Research suggests that mental contrasting with implementation intentions (MCII) enhances commitment and goal attainment. However, most studies have used limited comparison conditions. The present study compared MCII against two other potentially effective approaches: autonomous planning (AP), and solution-focused planning (SFP). It was thought that condition would have an indirect effect on goal progress by affecting commitment. However, goal attainment expectancy was hypothesised to be a moderator such that MCII has positive effects when expectancy is high but negative effects when expectancy is low. Ninety-eight female students were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: 1) MCII, 2) AP, or 3) SFP. All students initially set themselves a goal for the coming week regarding personal projects. Mean commitment and goal progress were marginally higher in the MCII condition than in the AP and SFP conditions but the differences were not statistically significant and (as predicted) much smaller than in previous research. Expectancy did not appear to have a moderating effect. The apparent benefits of MCII were larger relative to AP than to SFP. Results suggest that MCII may sometimes be no more effective than other approaches to goal-setting and planning, particularly if they are evidence-based and carefully-designed. Implications for schools are addressed.

研究表明，与实施意图（MCII）进行心理对比可以增强承诺和目标实现。但是，大多数研究使用的比较条件有限。本研究将MCII与其他两种可能有效的方法进行了比较：自治计划（AP）和以解决方案为中心的计划（SFP）。人们认为条件会通过影响承诺而对目标进度产生间接影响。但是，假设目标达到期望值是一个调节器，这样，当期望值较高时，MCII会产生积极影响，而期望值较低时，MCII会产生负面影响。98名女学生被随机分配到以下三个条件之一：1）MCII，2）AP或3）SFP。最初，所有学生都为下个星期设定有关个人项目的目标。在MCII条件下，平均承诺和目标进度略高于AP和SFP条件，但差异没有统计学意义，并且（如预期的那样）比以前的研究小得多。预期似乎没有起到调节作用。相对于AP，MCII的明显优势要大于SFP。结果表明，MCII有时可能不比其他方法来设定和规划目标更有效，尤其是如果它们是基于证据并经过精心设计的。对学校的影响已得到解决。相对于AP，MCII的明显优势要大于SFP。结果表明，MCII有时可能不比其他方法来设定和规划目标更有效，尤其是如果它们是基于证据并经过精心设计的。对学校的影响已得到解决。相对于AP，MCII的明显优势要大于SFP。结果表明，MCII有时可能不比其他方法来设定和规划目标更有效，尤其是如果它们是基于证据并经过精心设计的。对学校的影响已得到解决。