Skip to main content

Research Library

Jason Hreha· Updated September 5, 2026

Curation priorities: clear methods, measurement context, effect sizes where available, and explicit limits. Inclusion does not mean every finding has independently replicated.

Evidence status: These sources concern particular models, mechanisms, or interventions. Their relevance to Behavioral Strategy is an application proposed by this site. They do not validate the integrated Four-Fit or DRIVE workflow, calibrate Behavior Fit Assessment scores, or establish superiority over another approach. See the evidence overview.

Foundational Research #

Behavior Design #

Fogg, B. J. (2009). A behavior model for persuasive design. Persuasive Technology Conference Proceedings, Article 40. DOI: 10.1145/1541948.1541999

  • Contribution: Proposes a behavior occurrence model using motivation, ability, and a trigger; Fogg’s current terminology uses “prompt” in B=MAP.
  • Proposed relevance and limit: A lens for forming diagnostic questions. The paper does not introduce or validate this site’s Behavior Fit Assessment.

Behavioral Neuroscience: Three Systems #

Rangel, A., Camerer, C., & Montague, P. R. (2008). A framework for studying the neurobiology of value-based decision making. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 9(7), 545-556. DOI: 10.1038/nrn2357

  • Key finding: The review distinguishes proposed Pavlovian, habitual, and goal-directed valuation systems with different computational and neural properties.
  • Proposed relevance and limit: Helps distinguish possible control mechanisms; it does not classify every complex real-world activity as non-habitual.

Balleine, B. W., & O’Doherty, J. P. (2010). Human and rodent homologies in action control. Neuropsychopharmacology, 35(1), 48-69. DOI: 10.1038/npp.2009.131

  • Key finding: Outcome devaluation distinguishes goal-directed actions from habits
  • Proposed relevance and limit: Supports careful distinctions between goal-directed and habitual control under the studied conditions; it does not set a universal complexity boundary for habits.

Daw, N. D., Niv, Y., & Dayan, P. (2005). Uncertainty-based competition between prefrontal and dorsolateral striatal systems for behavioral control. Nature Neuroscience, 8, 1704-1711. DOI: 10.1038/nn1560

  • Contribution: Proposes a computational account of competition between model-based and model-free control based on uncertainty.
  • Proposed relevance and limit: A theoretical account of action control, not a validated rule for deciding which customer activities can become habits.

Nudge Effectiveness #

DellaVigna, S., & Linos, E. (2022). RCTs to scale: Comprehensive evidence from two nudge units. Econometrica, 90(1), 81-116. DOI: 10.3982/ECTA18709

  • Key finding: The compared nudge-unit trials averaged about 1.4 percentage points, versus 8.7 percentage points in the academic-journal comparison sample. The nudge-unit average was positive; these are absolute percentage-point changes, not relative percentages. BS-0003

  • Proposed relevance and limit: Published estimates can overstate the effect to expect at scale. The samples differ in ways beyond laboratory versus field settings, and neither sample average forecasts every new intervention.

Maier, M., et al. (2022). No evidence for nudging after adjusting for publication bias. PNAS, 119(31), e2200300119. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2200300119

  • Key finding: After correcting for publication bias, estimated mean effects shrink substantially and move toward ~0 in their preferred specifications; the authors argue that the literature does not provide robust evidence of nudge effectiveness after adjustment.
  • Relevance: Publication bias can inflate apparent nudge effectiveness claims; treat meta-analytic averages cautiously

Hu, Y., et al. (2025). Assessing nudge impact: A comprehensive second-order meta-analysis. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. DOI: 10.1002/bdm.70053

  • Key finding: Aggregated estimate across meta-analyses (d = 0.270) drops to near zero (d = 0.004) after publication-bias adjustment; the authors flag quality limitations in many underlying meta-analyses.
  • Proposed relevance and limit: Bias correction and review quality materially affect pooled estimates. A near-zero adjusted mean is not proof that every intervention is ineffective or that Behavioral Strategy performs better.

