Less is more: The effect of multiple implementation intentions targeting unhealthy snacking habits

Abstract

Implementation intentions have been shown to effectively change counter‐intentional habits. Research has, however, almost solely been concerned with the effectiveness of a single plan. In the present research, we investigated the behavioral and cognitive implications of making multiple implementation intentions targeting unhealthy snacking habits and its underlying processes, linking multiple habitual snacking cues to healthy alternatives. Study 1 revealed that formulating multiple implementation intentions was not effective in decreasing unhealthy snacking, whereas formulating a single plan successfully induced behavior change. By using a lexical decision task in Study 2, it was found that when making a single plan, but not multiple plans, the healthy alternative became cognitively more accessible in response to a critical cue prime than the habitual response. However, when making additional plans in an unrelated domain, the negative effects of making multiple plans were absent. In sum, the current findings suggest that formulating multiple implementation intentions is ineffective when changing unwanted behavior. These reduced effects of multiple implementation intentions do not occur when making the plan but are rather due to interference in the enacting phase of the planning process. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cognitive and neuromodulation strategies for unhealthy eating and obesity: Systematic review and discussion of neurocognitive mechanisms

“…healthy snacks when forming any type of II (regardless of match with their regulatory orientation), while participants with strong unhealthy snacking habits consumed more healthy snacks only when forming II that matched their regulatory orientations (promotion-focused or orientation-focused). Verhoeven and colleagues (2013) investigated the effectiveness of making a single versus multiple II for reducing unhealthy snacking habits, as measured by the Self-Report Habit Index (Verhoeven et al, 2013). Findings showed that a single plan successfully reduced unhealthy snacking habits, whereas formulating multiple II was ineffective.…”

“You Can't Always Get What You Want”: A Novel Research Paradigm to Explore the Relationship between Multiple Intentions and Behaviours

“…These findings may be interpreted as an indication that the increased automaticity associated with the exercise habit has freed self‐regulatory capacity that participants could use to more effectively regulate other desirable health behaviours. This is also the hypothesised mechanism behind many interventions involving the formulation of one or more action plans (or implementation intentions) which are hypothesised to facilitate behaviour change by increasing the automaticity of behavioural performance (de Bruijn, Wiedemann, & Rhodes, ; Sheeran, Webb, & Gollwitzer, ; Verhoeven, Adriaanse, de Ridder, de Vet, & Fennis, ; Wiedemann, Lippke, & Schwarzer, ). Evaluated in a multiple‐behaviour paradigm, the known mechanisms of planning interventions can be contrasted against a competing hypothesis, that planning increases the salience and priority of certain behaviours over that of alternative options.…”

Utilising implementation intentions to promote healthy eating in adolescents

“…Third, findings from the literature regarding the effectiveness of making multiple implementation intentions on unhealthy eating habits in adults may be applicable here. It has been reported, for example, that implementation intentions are only effective in relation to the achievement of a single goal (Dalton & Spiller, 2012;Verhoeven, Adriaanse, Ridder, Vet, & Fennis, 2013). We justified the inclusion of multiple plans in our intervention based on the rationale that making plans to eat healthily requires the formation of a series of related goals, and this reflects more accurately real-life goal striving, rather than a contrived focus on a single goal.…”