Changing Behavior Using the Model of Action Phases

doi:10.1017/9781108677318.006

6 - Changing Behavior Using the Model of Action Phases

from Part I - Theory and Behavior Change

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 July 2020

Lucas Keller ,

Peter M. Gollwitzer and

Edited by

Nelli Hankonen and

Martin S. Hagger: Affiliation:
University of California, Merced
Linda D. Cameron: Affiliation:
University of California, Merced
Kyra Hamilton: Affiliation:
Griffith University
Nelli Hankonen: Affiliation:
University of Helsinki
Taru Lintunen: Affiliation:
University of Jyväskylä

Book contents

Get access

Summary

The model of action phases makes a distinction between motivational (goal setting) and volitional (goal implementation) phases of goal pursuit. The model implies that changing the behavior of individuals who are in a pre-decisional action phase (i.e., have not crossed the “Rubicon” yet with respect to turning their many wishes into binding goals) needs a different approach than changing the behavior of people who are in a post-decisional phase (i.e., have crossed the Rubicon and need to implement their goals). The model is, therefore, also known as the “Rubicon” model. What exactly needs to be targeted to achieve behavior change in pre-decisional versus post-decisional individuals is addressed in the mindset theory of action phases, which explicates the Rubicon model in terms of the relevant psychological processes. It is argued that solving the tasks people face while still being pre-decisional requires different modes of thought (i.e., mindsets conceived of as a distinct assembly of activated cognitive procedures) than solving the tasks people face in post-decisional phases. These distinct features of pre-decisional (deliberative) versus post-decisional (implemental) mindsets as specified in the model need to be considered when trying to instigate behavior change. Furthermore, research on the implemental mindset has led to the discovery of a powerful self-regulation strategy promoting goal striving: the formation of implementation intentions. The chapter also outlines psychological mechanisms that underpin the facilitating effects of implementation intentions on behavior change and, when forming implementation intentions, are expected to help people to reach their goals.

Keywords

motivational action phase volitional action phase "rubicon" model goal setting goal implementation implementation intentions deliberative mindset implemental mindset goal striving

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: The Handbook of Behavior Change , pp. 77 - 88

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108677318.006 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Adriaanse, M. A., Oettingen, G., Gollwitzer, P. M., Hennes, E., de Ridder, D. T. D., & de Wit, J. B. F. (2010). When planning is not enough: Fighting unhealthy snacking habits by mental contrasting with implementation intentions (MCII). European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 1277–1293. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.730 CrossRef Google Scholar

Adriaanse, M. A., Vinkers, C. D. W., de Ridder, D. T. D., Hox, J. J., & de Wit, J. B. F. (2011). Do implementation intentions help to eat a healthy diet? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the empirical evidence. Appetite, 56, 183–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2010.10.012 Google Scholar

Bayer, U. C., Achtziger, A., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Moskowitz, G. B. (2009). Responding to subliminal cues: Do if-then plans facilitate action preparation and initiation without conscious intent? Social Cognition, 27, 183–201. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2009.27.2.183 Google Scholar

Bayer, U. C., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2005). Mindset effects on information search in self-evaluation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 313–327. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.247 Google Scholar

Bélanger-Gravel, A., Godin, G., & Amireault, S. (2013). A meta-analytic review of the effect of implementation intentions on physical activity. Health Psychology Review, 7, 23–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2011.560095 Google Scholar

Bieleke, M., Gollwitzer, P. M., Oettingen, G., & Fischbacher, U. (2017). Social value orientation moderates the effects of intuition versus reflection on responses to unfair ultimatum offers. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 30, 569–581. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.1975 Google Scholar

Brandstätter, V., Giesinger, L., Job, V., & Frank, E. (2015). The role of deliberative versus implemental mindsets in time prediction and task accomplishment. Social Psychology, 46, 104–115. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000231 Google Scholar

Brandstätter, V., Lengfelder, A., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2001). Implementation intentions and efficient action initiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 946–960. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.81.5.946 CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Brandstätter, V., & Schüler, J. (2013). Action crisis and cost-benefit thinking: A cognitive analysis of a goal-disengagement phase. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 543–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.10.004 Google Scholar

Büttner, O. B., Wieber, F., Schulz, A. M., Bayer, U. C., Florack, A., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2014). Visual attention and goal pursuit: Deliberative and implemental mindsets affect breadth of attention. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40, 1248–1259. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167214539707 Google Scholar

Conner, M., Grogan, S., West, R. et al. (2019). Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of repeated implementation intention formation plus anti-smoking messages on adolescent smoking initiation: A cluster randomized controlled trial. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 87, 422–432. https://dx.doi.org/10.1037%2Fccp0000387 CrossRef Google Scholar

