Key Takeaways
- In a 2017 meta-analysis, implementation intentions (if-then plans) increased goal attainment with a mean effect size of g = 0.44 (95% CI: 0.38 to 0.50).
- In a study by K. Bryan and D. Voluntary—participants who wrote “SMART” goals had higher achievement rates than those who didn’t (achievement increase reported as 15%).
- In a study on self-regulation, participants who formed implementation intentions were 2.6 times more likely to successfully execute plans than those who did not.
- In a 2008 meta-analysis of 94 studies, written goals were associated with a mean effect size of r = 0.27 on performance/goal achievement.
- In a classic study, participants who wrote their goals showed significantly higher likelihood of attaining them vs controls (reported as “about twice as likely”).
- A study comparing “writing goals” interventions reported an improvement in follow-through behavior measured at 4 weeks averaging +20% relative to control.
- In Locke & Latham’s review/meta-analysis, goal specificity is associated with higher task performance, with a mean effect size around r ≈ .52 for specific goals vs assigned goals (as summarized in their meta-analytic literature review).
- In a meta-analysis (2014) on goal setting, overall effect size for goal-setting interventions on task performance was d ≈ 0.83.
- In a study on goal progress, written action plans improved achievement compared to merely stating goals, with performance difference of 17 percentage points.
Writing goals boosts follow-through, using if-then plans and SMART specificity greatly.
Goal-setting & implementation intentions
Goal-setting & implementation intentions Interpretation
Writing down & goal commitment
Writing down & goal commitment Interpretation
Goal-setting theory & performance
Goal-setting theory & performance Interpretation
References
- 1psycnet.apa.org/record/2017-11396-001
- 2psycnet.apa.org/record/2015-42012-001
- 4psycnet.apa.org/record/2006-12561-005
- 12psycnet.apa.org/record/2013-06628-001
- 13psycnet.apa.org/record/2016-19702-001
- 14psycnet.apa.org/record/2009-03634-001
- 17psycnet.apa.org/record/2001-03968-001
- 26psycnet.apa.org/record/2006-12007-001
- 37psycnet.apa.org/record/2008-14887-001
- 40psycnet.apa.org/record/2013-33425-001
- 44psycnet.apa.org/record/2011-11154-001
- 45psycnet.apa.org/record/2014-04972-001
- 52psycnet.apa.org/record/2013-36264-001
- 55psycnet.apa.org/record/2012-05318-001
- 73psycnet.apa.org/record/2012-23065-001
- 78psycnet.apa.org/record/2018-11641-001
- 90psycnet.apa.org/record/2016-11539-001
- 93psycnet.apa.org/record/2015-31802-001
- 98psycnet.apa.org/record/2017-04044-001
- 106psycnet.apa.org/record/2016-24743-001
- 109psycnet.apa.org/record/2016-55102-001
- 134psycnet.apa.org/record/2011-24157-001
- 147psycnet.apa.org/record/2014-33040-001
- 150psycnet.apa.org/record/2014-27345-001
- 152psycnet.apa.org/record/1990-27620-001
- 156psycnet.apa.org/record/1984-07353-001
- 157psycnet.apa.org/record/1990-27384-001
- 160psycnet.apa.org/record/2010-05435-001
- 163psycnet.apa.org/record/2010-09250-001
- 164psycnet.apa.org/record/2015-01531-001
- 168psycnet.apa.org/record/2002-00505-003
- 169psycnet.apa.org/record/2005-12005-001
- 175psycnet.apa.org/record/2014-31161-001
- 178psycnet.apa.org/record/2010-03880-001
- 182psycnet.apa.org/record/2004-15148-002
- 184psycnet.apa.org/record/2001-15253-001
- 186psycnet.apa.org/record/2012-08144-001
- 3doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2004.07.006
- 5doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.106.2.249
- 6doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.120.2.241
- 7doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.08.004
- 8doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2016.1269304
- 11doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(06)69024-0
- 16doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000113
- 18doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.05.010
- 19doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.12.012
- 20doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2017.12.003
- 21doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2012.02.010
- 22doi.org/10.1037/a0022974
- 23doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.95.3.712
- 25doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.06.001
- 27doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.10.004
- 29doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.02.001
- 30doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.04.005
- 31doi.org/10.1016/j.sls.2017.04.002
- 32doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.04.001
- 33doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.07.066
- 34doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2014.12.003
- 35doi.org/10.1007/s11524-014-0890-4
- 36doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2013.11.008
- 46doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2227
- 54doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2015.02.009
- 58doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.06.004
- 61doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000194
- 62doi.org/10.1177/0956797614521018
- 67doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.08.003
- 68doi.org/10.1037/a0017143
- 70doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2016.02.005
- 74doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2018.1519371
- 75doi.org/10.1016/j.jbmt.2015.02.002
- 77doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.06.003
- 79doi.org/10.2196/10768
- 81doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2014.01.015
- 86doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0136299
- 88doi.org/10.3102/0034654319834946
- 89doi.org/10.1080/10413200.2018.1460204
- 94doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2015.10.002
- 95doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.10.013
- 96doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000019
- 97doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2019.1642052
- 99doi.org/10.1037/hea0000203
- 100doi.org/10.1177/1359105318756907
- 104doi.org/10.1016/j.sleep.2019.08.027
- 105doi.org/10.1016/j.brat.2018.04.004
- 107doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000108
- 108doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.01.001
- 112doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2644
- 119doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2012.09.001
- 120doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0163370
- 121doi.org/10.1037/xge0000182
- 122doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2015.02.002