Habit Formation (with limitations) #

Lally, P., et al. (2010). How are habits formed: Modelling habit formation in the real world. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40(6), 998-1009. DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.674

  • Key finding: Participants repeated self-selected eating, drinking, or exercise behaviors in a consistent context over 12 weeks. The often-cited median of 66 days concerns modeled time to 95% of an individual’s automaticity asymptote in the fitted subset; estimated times ranged from 18 to 254 days. Some estimates therefore extend beyond the observation window. BS-0026

  • Proposed relevance and limit: Habit development varied substantially. The study included exercise, but does not establish a universal deadline or show that every part of a complex activity becomes automatic.

Implementation Intentions #

Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2006). Implementation intentions and goal achievement: A meta-analysis. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 69-119. DOI: 10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38002-1

  • Key finding: If-then plans improve goal achievement (d=0.65)
  • Relevance: Making goal-directed behavior more reliable without converting to habit

Self-Concept, Motivation, and Behavior #

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68-78. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

  • Contribution: Presents autonomy, competence, and relatedness as basic psychological needs within self-determination theory.
  • Relevance: Adjacent theory about recurring motives and preferences; it does not validate the BFA dimension

Oyserman, D., Fryberg, S. A., & Yoder, N. (2007). Identity-based motivation and health. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(6), 1011-1027. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.93.6.1011

  • Key finding: Social identity can influence how health behaviors are interpreted and selected
  • Relevance: Self-concept can be a secondary signal in a specific domain; it does not define Dispositional Fit or BSM Personal Components

Intention-Behavior Gap #

Sheeran, P., & Webb, T. L. (2016). The intention-behavior gap. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10(9), 503-518. DOI: 10.1111/spc3.12265

  • Contribution: Reviews the gap between intentions and subsequent behavior, including factors that affect whether intentions are enacted.
  • Proposed relevance and limit: Supports measuring behavior separately from intention. It does not directly validate Capability Fit or Context Fit scores.

Foundational Behavior Theory #

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. DOI: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T

  • Contribution: Presents a model relating attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, intentions, and behavior.
  • Proposed relevance and limit: A related multi-factor behavior model. Its evidence does not independently validate the structure or scoring of this site’s Behavior Fit Assessment.

Context and Environment #

Wood, W., & Rünger, D. (2016). Psychology of habit. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 289-314. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-122414-033417

  • Contribution: Reviews how repetition in recurring contexts can form cue-response associations, including interactions between habits and deliberate goals.
  • Proposed relevance and limit: Informs questions about cues and repeated action. The review does not restrict all habits to simple behaviors or validate the Context Fit score.

Thaler, R. H., & Benartzi, S. (2004). Save More Tomorrow: Using behavioral economics to increase employee saving. Journal of Political Economy, 112(S1). DOI: 10.1086/380085

  • Key finding: In the first implementation, employees could commit in advance to allocating part of future pay increases to saving. Participants’ average contribution rate rose from 3.5% to 13.6% over 40 months.
  • Proposed relevance and limit: This was voluntary commitment with automatic contribution escalation, not automatic enrollment. The result is specific to that program and does not establish general superiority over motivation-based approaches.

Self-Regulation #

Baumeister, R. F., Vohs, K. D., & Tice, D. M. (2007). The strength model of self-control. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(6), 351-355. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00534.x

  • Contribution: Presents the strength model of self-control, including the proposal that exerting self-control can reduce subsequent performance.
  • Proposed relevance and limit: A historical theoretical account, not settled evidence of a finite willpower resource. It does not demonstrate that Behavioral Strategy or environmental design outperforms alternatives. See replication and interpretation limits.

Taxonomy #

  • Behavior change field experiments
  • Measurement methods and reporting standards
  • Product adoption and diffusion
  • Personality-behavior interactions
  • Social and physical environment effects
  • Habitual vs goal-directed systems
  • Nudge effectiveness and limitations

See also