Behavioural Science is a rapidly expanding field and everyday new research is being developed in academia, tested and implemented by practitioners in financial organisations, development agencies, government ‘nudge’ units and more. This interview is part of a series interviewing prominent people in the field. And in today's interview the answers are provided by Sakshi Ghai.
Sakshi is an Assistant Professor of Psychological and Behavioural Science at the London School of Economics and Political Science, with a distinguished background as a Postdoctoral Researcher at the Oxford Internet Institute and a Junior Research Fellow at Linacre College, Oxford. Her research spans two key areas: the impact of digital technologies on young people’s well-being and advancing diversity and equity in behavioural science. Her work includes groundbreaking studies on online safety and digital inclusion among vulnerable young populations across the Global South, as well as meta-scientific investigations into improving sample diversity and generalisability in behavioural research. With an interdisciplinary approach rooted in philosophy, psychology, and behavioural economics, Sakshi collaborates with global partners to address culturally relevant challenges. She holds degrees from the University of Delhi, the University of Pennsylvania, and the University of Cambridge, and her contributions have earned her numerous awards, including the UK Women of the Future Award and the Society for Improving Psychological Science Mission Award.
Who or what got you into behavioural science?
I have always considered myself an accidental behavioural scientist. My background is diverse, spanning philosophy, behavioural economics, and psychology—with different degrees in each. But my journey into behavioural science began in advertising, working at Ogilvy in Mumbai right after college. Although I didn’t have the terminology for it back then, I now recognize that much of my work was rooted in behavioural science. That role gave me my first real glimpse into the applied side of behavioural science—though I didn’t yet know to call it that.
As my interest in understanding human behaviour deepened, I became certain I wanted to pursue a PhD. Coming from India, however, the path wasn’t straightforward. There are strong cultural and gender norm expectations to follow a different path after college. But academia always pulled me back, and after a nonlinear journey exploring various fields, I eventually pursued a master’s in Behavioural and Decision Sciences at Penn as part of the founding cohort in 2017. This experience was a true turning point, solidifying my commitment to the field. From there, I moved to the UK to begin my PhD and started focusing on a new mission: diversifying behavioural science. It’s a passion that keeps me up at night and motivates much of my work today.
What is the accomplishment you are proudest of as a behavioural scientist? And what do you still want to achieve?
While I wouldn’t say I’ve “achieved” anything in a traditional sense, I’m proud of the direction I’ve chosen within behavioural science, particularly my deep interest in meta-science. I’m tackling issues that can feel daunting, like sample diversity and the many facets of diversifying behavioural science as a whole. These are complex challenges, but I’m proud to be investing my energy into them.
What I still want to achieve is directly tied to this focus. Diversifying behavioural science isn’t just about broadening research samples; it’s about looking critically at everything from theories to methods, and how they may or may not translate across different contexts and populations. Some foundational theories we take for granted—loss aversion, temporal discounting—may not hold the same relevance in every part of the world. Expanding our field means examining these assumptions, questioning which elements truly generalize, and creating a behavioural science that includes diverse voices and perspectives at every stage.
"Some foundational theories we take for granted—loss aversion, temporal discounting—may not hold the same relevance in every part of the world. Expanding our field means examining these assumptions, questioning which elements truly generalize, and creating a behavioural science that includes diverse voices and perspectives at every stage."
What are the greatest challenges being faced by behavioural science, right now?
There are quite a few pressing challenges facing behavioural science today. One of the biggest, in my opinion, is the lack of diversity in the researchers themselves. When you have a core group of researchers setting the agenda, consciously or not, they shape what the field prioritizes. This means we’re potentially missing out on so many other important problems or angles that aren’t being explored. Right now, behavioural science is still largely Western-centric, and there’s a major gap in the voices, perspectives, and issues being represented, which ultimately limits the field’s reach and depth.
Another major challenge is funding. It’s one of those issues that people know exists but isn’t often openly discussed. The reality is that research agendas tend to be dominated by wealthier countries that have the resources and funding capabilities. This creates a sort of feedback loop where researchers in low- and middle-income countries struggle to secure the same resources, which impacts the diversity of the science itself. This imbalance in funding means that the voices from the Global South and other under-represented regions are often left out, even if they’re working on highly relevant issues. The structure of funding right now is such that it supports the existing power structures, which is problematic when trying to foster genuine diversity.