Cross, A., & Sheffield, D. (2019). Mental contrasting for health behaviour change: A systematic review and meta-analysis of effects and moderator variables. Health Psychology Review, 13, 209–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2019.1594332 Google Scholar

da Silva, M. A. V., São-João, T. M., Brizon, V. C., Franco, D. H., & Mialhe, F. L. (2018). Impact of implementation intentions on physical activity practice in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. PLoS ONE, 13, e0206294. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206294 Google Scholar

Dennehy, T. C., Ben-Zeev, A., & Tanigawa, N. (2014). “Be prepared”: An implemental mindset for alleviating social-identity threat. British Journal of Social Psychology, 53, 585–594. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12071 Google Scholar

Doerflinger, J., Martiny-Huenger, T., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2017). Planning to deliberate thoroughly: If-then planned deliberation increases the adjustment of decisions to newly available information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 69, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.10.006 Google Scholar

Fujita, K., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Oettingen, G. (2007). Mindsets and pre-conscious open-mindedness to incidental information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 48–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2005.12.004 CrossRef Google Scholar

Gilbert, S. J., Gollwitzer, P. M., Cohen, A.-L., Burgess, P. W., & Oettingen, G. (2009). Separable brain systems supporting cued versus self-initiated realization of delayed intentions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 905–915. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015535 Google Scholar

Gollwitzer, A., Schwoerer, B., Stern, C., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Bargh, J. A. (2017). Down and up regulation of a highly automatic process: Implementation intentions can both decrease and increase social projection. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 70, 19–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.12.006 Google Scholar

Gollwitzer, P. M. (1990). Action phases and mind-sets. In Higgins, E. T. & Sorrentino, R. (Eds.), The Handbook of Motivation and Cognition: Foundations of Social Behavior, Vol. 2 (pp. 53–92). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Gollwitzer, P. M. (1993). Goal achievement: The role of intentions. European Review of Social Psychology, 4, 141–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779343000059 Google Scholar

Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). Implementation intentions: Strong effects of simple plans. American Psychologist, 4, 493–503. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.54.7.493 Google Scholar

Gollwitzer, P. M. (2012). Mindset theory of action phases. In Van Lange, P., Kruglanski, A. W., & Higgins, E. T. (Eds.), Handbook of Theories of Social Psychology (pp. 526–545). London: SAGE.Google Scholar

Gollwitzer, P. M. (2014). Weakness of the will: Is a quick fix possible. Motivation and Emotion, 38, 305–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-014-9416-3 Google Scholar

Gollwitzer, P. M. (2018). The goal concept: A helpful tool for theory development and testing in motivation science. Motivation Science, 18, 185–205. https://doi.org/10.1037/mot0000115 CrossRef Google Scholar

Gollwitzer, P. M., & Keller, L. (2016). Mindset theory. In Zeigler-Hill, V. & Shackelford, T. K. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences (pp. 1–8). Cham: Springer International. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_1141-1 Google Scholar

Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2006). Implementation intentions and goal achievement: A meta-analysis of effects and processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 69–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38002–1Google Scholar

Hallam, G. P., Webb, T. L., Sheeran, P. et al. (2015). The neural correlates of emotion regulation by implementation intentions. PLoS ONE, 10, e0119500. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0119500 Google Scholar

Heckhausen, H., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (1987). Thought contents and cognitive functioning in motivational versus volitional states of mind. Motivation and Emotion, 11, 101–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992338 Google Scholar

Heckhausen, H., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Weinert, F. E. (1987). Jenseits des Rubikon: Der Wille in den Humanwissenschaften [Beyond the Rubicon: The Will in the Humanities]. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar

Hügelschäfer, S., & Achtziger, A. (2014). On confident men and rational women: It’s all on your mind(set). Journal of Economic Psychology, 41, 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2013.04.001 Google Scholar

Keller, L., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2017). Mindsets affect risk perceptions and risk-taking behavior: Optimistic bias and the BART. Social Psychology, 48, 135–147. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000304 Google Scholar

Lejuez, C. W., Aklin, W. M., Jones, H. A. et al. (2003). The Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART) differentiates smokers and nonsmokers. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 11, 26–33. https://doi.org/10.1037/1064-1297.11.1.26 Google Scholar

Lejuez, C. W., Aklin, W. M., Zvolensky, M. J., & Pedulla, C. M. (2003). Evaluation of the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART) as a predictor of adolescent real-word risk-taking behaviours. Journal of Adolescence, 26, 475–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-1971(03)00036–8Google Scholar

Lejuez, C. W., Read, J. P., Kahler, C. W. et al. (2002). Evaluation of a behavioral measure of risk taking: The Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 75–84. https://doi.org/10.1037//1076-898X.8.2.75 Google Scholar

Lewin, K., Dembo, T., Festinger, L., & Sears, P. S. (1944). Level of aspiration. In Hunt, J. M. (Ed.), Personality and the Behavior Disorders (pp. 333–378). Oxford: Ronald Press.Google Scholar

