How to Make New Year’s Resolutions That Actually Work
Just after midnight on January 1, a woman in Stockholm opened her notes app and typed a simple line: “Take better care of my health.” Like millions of people around the world, she was fueled by the optimism of a fresh start. But she also wondered—as most of us do—Will this actually work?
A recent peer-reviewed study offers an unusually detailed answer. Published in PLOS ONE, the research by Oscarsson and colleagues followed more than 1,000 adults over the course of a full year to understand which New Year’s resolutions thrive, which ones fade, and what separates the two. The findings deliver both nuance and practical insight—and challenge some long-held assumptions about goal setting. file (2)
A Rare Longitudinal Look at How Resolutions Unfold
Despite how common New Year’s resolutions are, surprisingly little rigorous research exists on them. Many studies have relied on small samples, focused on narrow topics such as smoking cessation, or had short follow-up periods.
The Oscarsson study fills a major gap. More than 1,000 adults, representing a wide range of ages and backgrounds, enrolled between December 2016 and January 2017. They submitted their resolutions in free text (instead of choosing from preset categories), and were randomly assigned to one of three conditions:
- No support (brief instructions + 3 follow-ups)
- Some support (guidance on social support + monthly follow-ups + one email)
- Extended support (SMART goal instruction, interim goals, and four emails across the year)
Then researchers did something rare in behavior-change research: they followed everyone for 12 full months.
At the one-year mark, 55% of respondents reported success. That’s far higher than the 20–40% success rates reported in earlier studies.
What People Actually Resolve to Do
Because participants wrote their resolutions in their own words, researchers were able to map them into 15 categories. The top three were:
- Physical health (33%)
- Weight loss (20%)
- Change in eating habits (13%)
Lower on the list but still notable were personal growth, mental health and sleep, social engagement, and work-related goals.
Interestingly, nearly two-thirds (64.5%) created approach-oriented goals—things they wanted to do rather than things they wanted to avoid.
This distinction turned out to matter a lot.
Key Insight: Approach-Oriented Goals Perform Better
One of the clearest findings in the study is also one of the most actionable: People who set approach-oriented goals were significantly more successful (58.9%) than those with avoidance-oriented goals (47.1%).
Approach goals sound like:
- “Eat more vegetables.”
- “Be more physically active.”
- “Spend more time with friends.”
Avoidance goals sound like:
- “Stop eating sugar.”
- “Cut down on screen time.”
- “Stop procrastinating.”
This mirrors decades of motivation science showing that “moving toward” goals tends to feel more energizing, more specific, and more achievable than “moving away from” goals.
For public health professionals designing programs around behavioral change, this insight is gold. It means the framing of a goal—even when the behavior is the same—can significantly shift the likelihood of long-term success.
Surprising Twist: More Support Didn’t Equal More Success
You might assume that the group given the most structured support—SMART goals, interim targets, and four thematic emails—would perform best.
But that’s not what happened.
The “some support” group actually had higher success rates than both the “no support” and the “extended support” groups. Why? Researchers offer several possibilities:
- Too much structure can backfire. Participants asked to create very specific, measurable goals were more likely to judge themselves harshly when they fell short—even if they’d made meaningful progress.
- Interim goals increase the risk of perceived failure. Missing one checkpoint may have led to discouragement, even when the overall goal was still on track.
- Saturation might occur. Adding more emails and tasks may not add meaningful value once basic support is already in place.
This is an important implication for public health: More intervention isn’t always better intervention.
A single well-timed nudge may be more effective than a complex coaching program—especially for large-scale community settings where time and resources are limited.
What This Means in Practice
For Local Health Departments & Community Programs
- Frame goals as approach-oriented. “Walk 20 minutes a day” works better than “Stop being inactive.”
- Provide light-touch support. A monthly check-in or simple worksheet may outperform an intensive curriculum.
- Encourage social accountability. Naming a support person improved outcomes for participants with “some support.”
For Clinicians, Coaches & Public Health Educators
- Prioritize momentum over perfection. People are more likely to persist when success feels attainable.
- Avoid overly rigid structures. SMART goals help some people—but overwhelm others.
- Build in early wins. Interim goals should feel motivating, not punitive.
For Individuals Making Their Own Resolutions
- Focus on what you want to do—not what you want to avoid.
- Keep it simple. One clear, positive behavior beats a long list.
- Use the fresh-start effect to your advantage.
Barriers & Open Questions
While the study is one of the most rigorous on New Year’s resolutions to date, several questions remain:
- How accurate are self-reports? Objective measurements (e.g., pedometer data) might reveal lower or higher success rates. file (2)
- Which populations benefit most from light support? Effects may differ by age, income, social networks, or baseline confidence.
- What happens beyond one year? Are approach-oriented goals better for habit formation long-term?
These are important areas for future research, especially as health systems look for scalable ways to support behavior change in communities.
Questions to Start Conversation
- How might your team reframe goals toward approach-oriented behaviors this year?
- Where could you replace heavy programming with light-touch nudges?
