It might be only two days after New Year’s Day, yet resolutions are notoriously hard to keep. One estimate puts their long-term success rate at barely 8%.
Many fall flat almost instantly. How are yours faring?
From personal experience and observation, Civis suspects many resolutions fail because they are too ambitious. In the flush of a new year, we want to make a difference. We persuade ourselves that a fresh start means new goals can suddenly be achieved.
Too often, we overestimate what is "achievable", and disappointment quickly follows.
No wonder the second Friday of January in the United States is dubbed "Quitters’ Day".
One US study predicts the most common resolution for 2026 will be to exercise more, with 25% of respondents listing it. It narrowly edges out others, such as being happier, eating more healthily, saving money and, of course, losing weight.
Consider one way to help an exercise resolution stick. Instead of "walk for 30 minutes a day", set the goal at only two or three days a week.
The idea is to use a few psychological tricks on ourselves. By choosing an aim that is both easy and meaningful, we set ourselves up for success. Positive reinforcement becomes the reward. Few forces destroy resolutions faster than early failure.
We might fold the walks into daily routines, such as commuting to or from work. We might also complete those two or three walks well before week’s end.
Nothing stops us from adding extra sessions or extending them. That is when we enter feel-good bonus territory.
Thus begins week after week of habit-building achievement. One study suggests it can take up to 254 days to consolidate a new routine.
There’s no need to raise the minimum before next year rolls around. Enjoy extra walks when they happen — and if they don’t, it doesn’t matter.
Naturally, we all respond differently to different forms of motivation, something the best teachers and coaches understand well.
As online game designers and social-media companies know, countless psychological techniques encourage people to stay the course. One obvious example, as social creatures, is sharing progress. The awareness of others watching helps keep us accountable — for better or worse.
* * *
In terms of annoying phrases, "in terms of" has raised the ire of Nordal Stene. He sees it as always unnecessary and irritating; Civis agrees. Nordal notes that RNZ presenters favour the phrase.
Another reader, Michael Anderson, adds "the proof is in the pudding". "It’s in the eating, not the pudding," he says.
Indeed. However, the modern expression can be seen as a shortened version of the older saying: "the proof of the pudding is in the eating".
Although the phrase appears in English texts from the early 17th century, its origins might be older still.
"Puddings" then were nothing like today’s sweet desserts. They were mixtures of minced meat, cereals and spices, often stuffed into intestines and boiled or steamed. The results could be delicious — or dreadful. Poor preparation could make them lethal.
Michael also dislikes hearing people say something "begs the question" when they simply mean it "raises the question". Begging the question is something else entirely, he says.
Correct. To beg the question is to assume the truth of the very point in dispute. The term traces to Aristotle and describes a circular argument.
Perhaps one New Year’s resolution could be to spout fewer vacuous or phoney phrases.
Should you fail, at least the only people you’ll annoy are pedants — present company included.
