

are integrated into the system

to gain a deeper understanding
of the individual.

Let me give you an example.

Matching people's TV preferences
with their views on social justice issues

reveals that Americans who rank
immigration among their top three concerns

are more likely to be fans
of "The Walking Dead,"

and they often watch
for the adrenaline boost,

which is measurable.

A person's biological signature
and their survey response

combines into a database
to create their unique media imprint.

Then our predictive model
finds patterns between media imprints

and tells me which narrative ingredients

are more likely to lead
to engagement in altruistic behavior

rather than distress and apathy.

The more imprints added to the database

across mediums from episodic
television to games,

the better the predictive models become.

In short, I am mapping
the first media genome.

(Applause and cheers)

Whereas the human genome
identifies all genes involved

in sequencing human DNA,

the growing database of media imprints
will eventually allow me

to determine the media DNA
for a specific person.

Already the Limbic Lab's narrative engine

helps content creators
refine their storytelling,

so that it resonates with their target
audiences on an individual level.

The Limbic Lab's other component,

the media machine,

will assess how media elicits
an emotional and physiological response,

then pulls scenes from a content library

targeted to person-specific media DNA.

Applying artificial intelligence
to biometric data

creates a truly personalized experience.

One that adapts content based
on real-time unconscious responses.

Imagine if nonprofits and media makers
were able to measure how audiences feel

as they experience it

and alter content on the fly.

I believe this is the future of media.

To date, most media
and social-change strategies

have attempted to appeal
to mass audiences,

but the future is media
customized for each person.

As real-time measurement
of media consumption

and automated media production
becomes the norm,

we will soon be consuming media
tailored directly to our cravings

using a blend of psychographics,
biometrics and AI.

It's like personalized medicine
based on our DNA.

I call it "biomedia."

I am currently testing
the Limbic Lab in a pilot study

with the Norman Lear Center,

which looks at the top 50
episodic television shows.

But I am grappling
with an ethical dilemma.

If I design a tool
that can be turned into a weapon,

should I build it?

By open-sourcing the lab
to encourage access and inclusivity,

I also run the risk
of enabling powerful governments

and profit-driven companies
to appropriate the platform

for fake news, marketing
or other forms of mass persuasion.

For me, therefore,
it is critical to make my research

as transparent to
lay audiences as GMO labels.

However, this is not enough.

As creative technologists,

we have a responsibility

not only to reflect upon how present
technology shapes our cultural values

and social behavior,

but also to actively challenge
the trajectory of future technology.

It is my hope that we make
an ethical commitment

to harvesting the body's intelligence

for the creation of authentic
and just stories

that transform media and technology

from harmful weapons
into narrative medicine.

Thank you.

(Applause and cheers)