Cited by 2,185Behavioral Health and InterventionsDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsGrit, Self-Efficacy, and Motivation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 152 of the 152 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 47 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

The Intention–Behavior Gap

Open access
Sheeran, Paschal, Webb, Thomas L.·2016·Social and Personality Psychology Compass

Abstract

Bitter personal experience and meta‐analysis converge on the conclusion that people do not always do the things that they intend to do. This paper synthesizes research on intention–behavior relations to address questions such as: How big is the intention–behavior gap? When are intentions more or less likely to get translated into action? What kinds of problems prevent people from realizing their intentions? And what strategies show promise in closing the intention–behavior gap and helping people do the things that they intend to do?

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This review synthesizes evidence on the intention–behavior gap, concluding that intentions are translated into action approximately one-half of the time and that “inclined abstainers” mainly drive the gap. It identifies intention qualities, self-regulatory problems across goal pursuit, and tools such as if-then plans and progress monitoring that can help close the gap.

Key findings

  • Meta-analytic evidence shows intentions predict behavior with a large sample-weighted average correlation (*r*+ = 0.53; Sheeran, 2002, 422 studies), but experimentally changing intentions produces only a small-to-medium change in behavior (*d*+ = .36; Webb & Sheeran, 2006); the gap is mainly due to people who intend to act but do not (“inclined abstainers”).
  • Intention realization depends on goal dimensions, the basis of intention, and intention properties; intention stability is described as the best indicator of whether an intention will be realized, and stable intentions moderated intention–behavior consistency even across measures taken 6 years apart (Conner, Norman, & Bell, 2002).
  • Self-regulatory problems occur in initiating, maintaining, and closing goal pursuit; for example, after a delay of just 5 seconds, 8% of young, healthy participants forgot to enact an intended behavior, rising to 24% when attention was divided (Einstein et al., 2003).
  • If-then plans improved goal attainment and behavioral performance compared with merely forming intentions (*d*+ = 0.65; 94 studies; Gollwitzer & Sheeran, 2006), and progress-monitoring interventions produced a large increase in monitoring frequency (*d*+ = 1.98) that led to a small-to-medium behavior change (*d*+ = .40; 138 interventions; Harkin et al., 2016).

Methods

  • Design: narrative review/synthesis of research on intention–behavior relations, not a primary empirical study.
  • Data or sample: synthesizes prior correlational studies, experiments, meta-analyses, and statistical simulations; no original sample or dataset is reported.
  • Main analysis: organizes evidence around (a) qualities of intention, (b) self-regulatory problems and tasks in realizing intentions across initiation, maintenance, and closure, and (c) tools for intention realization.

Limitations

  • The paper states that research on goal dimensions has not yet been integrated with research on the basis of intention or studies of intention properties, and that formal tests of moderation of the intention–behavior relation remain to be undertaken for many interventions.
  • The paper notes debate about the magnitude and interpretation of the ego-depletion effect and more cautious assessments of some self-control, glucose, and training approaches.
  • Evident from the text: as a narrative review, it does not report systematic search or selection criteria or a formal meta-analysis, so its conclusions rest on the cited literature.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/spc3.12265

Cites

152 of 152 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

0 of 47 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

Show all 30 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 13
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 3
14 of 14

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 151 references

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. 10.1080/02699930244000291 · DOI
  2. Fujita K., 2012, Goal‐directed Behavior, 85
  3. Grant H., 2009, The Psychology of Goals, 77
  4. 10.1111/j.2044-8309.1993.tb00997.xfa · DOI
  5. Liberman N., 2009, The Psychology of Goals, 277
  6. Moskowitz G. B., 2009, The Psychology of Goals
  7. Sheeran P., Health behaviour change: Moving from observation to intervention, Annual Review of Psychology
  8. 10.1080/10463283.2012.718134 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 901–1,000 of 1,002

Metadata

Authors
Sheeran, P., & Webb, T. L.
Affiliations
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
  • University of Sheffield (GB)
Corresponding author
Sheeran, Paschal
Venue
Social and Personality Psychology Compass
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-09
Volume
10
Issue
9
Pages
503-518
ISSN
1751-9004 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2519766541
Cited by
2,185
References
151
Citations by year
2026: 432 · 2025: 333 · 2024: 294 · 2023: 270 · 2022: 253 · 2021: 237 · 2020: 212 · 2019: 88 · 2018: 44 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 3
FWCI
79.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Social and Personality Psychology Compass (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
  • John Templeton Foundation (#23145)
  • European Research Council (ERC‐2011‐StG‐280515)
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 › Social Psychology › Grit, Self-Efficacy, and Motivation
Keywords
intention-behavior gap, behavioral intention, implementation intentions, goal achievement, self-regulation

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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