Coming from India and now working in a high-income institution in the UK, I see the privilege and access that this provides. Being part of a Western institution gives me a platform to speak on these issues and advocate for a more inclusive research landscape. There’s a certain weight that comes with being associated with these institutions, which is something we don’t talk about enough. There are also biases involved, even for researchers from the Global South working within these institutions. We’re often seen as “bridge scientists” or “catalysts,” but that doesn’t erase the biases we carry or encounter.
Lastly, behavioural science faces the ongoing challenge of this term “weird” itself. We use it as shorthand, but it’s incredibly reductive. When we categorize 92% of the world as “non-WEIRD,” we flatten a vast diversity of cultures, behaviours, and insights. The problem isn’t necessarily with the term WEIRD itself, but rather how the field has used it to imply that all “non-WEIRD” people fit into one homogeneous group. This is not only inaccurate, but it perpetuates a lack of nuance in how we approach the diversity of human behaviour. All of these challenges combined mean we have a long way to go to make behavioural science truly inclusive, but that just means there’s a lot of room for growth and improvement.
How do you think behavioural science will develop (in the next 10 years)?
I’m definitely an optimist when it comes to the future of behavioural science, even though I critique it regularly from a diversity perspective. Despite the critiques, or maybe because of them, I see a lot of opportunity for positive change in the coming decade. I think we’re at a point where there’s more awareness than ever about the lack of diversity, especially around the “weird” bias—the predominance of Western, educated, industrialized, rich, democratic samples. We’re all aware that this is an issue, and the intention to diversify is there. But behavioural science, like so many other fields, suffers from the classic “intention-action gap” where we have good intentions, but the actions to bridge that gap aren’t always there or easy to achieve.
In the next 10 years, in an ideal scenario, I’d love to see behavioural science actually tackle that intention-action gap by bringing in more diverse voices, both in terms of researchers and research participants. I’d like to see more women from the Global South shaping the science. It’s important that our research samples also reflect the realities of the communities being studied—moving beyond the standard urban, educated, WEIRD samples we’re used to seeing.
I also hope that we will begin to question some of the core theories and assumptions of behavioural science. A lot of what we study was developed in certain cultural contexts that aren’t universally applicable. For instance, what if loss aversion or temporal discounting doesn’t hold up in a different cultural or socioeconomic context? We need to be willing to challenge those foundational theories and bring in perspectives that haven’t been traditionally considered.
One of the brightest aspects of the future, for me, is in the growing interest among early-career researchers. There’s a real hunger for behavioural science, and I see this in students from all over, including in the Global South. I think if we can find ways to encourage and support these emerging researchers, we’ll see a far richer, more inclusive field. Ultimately, I believe behavioural science has a bright future—but we have to be intellectually humble and open to change to make that future as inclusive as it could be.
"Right now, behavioural science is still largely Western-centric, and there’s a major gap in the voices, perspectives, and issues being represented. This limits the field’s reach and depth—diversifying isn’t just about representation, it’s about challenging power structures and rethinking our approach to human behaviour."
With all your experience, what skills would you say are needed to be a behavioural scientist? Are there any recommendations you would make?
To be a good behavioural scientist, I think the core skill that really stands out isn’t so much about knowing one specific theory or technique but rather building these metacognitive skills—the skills that help you think about thinking itself, to question, to remain curious, and to hold a critical eye to even well-established ideas. If there’s one thing I would really emphasize, it’s this ability to challenge. You have to be able to look at textbooks, even the most cited papers in the fanciest journals, and still say, “Well, what if there’s more to this, or what if this doesn’t hold in a different context?” It’s about not taking things for granted, not accepting things on face value just because they’ve been widely discussed or used.
Developing this critical mindset is not straightforward, and it can’t be done overnight, but it’s so crucial. It’s built through reading widely, talking to different people, learning about the different cultural and regional nuances that shape behaviour. I’d say it’s really about engaging in the field on multiple levels—yes, read the big papers, but also dig into smaller studies, pay attention to debates within the field, and most importantly, be willing to question assumptions. The best behavioural scientists don’t just know the theories; they understand the limits and context of those theories.
