An implementation intention is a self-regulatory strategy in the form of if-then-plans that can lead to better goal attainment, as well as create useful habits and modify problematic behaviors. It is subordinate to goal intentions as it specifies the when, where and how portions of goal-directed behavior.
In its most basic formulation, implementation intentions address everyday situations where a person could respond more effectively and more sustainably towards a goal (e.g. improving a personal relationship), and the technique acknowledges the fact that most have no troubles defining concrete and attainable goals as well as plans, but often have trouble identifying a situation where an action would be very effective for attaining the goal.
Though if-then-plans create habits, the key difference is that the technique creates habits consciously. Each if-then-plan creates a new habit which, in turn, improves the user's life in one or several aspects.
The concept of implementation intentions was introduced in 1999 by psychologist Peter Gollwitzer.Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 54, 493-503. Studies conducted by Gollwitzer in 1997 and earlier show that the use of implementation intentions can result in a higher probability of successful goal attainment, by predetermining a specific and desired goal-directed behavior in response to a particular future event or cue.Gollwitzer, P. M., & Brandstaetter, V. (1997). Implementation intentions and effective goal pursuit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 186-199.
History The concept of implementation intentions originated from research on goal striving throughout the late 1980s and 1990s. Developing research suggests that "the correlations between intentions and behavior are modest, in that intentions account for only 20% to 30% of the variance in behavior."Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 54, 493-503. Strong intentions ("I strongly intend to do X") were observed to be more often realized than weak intentions. Past behavior still tended to be a better predictor for a person's future behavior when it was compared to goal intentions. The research also suggested that the weak intention-behavior relation is a result of people having good intentions, but failing to act on them.Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 54, 493-503.
This inspired a growing body of research to help determine ways in which peoples' good intentions could be made more effective in accomplishing desired goals. Emerging research proposed the notion that successful goal attainment is in part attributable to the manner in which goal setting criteria are framed. For example, a person will perform better when set goals are challenging and specific as compared to goals that are challenging but vague (known as the goal-specificity effect).Locke, E. A., Latham, G. P., (1990). A theory of goal setting & task performance. In: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, US: Prentice-Hall, Inc. (1990). xviii, 413 pp. Emerging research also suggested a goal-proximity effect (wherein proximal goals lead to better performance than distal goals).Bandura A, & Dale H. (1981), Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 41(3), Sep 1981, 586-598. The strategy of implementation intentions was developed on the basis of these findings.
Concept People generally have positive intentions, but often fail to act on them.Orbell, S., & Sheeran, P. (1998) Regulation of behaviour in pursuit of health goals: Commentary. Psychology and Health, 13, 753-758 The question is how to ensure that the set goal intentions will reliably lead to the desired goal-directed behaviors, and subsequent attainment of those goals. Implementation intentions offer a practical solution for such a problem.
Achieving one's goals requires that certain goal-directed behaviors be instituted, but people are often unsuccessful in either initiating or maintaining these behaviors. The problems of initiating and maintaining goal-directed behavior can be addressed by using the implementation intention process. This if-then plan is a very specific approach as compared to goal intentions. A goal intention may be phrased in the following way: "I want to reach X!" Implementation intentions on the other hand are much more specific and seek to connect a future critical situation (an opportunity for goal attainment) with a specific goal-directed behavior, thereby leading to what could be called automatization in goal attainment. They are often phrased in the following way: "When situation X arises, I will perform response Y!"Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 54, 493-503. Where goal intentions are more general and abstract, implementation intentions are much more concrete and procedural.
Having formed a concrete plan involving a specific situation, this situation then becomes mentally represented and activated, leading to better perception, attention and memory concerning the critical situation. As a result, the chosen goal-directed behavior (the then-part of the plan) will be performed automatically and efficiently, without conscious effort. The automatization of the behavior in response to the future situation or cue, removes all hesitation and deliberation on the part of the decision maker when such a critical situation arises. This also has the effect of freeing cognitive resources for other mental processing tasks, and also for avoiding goal-threatening distractions or competing goals. It is also assumed that an implementation intention, once set, will continue operating non-consciously. This process is called strategic automaticity.
The strength of commitment related to both the plan set and the goal is very important for the implementation intention to have an effect on people's behavior. Without commitment, an implementation intention will hardly have any effect on goal-directed behavior.
In the phase model of action, the use of implementation intention takes place in the post-decisional phase (implemental mindset, volition is the driving force of action) which follows the predecisional phase (deliberative mindset, motivation is the driving force of setting goals).Gollwitzer, P. M. (1990). Action phases and mind-sets. In E. T. Higgins & R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), The handbook of motivation and cognition: Foundations of social behavior (Vol. 2, pp. 53-92). New York: Guilford Press. In the implemental mindset, a person is already committed to a goal and an implementation intention can be a good strategy to reach this goal.