Marquardt, M. K., Cohen, A.-L., Gollwitzer, P. M., Gilbert, S. J., & Dettmers, C. (2017). Making if-then plans counteracts learned non-use in stroke patients: A proof-of-principle study. Restorative Neurology and Neuroscience, 35, 537–545. https://doi.org/10.3233/RNN-170748 Google Scholar

Martin, J., Sheeran, P., Slade, P., Wright, A., & Dibble, T. (2011). Durable effects of implementation intentions: Reduced rates of confirmed pregnancy at two years. Health Psychology, 30, 368–373. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022739 Google Scholar

McCrea, S. M., & Vann, R. J. (2018). Postactional goal pursuit: Consequences of task completion for thought content, affect, and behavioral intentions. Motivation and Emotion, 42, 852–870. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-018-9713-3 Google Scholar

Mendoza, S. A., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Amodio, D. M. (2010). Reducing the expression of implicit stereotypes: Reflexive control through implementation intentions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 512–523. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167210362789 Google Scholar

Nenkov, G. Y., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2012). Pre- versus postdecisional deliberation and goal commitment: The positive effects of defensiveness. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 106–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.08.002 CrossRef Google Scholar

Neter, E., Stein, N., Barnett-Griness, O., Rennert, G., & Hagoel, L. (2014). From the bench to public health: Population-level implementation intentions in colorectal cancer screening. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 46, 273–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2013.11.008 Google Scholar

Oettingen, G. (2014). Rethinking Positive Thinking: Inside the New Science of Motivation. New York: Penguin Random House.Google Scholar

Oettingen, G. (2019). WOOP my life. Website. www.woopmylife.org Google Scholar

Orbell, S., & Sheeran, P. (2000). Motivational and volitional processes in action initiation: A field study of the role of implementation intentions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 780–797. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02823.x Google Scholar

Puca, R. M. (2001). Preferred difficulty and subjective probability in different action phases. Motivation and Emotion, 25, 307–326. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014815716476 Google Scholar

Schweiger Gallo, I., Keil, A., McCulloch, K. C., Rockstroh, B., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2009). Strategic automation of emotion regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 11–31. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013460 Google Scholar

Sheeran, P., Webb, T. L., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2005). The interplay between goal intentions and implementation intentions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204271308 Google Scholar

Stewart, B. D., & Payne, B. K. (2008). Bringing automatic stereotyping under control: Implementation intentions as efficient means of thought control. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 1332–1345. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167208321269 Google Scholar

Taylor, S. E., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (1995). Effects of mindsets on positive illusions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 213–226. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.2.213 Google Scholar

Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Toli, A., Webb, T. L., & Hardy, G. E. (2016). Does forming implementation intentions help people with mental health problems to achieve goals? A meta-analysis of experimental studies with clinical and analogue samples. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 55, 69–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjc.12086 Google Scholar

Webb, T. L., Schweiger Gallo, I., Miles, E., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2012). Effective regulation of affect: An action control perspective on emotion regulation. European Review of Social Psychology, 23, 143–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2012.718134 Google Scholar

Webb, T. L., & Sheeran, P. (2007). How do implementation intentions promote goal attainment? A test of component processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 295–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2006.02.001 Google Scholar

Webb, T. L., & Sheeran, P. (2008). Mechanisms of implementation intention effects: The role of goal intentions, self-efficacy, and accessibility of plan components. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47, 373–395. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466607X267010 Google Scholar

Wieber, F., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2014). Strategic regulation of mimicry effects by implementation intentions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 53, 31–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2014.02.002 Google Scholar

Winterich, K. P., & Nenkov, G. Y. (2015). Save like the Joneses: How service firms can utilize deliberation and informational influence to enhance consumer well-being. Journal of Service Research, 18, 384–404. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670515570268 CrossRef Google Scholar

WWC (What Works Clearinghouse). (2014). WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook (Version 3.0). US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, and What Works Clearinghouse. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/referenceresources/wwc_procedures_v3_0_standards_handbook.pdf Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.2 AAA

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

The HTML of this chapter complies with version 2.2 of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), offering more comprehensive accessibility measures for a broad range of users and attains the highest (AAA) level of WCAG compliance, optimising the user experience by meeting the most extensive accessibility guidelines.

Content Navigation

Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.

Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.

Reading Order & Textual Equivalents

Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.

Full alternative textual descriptions
You get more than just short alt text: you have comprehensive text equivalents, transcripts, captions, or audio descriptions for substantial non‐text content, which is especially helpful for complex visuals or multimedia.

Visualised data also available as non-graphical data
You can access graphs or charts in a text or tabular format, so you are not excluded if you cannot process visual displays.

Visual Accessibility

Use of high contrast between text and background colour
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.