Habit loops. Behavior change. Change models. Seems there are a number of ways we describe the very human phenomenon of laying neural paths. New ways to say the same thing seem to pop up every day. Here are a few:
Charles Duhigg: Cue, Routine, Reward
BJ Fogg: Trigger, Ability, Motivation
My friend’s model of change: There’s Aware; Then aware after the fact; Then sometimes catch yourself; Then eventually stop
John B. Arden: Focus, Effort to change, Effortlessness, Determined to stay in practice
Kurt Lewin: Unfreezing (getting ready to change); Change/Transition; Freezing (or refreezing)
James Prochaska: Precontemplation, Contemplation, Preparation, Action, Maintenance and Termination
Feedback Loop: Data, Relevance (the context of the behavior), Consequence, and Action
Martha Beck: Death and rebirth; Dreaming and scheming; The hero’s sage; The promised land
What is striking about these models is that they all seem to be reinterpretations of classic models.
The story-telling model: Once upon a time there was ___. Every day, ___. One day ___. Because of that, ___. Because of that, ___. Until finally ___.
Or said another way: stasis, trigger, the quest, surprise, critical choice, climax, reversal, resolution.
Or frankly, the hero’s journey (paraphrased and abbreviated): call to adventure, refusal of the call, supernatural aid, first threshold, belly of the whale (bottoming out), road of trials, limited success, temptation, atonement, success, return.
The difference is that these classic models seem to acknowledge the complexity of change and the journey change requires whereas the more modern adaptations look more like quick fixes.