In practice Usually, the user first collects a list of issues that can be addressed with minor but rather frequent actions. Some examples:
The person comes home, and starts watching TV until tired enough to sleep. As a result, household chores get postponed to the weekend, when they are done with palpable disdain.
A solution could be:
IF I get home before 19:00, THEN I will immediately clean up my room for 15 minutes.
I get tired in the early afternoon. I spend my noon break at the desk and I could use some more physical activity.
IF it is 12:30 THEN I will walk to the nearest shop to buy a snack.
The then-sentence is applied strictly whenever the if-clause is fulfilled, without any exception. If the user has to deliberate on whether an exception is justified, it adds to his cognitive burden, and thus can be detrimental for attaining the goals.
The if-then-plans can be revised after some time. This occurs, for example, when changes in the subject's everyday life have reduced the amount of if-situations that provoke a then-reaction. Then, new plans can be drawn up.
As the intention of the technique is to direct the user to clearly defined and short actions that improve his situation in the long run, and to reduce the burden of decision-making, the then clause should never mention a goal, or the problematic behavior itself.
Theory
Actively prompting individuals to make plans increases their likelihood of following through. Effective planning prompts guide people to consider when, where, and how they can act upon their intentions.Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 54, 493-503. Facilitating plan creation helps to increase follow-through for several reasons. First, it helps people to consider logistic obstacles and develop specific tactics to navigate around them.Rogers, T., Milkman, K. L., John, L. K., & Norton, M. I. (2015). Beyond good intentions: Prompting people to make plans improves follow-through on important tasks. Behavioral Science & Policy, 1(2) (December 2015). Second, the process helps to reduce the likelihood that someone will underestimate the time required by a task.Rogers, T., Milkman, K. L., John, L. K., & Norton, M. I. (2015). Beyond good intentions: Prompting people to make plans improves follow-through on important tasks. Behavioral Science & Policy, 1(2) (December 2015). Third, plan creation helps people to remember to act.Rogers, T., Milkman, K. L., John, L. K., & Norton, M. I. (2015). Beyond good intentions: Prompting people to make plans improves follow-through on important tasks. Behavioral Science & Policy, 1(2) (December 2015). Lastly, the formation of an action plan serves as a commitment to act. Research shows that breaking commitments generates discomfort.Cialdini, R. B. (1984). Chapter 3: Commitment and consistency: hobgoblins of the mind. Influence: The psychology of persuasion. New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishing. As such, plans are particularly effective when they are made as commitments to another person.Rogers, T., Milkman, K. L., John, L. K., & Norton, M. I. (2015). Beyond good intentions: Prompting people to make plans improves follow-through on important tasks. Behavioral Science & Policy, 1(2) (December 2015).
Todd Rogers, Katherine L. Milkman, Leslie K. John, and Michael I. Norton (2015)Rogers, T., Milkman, K. L., John, L. K., & Norton, M. I. (2015). Beyond good intentions: Prompting people to make plans improves follow-through on important tasks. Behavioral Science & Policy, 1(2) (December 2015). suggest the following situations in which the use of planning prompts is most effective:
Empirical support Implementation intentions have been very successful in helping individuals achieve targeted and specific goals over the years, as indicated by a survey of the research.
Voting plans Implementation intentions can help to increase voter turnout. A study by David W. Nickerson and Todd Rogers (2010) found that voters in a high-salience election were more likely to vote when they received an implementation intentions phone call facilitating the creation of a voting plan.Nickerson, D. W., & Rogers, T. (2010). Do You Have a Voting Plan?: Implementation Intentions, Voter Turnout, and Organic Plan Making. Psychological Science, 21 (2), 194-199. Voters who were contacted with an implementation intentions phone script were asked three questions to facilitate plan-making: what time they would vote, where they would be going to the voting place from, and what they would be doing immediately prior to voting.Nickerson, D. W., & Rogers, T. (2010). Do You Have a Voting Plan?: Implementation Intentions, Voter Turnout, and Organic Plan Making. Psychological Science, 21 (2), 194-199. Voters who were contacted via this phone script were 4.1 percentage points more likely to vote than those who did not receive a call.Nickerson, D. W., & Rogers, T. (2010). Do You Have a Voting Plan?: Implementation Intentions, Voter Turnout, and Organic Plan Making. Psychological Science, 21 (2), 194-199.
Flu shots