nucleation

LIT-1488: The when and how of planning: Meta-analysis of the scope and components of implementation intentions in 642 tests

2 min read

Properties5
StatusActive — read in full 2026-10-24 (NOTE-1131) from the version of record deposited in the University of Konstanz repository (KOPS, in copyright, terms of use); worth reading as the largest synthesis of if-then planning (642 experimental tests to September 2019) and the one that corrects its size. The effect is reliable (BF10 = 319) but small once publication bias is modelled (d = .15, against an uncorrected .36 and 2006's .65), and highly heterogeneous. Between tests, the conditional link beats a schedule of the same behaviour, rehearsal helps, keeping a copy to revisit hurts, and plans work only when the goal is wanted. Its taxonomy finds nearly every cue and response effective, ignoring and waiting before responding among them. No mechanism is tested.
Version3
Tagsmotivation, behavioral-integration, social-science
Cited as “paper” byNOTE-1131 — Sheeran, Listrom & Gollwitzer — The when and how of planning: 642 tests of implementation intentions
Cited as “source” byTHEORY-1175 — Between tests, implementation intentions in the contingent if-then format had larger effects than plans that schedule when, where and what without linking cue to response (d = .43 against .29); rehearsing the plan once raised the effect, keeping a copy to revisit lowered it (.31 against .44), and adding how or for how long to a time-and-place cue roughly halved it, THEORY-1176 — Implementation intentions affect performance only when the goal intention they serve is strong and activated, so the cue-triggered response is gated by the goal and does not fire on the cue alone, THEORY-1192 — Across 642 experimental tests to September 2019, forming implementation intentions reliably improved behaviour, cognitive performance, affect regulation and social judgement, but publication bias was substantial: the pooled d = .36 falls to a model-averaged d = .15 under robust Bayesian meta-analysis, with large heterogeneity, THEORY-904 — Gollwitzer and Sheeran (2006) conclude, narratively from a handful of studies that measured or manipulated the goal intention, that implementation intentions affect performance only when the goal intention they serve is strong and activated, so the planned response is not elicited mechanically by its cue; in 2024, across eight tests, plan effects were larger with strong, activated or self-concordant goal intentions than with weak, unactivated or self-discordant ones (d = .79 for the difference), and in 31 physical-activity tests split at the median of intention, planning helped with strong intentions (d = .31) and had no effect with weak ones (d ≈ 0), THEORY-908 — Between tests, uncorrected for publication bias, implementation intentions in the contingent if-then format had larger effects than plans that schedule when, where and what without linking cue to response (d = .43 against .29); tests in which the plan was rehearsed had larger effects (.45 against .33, with no gain beyond one rehearsal), tests in which it was recorded had smaller ones (.31 against .44), and adding how or for how long to a time and place went with about half the effect (.24 against .46), THEORY-918 — Across 642 experimental tests to September 2019, forming implementation intentions improved outcomes, with uncorrected effects on behaviour (d = .27), cognitive performance (.47), affect regulation (.66) and social judgement (.52), but publication bias was substantial: the pooled d = .36 falls to a model-averaged d = .15 under robust Bayesian meta-analysis, which still found extreme evidence of an effect (BF10 = 319), with large heterogeneity

Graph View

Sheeran, P., Listrom, O. & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2024). The when and how of planning: Meta-analysis of the scope and components of implementation intentions in 642 tests. European Review of Social Psychology 36(1): 162–194. doi:10.1080/10463283.2024.2334563.

Key takeaways

From the reading, NOTE-1131. Page numbers are the journal’s.

  • Reliable but small. Pooled d = .36 over 642 tests; Egger’s b = 1.06; RoBMA d = .15 with tau = 0.27. “Thus, implementation intentions appear to have a robust impact on outcomes though the effect size is small according to conventional guidelines” (p. 170).
  • Broad scope, uncorrected. Behaviour .27, cognitive performance .47, affect regulation .66, social judgement .52 (Table 1); lab .49, field .27 (Table 2).
  • The link matters. Contingent if-then plans .43, schedule plans .29 (Table 3, p. 173).
  • Do not revisit the plan. Rehearsal once .45 against .33; recording .31 against .44; “when participants had the opportunity to revisit their plans (e.g., because they retained copies), those plans were less effective” (p. 180).
  • Motivation gates it. High against low motivation d = .79 (k = 8); for physical activity, planning “had no effect when intentions were weak” (p. 177).
  • Out of date. The search ended in September 2019 (p. 168).

Why this is here

The exchange cited it at turn U10 as “a 2024 meta-analysis covering 642 independent tests” of implementation intentions. The abstract confirms the count and adds what the exchange did not use: the effect depends on the if-then format, on motivation and on rehearsal. The print issue is 2025.

Corrected 2026-10-24, from the reading. The abstract’s range (.27 ≤ d ≤ .66) is uncorrected for publication bias, which the authors find substantial; their bias-corrected estimate is d = .15. For CLAIM-443 the review confirms that if-then links of situation to response change behaviour, adds that the conditional link and not the schedule carries the effect, and does not test what happens when the planned response becomes the wrong one. Filed from it: THEORY-918 (the effect and its bias), THEORY-908 (format, rehearsal and recording), and a share in THEORY-904 (goal-dependence).

Backlinks