How much if-then plans help, across 94 studies

In one line: across 94 studies, people who made a specific “when this happens, I’ll do that” plan reached their goals more often than people who only intended to.

What they did

Peter Gollwitzer and Paschal Sheeran, two psychologists, gathered up the studies that had tested this kind of plan. They found 94 separate tests. Then they pooled the results, to see how big the effect was overall and when it was bigger or smaller. A study that pools many others like this is called a meta-analysis.

In each study, some people simply set a goal: “I intend to do X”. Others also wrote a plan saying when, where and how: “When situation Y comes up, I’ll do X”. The researchers then checked who actually did it. The goals were very varied. They included health habits such as healthy eating, exercise and going for screening, study tasks such as finishing coursework, and others.

What they found

• Plans helped, clearly. People with a when-then plan were more likely to reach their goal. The authors called the effect medium to large.
• It worked across many kinds of goal. Health, study and everyday tasks all showed the effect, though it was stronger for some goals than others.
• Plans help people get started and keep going. They helped people remember to act, seize the moment when it came, and stay on track when distractions or old habits got in the way.
• Plans narrow the gap, but don’t close it. Many people still don’t do what they planned. A plan makes action more likely, not certain.

How much should you trust it?

Strong, well-repeated evidence; the real-world effect is probably smaller than this review suggests.

• This is a large, careful review of a big body of research, so the main finding is solid: plans help.
• Many of the studies were done with university students, and many relied on people reporting what they had done. Results in busy everyday settings may be smaller.
• Newer and bigger reviews, including one by the same team, find a smaller average effect than this one. Still useful, but moderate rather than dramatic.
• Plans help most when people already want the goal. A plan can’t supply motivation that isn’t there. Few studies looked at staff changing their practice after training in busy healthcare settings.

If you need to convince someone

In our words (a paraphrase, not a quotation): across 94 studies, people who said exactly when and where they’d act did better than people who only intended to. Ending a session with a specific plan is a small step with good evidence behind it.

What it means for you

1. Turn reflection into a plan. “Think about what you’ll take forward” is a start, not a plan. Ask people when, where and what exactly.
2. Push for specifics, kindly. When someone says “I’ll try to use more quizzes”, ask: “Which session? Which day? What question will you ask?”
3. Tie it to something that already happens. “When I write the care plan at 8am” or “When I open the clinic list” works better than “when I get a chance”. The moment should come round whether or not they remember.
4. Check back. Plans work better when someone follows up. Next time you see people, ask what they did, and what got in the way.

How it appears in Teaching That Lands

The asks at the end of Sessions 1 and 2 are specific intentions, written on a card, photographed, and read back at the start of the next session. The read-back is both a follow-up and a chance to recall. Facilitators push back on vague wording (“I’ll try to…”) and ask when, and what exactly. Session 3 has no card. The completed canvas is the commitment, with one named person who will hold each participant to it, and the support they have agreed they need from that person. The programme itself sends three short questions at 30 and 90 days.

The small print

• Effect size. The pooled effect was d = 0.65. An effect size (here, d) is a standard way of saying how big a difference is between two groups. By a common rule of thumb, 0.2 is small, 0.5 medium and 0.8 large. A d of 0.65 means that if you picked one person with a plan and one without, the one with the plan would come out ahead about two times in three.
• Later work. A much larger 2025 review by Sheeran, Listrom and Gollwitzer (642 tests) found a smaller average effect, d about 0.36. Plans worked best when people really wanted the goal and rehearsed the plan. That fits the programme’s habit of reading each ask back.
• How it works. The authors argue that the plan makes the moment easier to spot and the action easier to start, often without much deliberate thought. Not everyone agrees on how automatic this really is.
• What’s still unknown. The studies say little about how long a plan keeps working without reminders. The programme deals with this practically: the asks are read back a week later, and each person names someone who will hold them to their plan.