Build more effective habits using If-Then Strategies
Research tells us that it is almost impossible to deconstruct the existing neural signature of a habit. Therefore, we can’t actually undo a habit (Graybiel & Smith, 2014). But we can build a new one.
There is a three-step loop of trigger (or cue) from the environment that prompts the brain to deploy a sequence of actions associated with that very cue; an action that is performed, which can be cognitive, emotional, or physical; and a reward that reinforces that a particular set of actions and reactions is useful and worth remembering. Repetition of this behavior loop allows for a habit to form.
When this loop is repeatedly completed over time, the new way of behaving or reacting becomes stronger and gets turned into a habit — the unconscious way of performing a set of actions that does not require us to actively decide what to do and what steps to take.
Building a new habit
There is a 4 step process for building new habits or patterns of behavior:
Awareness of the Habit: changing the behavior begins first with being aware of the habit or pattern, it is a good idea to describe this habit or behavior in a sentence, to provide clarity.
Impact of the Habit: understanding how a habit can create how you experience world can lead to deep insight and desire to alter it.
Commitment to Change: change takes attention, effort, and time—and it can feel quite uncomfortable. It helps to visualize a different pattern of behavior and the positive impact on your life or experience. This process helps with the commitment.
Define the New Habit and take Action: take some time to define the new habit or behavior and define the action steps to make it happen. Here I will introduce “Implementation Intentions”.
Implementation Intentions
An implementation intention is a self-regulatory strategy in the form of an "if-then plan" that can lead to better goal attainment, as well as help in habit and behavior modification. It is subordinate to goal intentions as it specifies the when, where and how portions of goal-directed behavior. The concept of implementation intentions was introduced in 1999 by psychologist Peter Gollwitzer. 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.
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 pre-decisional phase (deliberative mindset, motivation is the driving force of setting goals). 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.
The basic structure of an implementation intention is as follows:
IF {situation} THEN I will {behavior}
Emotional Regulation
In 2009 Schweiger Gallo, Keil, Gollwitzer, Rockstroh and McCulloch published a study that was conducted to address the effectiveness of implementation intentions in regulating emotional reactivity.
The studies required that disgust (in Study 1) and fear (in Study 2) eliciting stimuli were viewed by participants subject to three different self-regulation instructions:
The first group was given the simple goal intention to not experience fright or disgust, and was told to believe "I will not get frightened."
The second group was given the first goal intention, with an additional implementation intention, and was told to believe "And if I see a spider, I will stay calm and relaxed."
The third group was given no-self-regulation as the control group and did not receive any instruction prior to the event.
Disgust was selected because it is almost universally considered to be a basic emotion in the applicable literature. Fear was selected because anxiety disorders, such as panic disorders or phobias are common, and they affect the life of many people. The participants reported on the intensity of the elicited emotions by rating experienced arousal. Only group two, the implementation intention participants, succeeded in reducing their disgust and fear reactions compared to the other two groups.
These results support the idea that self-regulation by using simple goal intentions can run into problems when immediate and strong emotional reactivity has to be down-regulated, whereas implementation intentions appear to be an effective tool for self-regulation.
Implementation intentions inhibit the automatic activation of stereotypical beliefs and prejudicial feelings.[26] In a more recent study, the use of implementation intentions was applied to interactions with new acquaintances as well as interracial interactions. The notion is that interactions with new acquaintances can be laden with anxiety and also decrease interest and desire for long-term contact. The study found that implementation intentions actually increased interest in sustained contact during anxiety provoking interactions and also led to closer interpersonal distance in anticipation of interracial interactions. The results also suggest that anxiety itself was not reduced by means of implementation intentions, but rather, implementation intentions shielded individuals from the negative effects of anxiety during social interactions.