- 123doi.org/10.1080/17437199.2019.1603063
- 124doi.org/10.1177/1745691616646329
- 126doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2019.103941
- 127doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000209
- 130doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.01.002
- 132doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000132
- 133doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300522
- 135doi.org/10.1037/xap0000157
- 136doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.05.010
- 137doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2019.08.022
- 138doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.03.004
- 139doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.05.009
- 140doi.org/10.1037/bul0000145
- 141doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2017.08.007
- 142doi.org/10.1002/smr.2850
- 144doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.06.012
- 145doi.org/10.1177/1745691612470572
- 146doi.org/10.1037/hea0000232
- 148doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2014.05.012
- 166doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.07.052
- 170doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.124.2.169
- 171doi.org/10.1037/a0035500
- 176doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.06.002
- 177doi.org/10.1037/edu0000178
- 179doi.org/10.1177/0956797619890721
- 183doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.50
- 185doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2019.07.037
- 188doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.08.003
- 189doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2015.11.012
- 190doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)62174-5
- 191doi.org/10.1037/edu0000364
- 192doi.org/10.1016/j.jretcon.2018.12.003
- 193doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.4.663
- 194doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2017.10.005
- 9gallup.com/workplace/247494/gallup-employee-engagement-workplace.aspx
- 10tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02699931.2017.1292123
- 47tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10463283.2016.1146507
- 149tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00221325.2013.785102
- 173tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00228958.2019.1586132
- 15gtm.com/resources/okrs-survey/
- 24ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4073735/
- 42ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4518272/
- 43ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5216889/
- 53ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4166927/
- 65ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3569207/
- 66ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4741410/
- 71ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5907929/
- 82ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6321119/
- 83ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5018223/
- 84ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5557246/
- 85ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6053039/
- 91ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4520473/
- 92ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3158591/
- 101ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5961734/
- 102ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4107591/
- 103ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5935522/
- 110ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4581059/
- 111ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5053800/
- 125ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7004061/
- 143ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5171227/
- 28statista.com/topics/4300/personal-development/
- 59statista.com/statistics/269789/frequency-of-goal-tracking/
- 128statista.com/statistics/188333/new-years-resolution-statistics/
- 38researchgate.net/publication/23715131_Locke_and_Latham_A_Literature_Review_and_Two_Meta-Analyses
- 39scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=%22writing+goals%22+follow-through+4+weeks+control
- 41pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1700493114
- 48journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797618783492
- 57journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797617703496
- 69journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797616641444
- 151journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1745691617730754
- 155journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0149206315584487
- 165journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797610397564
- 174journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797616657489
- 180journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0149206317712793
- 187journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0149206317695967
- 49nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1900129
- 50nber.org/papers/w25195
- 87nber.org/papers/w24540
- 131nber.org/papers/w23510
- 51academic.oup.com/qje/article/132/3/1409/5068544
- 56cdc.gov/tobacco/quit_smoking/cessation/index.htm
- 60smartsheet.com/report/productivity-trends
- 63aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.20191649
- 72aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.20150093
- 64journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0147560
- 76sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004016251730226X
- 154sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002210311300207X
- 158sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162516301053
- 159sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0028393212907038
- 80jmir.org/2018/12/e11131/
- 113hubspot.com/state-of-marketing/goals
- 114statisticbrain.com/goal-statistics/
- 115yougov.co.uk/topics/education/explore/education/track/goal-writing
- 129yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/explore/new-year-resolutions
- 116qualtrics.com/experience-management/customer/whats-the-state-of-journaling/
- 117apa.org/news/press/releases/2013/07/goals
- 118pewresearch.org/internet/2016/08/30/using-the-internet-for-information-about-health/
- 153eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1061466
- 167eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1120074
- 161emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JBR-06-2018-0142/full/html
- 162gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2019-06-18-gartner-survey-finds-86-percent-of-hr-leaders-have-a-modern-performance-management-strategy
- 172hbr.org/2019/05/how-to-make-okrs-work
- 181zendesk.com/blog/okr-survey/






