Crafting New Year’s Resolutions That Stick

Every January, innumerable people set New Year’s resolutions with genuine hope and commitment to change. They aim to do things like eat better, move more, sleep longer or finally leave behind habits that no longer serve them. Yet by spring, many resolutions fall away. Research suggests this is not a failure of motivation or discipline, but often a matter of how goals are framed and structured.

A large experimental study published in PLOS ONE in 2020 followed more than one thousand adults who set their own New Year’s resolutions and tracked their progress for a full year. This was a longitudinal behavioral experiment, meaning participants were observed over time rather than surveyed once. When researchers checked in on them a year later, more than half of respondents said they had been successful in maintaining their resolutions. One finding stood out clearly: participants who framed their goals around positive actions were significantly more successful than those who focused on avoidance. About 59 percent of people with approach oriented goals reported success compared with about 47 percent of those with avoidance oriented goals.

An approach oriented goal focuses on what someone wants to do or add, such as eating more vegetables or walking regularly. An avoidance oriented goal focuses on stopping a behavior, like cutting out sugar or avoiding social media. The study suggests that giving the brain a clear positive action may make change easier to sustain than focusing on what not to do.

Another 2020 study published in the Journal of Applied Psychology: Health and Well Being explored a different aspect of goal setting. This was a field experiment involving 256 adults who were asked to set New Year’s resolutions and then guided to focus on different types of goals. Some participants focused on a superordinate goal, meaning a bigger purpose or reason behind the change (e.g. “get healthy” or “spend more time with family”). Others focused on subordinate goals, meaning specific actions or steps (e.g. “go for a walk four times per week” or “go to the park every weekend with the kids”). A third group worked with both types of goals at the same time. The researchers found that participants in the third group—those who combined a meaningful purpose with concrete actions—invested more effort into their resolutions than those who focused on only one level.

Taken together, these studies offer useful insight into why some resolutions last while others do not. Successful change appears to be less about strict self control and more about direction, meaning-making and structure.

One practical takeaway is to frame resolutions around addition rather than restriction. Instead of saying “stop eating junk food,” a goal like “cook three nourishing meals a week” provides a clear behavior to follow.

Another key strategy is pairing purpose with action. The second study suggests that people are more engaged when they understand why a goal matters to them and also know exactly how to act on it. For example, wanting more love in your life is a superordinate goal. Making a point of talking to one new person every day is a subordinate goal. Together they create both motivation and momentum.

Flexibility also matters. Neither study supports perfection or rigid rules. In fact, more than half of participants in the year long study reported success without flawless adherence. This suggests that viewing resolutions as evolving experiments rather than pass or fail tests may help people stay engaged when setbacks occur.

Support plays a role as well: in the PLOS ONE study, participants who received even light guidance showed better outcomes than those with no structure at all. This support might come from a friend, a spouse, a written plan or a professional who helps refine goals over time.

Ultimately, these findings point to a shift in how we think about New Year’s resolutions. Sustainable change is more likely when goals focus on positive movement, connect to personal meaning and include realistic steps that fit into daily life. Instead of asking how to be more disciplined, the better question may be how to design goals that work with human motivation rather than against it.