Kruti Vekaria · PhD
Behavioral science leadership · Finance, trust & AI

I turn the science of decision-making into financial products people trust.

Director-level behavioral science. I design the moments where money meets judgment — then run the experiments that prove the design moved real behavior.

Try a 15-second demonstration →
$100 · sooner$110 · laterpreference reversalnowtime →
Present bias — the same wait, valued differently. Illustrative.
Research
Nature CommunicationsCovered by Freakonomics & Nature
Invention
5 granted U.S. patentsToyota R&D innovation lab
Leadership
Built & led at DiscoverHired a team · owned the budget
A 15-second demonstrationPresent bias

Before the work, the thing itself. Two quick choices.

No right answer — pick the one you'd actually take.

Choice 1 of 2

Which would you take?

Choice 2 of 2

And this one?

Selected work / 01

Turning a missed payment into a resolved one

Discover Financial ServicesBehavioral DesignNotificationsLoss Framing
What changed
  1. Removed the reassurance card that competed with the action

    Less cognitive load — the card said "missed payments happen" which normalised avoidance

  2. Added a caution cue

    Saliency and urgency — naming the late-fee cost reframes the choice as a loss to avoid

  3. Collapsed two competing buttons into one clear action

    Fewer choices, faster resolution — choice overload suppressed action

$75M+
estimated annual revenue protected/yr
+16%
payment resolution rate lift
+$25
average payment amount increase
+6.9k
accounts resolved per month

Collections on missed payments were leaving money on the table. Standard dunning sequences — letters, robocalls, escalating fees — were generating regulatory risk without recovering debt.

Most missed payments aren't inability to pay — people forget, or the friction of calling in is too high. The emotional valence of 'collections' activates avoidance. Remove the threat, lower the effort, and most customers self-cure.

Secondary research, a behavioral & UX evaluation, and a three-variant click test (threat-based, neutral, friendly) on a panel of 400 users. The friendly variant was then A/B tested in production over 6 weeks.

RoleLead behavioral designer + researcher. End-to-end: framing research, prototype, A/B test design, measurement.

Figures are rounded estimates. Mockups are illustrative — no real UI reproduced.

Selected work / 02

When congratulation backfired

Discover Financial ServicesBehavioral DesignEmailSegmentationRewards
What changed
  1. Framed rewards as earned recognition for low earners

    Motivational framing activates pride and status in lower-income segments

  2. Removed congratulatory framing for high earners

    For high earners, congratulation felt patronizing — insight from qualitative research

12.0% → 14.0%
low-earner CTR (+16% rel.)
base → −2%
high-earner CTR (did not work)

Rewards redemption rates were underperforming relative to enrollment. High-value customers were earning points they never spent — a liability on the balance sheet and a signal of low perceived value.

Redemption isn't a preference problem — it's a salience + timing problem. The value of rewards is highest at the moment of earning, not at the moment of redemption. Most redemption UX is buried behind menus and friction.

Contextual inquiry with 12 rewards cardholders, mapping emotional highs/lows in the rewards journey. Competitive teardown of 8 programs. Three low-fidelity concepts prototyped and tested with a 6-week live pilot of the winner.

RoleBehavioral researcher + designer. Research, framing hypotheses, email copy, A/B test.

Figures rounded. Mockups illustrative.

Selected work / 03

Matching people to places they actually want

Toyota Motor North America R&DBehavioral SciencePreference MatchingMobile RetailPatents
What changed
  1. Built preference-elicitation into the browsing experience

    Stated preferences are unreliable; revealed preferences from behavior are more predictive

  2. Used temporal discounting principles to rank urgency

    People discount future options; surfacing high-match locations reduces present bias

5
granted U.S. patents
5
LA pilot locations
In-market
preference-match system shipped

Toyota's online configurator was losing customers mid-funnel. Analytics showed high drop-off between trim selection and lead submission — a 'paradox of choice' problem with 200+ configuration combinations.

Preference instability under complexity: when people can't hold all options in working memory simultaneously, they satisfice on salient features (color, price) and defer on others (tech packages, drivetrain). This creates regret risk and abandonment.

A 3-week diary study tracking preference stability across repeat visits, followed by a conjoint analysis to identify the minimum-viable configuration set. A progressive-disclosure prototype reduced options to a 4-question guided flow.

RoleBehavioral scientist. Research, behavioral framework, IP contribution, pilot design.

Figures accurate as of patent grant dates. Mockups illustrative — no real Toyota UI reproduced. No logos used.

How I help

Behavioral Research

Translating academic behavioral science into product hypotheses. From literature review through experiment design to result interpretation.

Experiment Design & Analysis

A/B and multivariate test design, statistical power, segmentation logic, and the discipline to report what didn't work alongside what did.

Team Building & Leadership

Hiring behavioral scientists and designers, building embedded team structures, and creating the organizational conditions where the work can ship.

Building & leading
Published in Nature Communications
Research
5 granted U.S. patents
Invention
Built & led behavioral science at Discover
Leadership

I build the team and the practice, not just the research.

At Discover I hired behavioral scientists and product designers, owned the budget, and built embedded team structures that let the science reach the product surface. At Toyota R&D I developed IP that became five granted patents.

Credentials & references
Nature Human BehaviourGoogle Scholar (448 citations)5 U.S. Patents (Toyota)The Decision Lab
WritingAll publications →
The Decision Lab

Why We Make Worse Decisions When We're Under Time Pressure

Temporal discounting and present bias explain why urgency distorts our choices — and how product design can work with this instead of against it.

About448+ citations

Kruti VekariaPhD · Georgetown University

I'm a behavioral scientist exploring how people make decisions — from the mundane to the extraordinary. My work bridges cognitive neuroscience, behavioral economics, and human-centered design to understand what drives generosity, health behavior, and financial well-being.

2021–Present
Sr. Manager, User & Behavioral Insights
Discover Financial Services
2020–2021
Senior Researcher, Behavioral Science
Toyota Motor North America R&D
2019–2020
Behavioral Science Consultant
Lirio
2014–2019
PhD, Psychology (Cognitive Neuroscience)
Georgetown University
2010–2014
BA, Economics & Neuroscience
University of Southern California
[Portrait: coming soon]

Contact

Get in touch

Book a call

[PLACEHOLDER: Cal.com booking calendar — available once CAL_LINK is configured]