CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 147Behavioral Health and InterventionsDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsBehavioral and Psychological Studies

Changing Behavior Using the Model of Action Phases

Keller, Lucas, Gollwitzer, Peter M., Sheeran, Paschal·2020·The Handbook of Behavior Change
DOI 10.1017/9781108677318.006
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

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.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/9781108677318.006

Cites

310 of 310 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Keller, L., Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P.
ORCID
Venue
The Handbook of Behavior Change
Publisher
Cambridge University Press
Published
2020-07-23
Pages
77-88
DOI
10.1017/9781108677318.006
OpenAlex
W3040575936
Cited by
147
References
310
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 91 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6
FWCI
120.23
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified)
Locations
Cambridge University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
Keywords
Rubicon model, goal pursuit, deliberative mindset, implemental mindset, implementation intentions, self-regulation, behavior change

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review