Another key recommendation is to be open to the interdisciplinary nature of behavioural science. This field is enriched by psychology, economics, sociology, neuroscience, and more, so having a flexible, interdisciplinary mindset is valuable. It’s less about having a perfectly linear path or a “pure” background in one field and more about seeing how these different lenses can bring depth and nuance to your understanding.
Lastly, I would say don’t be afraid to learn from your own experiences and background. Everyone brings a unique perspective to behavioural science, especially those from underrepresented backgrounds or regions. Use that to your advantage, and understand that even if you come from a place or a perspective that isn’t traditionally seen as “behavioural science,” your insights are still valuable. In fact, they might be exactly what the field needs. So, stay curious, stay critical, and don’t shy away from asking tough questions—even of the field itself.
What advice would you give to young behavioural scientists or those looking to progress into the field?
My advice to aspiring behavioural scientists is to build metacognitive skills that foster curiosity, critical thinking, and a willingness to challenge established ideas. The field is diverse, and having the confidence to question foundational theories or mainstream beliefs is essential for growth. Developing these skills may seem abstract, but it comes from a mix of reading, speaking with different people, and learning to frame questions that reveal both the strengths and limitations within behavioural science.
I encourage young behavioural scientists to approach the field with an open mind, knowing that they belong and that their perspectives matter, regardless of where they come from. These skills, though intangible, are what will allow them to uncover new insights and help shape a behavioural science that is not just rigorous but inclusive and representative.
"The best behavioural scientists don’t just know the theories; they understand the limits and context of those theories. Stay curious, stay critical, and don’t shy away from asking tough questions—even of the field itself."
What is your biggest frustration with the field as it stands?
One of my biggest frustrations with behavioural science is the loose use of the term itself. It’s such a broad umbrella, but we rarely clarify what we mean when we use it. Sometimes “behavioural science” is conflated with nudging, other times it’s only about psychology, and sometimes it implies interdisciplinarity. This ambiguity can undermine our efforts because it prevents a clear understanding of what behavioural science actually encompasses.
Being more intentional about how we define and use “behavioural science” would help focus our conversations, clarify the field’s purpose, and ultimately strengthen our work. This may seem like a small issue, but I think it reflects a larger challenge in establishing behavioural science as a cohesive, rigorous discipline.
If you weren’t a behavioural scientist, what would you be doing?
Honestly, if I hadn’t found behavioural science, I’d probably have been married in my twenties, living maybe a more traditional life at home. That was the cultural expectation, and it’s the path I was heading down initially. Thinking of that “sliding doors” moment really humbles me because my path deviated from that.
Getting to where I am wasn’t easy. It involved a lot of family discussions and explanations, especially when I decided to start my PhD. Cultural expectations around marriage and career paths are strong, and it took time to communicate why I was choosing an unconventional path. Looking back, I feel immense gratitude to have had the opportunity to pursue a career and life in behavioural science instead.
"Behavioural science isn’t always about big studies—it’s also about small, day-to-day tweaks.
How do you apply behavioural science in your personal life?
Yes, definitely. I apply behavioural science principles in my personal life, especially around self-control and health behaviours. In my relationship with my partner, I’ll sometimes experiment with different forms of influence, seeing how different ways of framing a message affect the outcome. I also run “mini-experiments” with my cats, testing ways to shape their behaviours, like controlling how many treats they eat.
Behavioural science isn’t always about big studies—it’s also about small, day-to-day tweaks. And, of course, my partner and my cats bear the brunt of my curious experiments.
Which other behavioural scientists would you love to read an interview by?
I feel fortunate to have worked with inspiring behavioural scientists across a range of applications, and you have already interviewed many of my favourite women in the field. I would recommend Francesca Papa, who applies behavioural public policy at the European Union, and Ana Maria Munoz-Boudet, a senior social scientist with the World Bank’s eMBeD team who works on the very persistent issue of gender norms.
Thank you so much for taking the time to answer my questions Sakshi!
As I said before, this interview is part of a larger series which can also be found here on the blog. Make sure you don't miss any of those, nor any of the upcoming interviews!
Keep your eye on Money on the Mind!
コメント