Methodology

The principle library behind every simulation.

When DayClerk's simulation or the free page grader cites a reason a visitor will hesitate or act, it draws from this fixed, vetted set of behavioral-science frameworks — never invented at runtime. Every entry below is a real, citable concept, spread across 7 independent source families so no single publisher does the heavy lifting.

Social proof

thedecisionlab ↗

People look to the actions and approval of others to decide what is correct or worth doing, especially under uncertainty.

Cialdini, Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion (2021)

Opportunities seem more valuable when their availability is limited.

Cialdini, Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion (2021)

People defer to credible experts, credentials, or recognized sources when deciding what to trust.

Cialdini, Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion (2021)

Reciprocity

wikipedia ↗

People feel obligated to return a favor, so a free sample or piece of value makes them more willing to act.

Cialdini, Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion (2021)

Commitment and consistency

wikipedia ↗

Once people commit to a small action, they feel pressure to behave consistently with that commitment in later, bigger decisions.

Cialdini, Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion (2021)

A real time constraint, such as a deadline or an expiring offer, prompts immediate action instead of deferral.

Cialdini, Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion (2021)

Loss aversion

thedecisionlab ↗

People weigh the pain of a potential loss more heavily than the pleasure of an equivalent gain, which makes "don't miss out" framing more motivating than "gain this."

Kahneman & Tversky, Prospect Theory (1979)

The first number or option a person sees becomes a reference point that skews how they judge everything after it.

Tversky & Kahneman, Judgment Under Uncertainty (1974)

Framing effect

thedecisionlab ↗

The same offer feels different depending on how it is worded, so a gain frame and a loss frame can lead to different choices even when the underlying facts are identical.

Tversky & Kahneman, The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice (1981)

Endowment effect

behavioraleconomics ↗

People value something more once they feel it is already theirs, which is why free trials, samples, and "your plan" framing increase commitment.

Kahneman, Knetsch & Thaler (1991)

Status quo bias

wikipedia ↗

People default to the current or familiar option and need a clear reason to switch away from it.

Samuelson & Zeckhauser, Status Quo Bias in Decision Making (1988)

Paradox of choice

wikipedia ↗

Too many options increases decision difficulty and anxiety, often leading people to delay or avoid deciding at all.

Schwartz, The Paradox of Choice (2004)

Decoy effect

thedecisionlab ↗

Adding a deliberately less-attractive third option shifts preference toward one of the original two by making it look like the better deal.

Huber, Payne & Puto, Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives (1982)

Hick's law

lawsofux ↗

The more options you put in front of someone, the longer they take to decide, so fewer, clearer choices lead to faster action.

Hick (1952); Hyman (1953)

Cognitive load

wikipedia ↗

People disengage when a page demands too much mental effort to parse, so clarity and brevity convert better than density.

Sweller, Cognitive Load During Problem Solving (1988)

Serial position effect

lawsofux ↗

People remember the first and last items in a sequence better than the middle, so the most important points belong at the top and the bottom of the page.

Ebbinghaus (1885); Murdock (1962)

Peak-end rule

nngroup ↗

People remember an experience mainly by its most intense moment and how it ended, so a strong closing section shapes the overall impression.

Kahneman, Fredrickson, Schreiber & Redelmeier (1993)

Halo effect

britannica ↗

A strong positive impression in one area, such as clean design or a polished hero section, spills over into how people judge everything else.

Thorndike, A Constant Error in Psychological Ratings (1920)

Mere-exposure effect

simplypsychology ↗

People tend to prefer things they have seen before, so repeated, consistent exposure to a brand or message builds comfort and trust over time.

Zajonc, Attitudinal Effects of Mere Exposure (1968)

Goal-gradient effect

lawsofux ↗

People push harder to finish as they get closer to a goal, so showing progress through a multi-step form or signup increases completion.

Hull (1932); Kivetz, Urminsky & Zheng (2006)

20 principles in the current library, across 7 independent source families. This list grows as the methodology is refined — nothing here is AI-generated; every entry is a real, verified reference.