04-011 · EVIDENCE A · SOURCE-SENSITIVE
Tie your money to your commitment — but first ask if you’re willing to pay
想让自己做到就把钱押上,但先问自己肯不肯押
Under this deposit‑based approach, participants must put up their own cash upfront; if they fail to meet the target, the money is forfeited. In this trial, the required deposit was $150.
A randomized trial compared two incentive models: one offering a cash reward for success, and another requiring an upfront deposit that is refunded plus a bonus only if the goal is met. Among those willing to join either program, the deposit model produced a success rate 13 percentage points higher than the reward model. Yet only 13.7% of participants agreed to pay the deposit, while 90% opted for the reward option. Thus the deposit approach works best for those willing to pay; for everyone else it essentially has no effect.
A
Move “Tie your money to your commitment — but first ask if you’re willing to pay” to Future Me's calendar
The excuse
One more exception feels free because the bill arrives outside the current scene.
What feels good now
Today I keep a little money, a few minutes, a bit of persistence and avoid interrupting my default routine.
What the source says
The source summarizes the return this way: “A randomized trial compared two incentive models: one offering a cash reward for success, and another requiring an upfront deposit that is refunded plus a bonus only if the goal is met. Among those willing to join either program, the deposit model produced a success rate 13 percentage points higher than the reward model. Yet only 13.7% of participants agreed to pay the deposit, while 90% opted for the reward option. Thus the deposit approach works best for those willing to pay; for everyone else it essentially has no effect.” Evidence grade A. The original states the population, caveats, and sources; this is not a personal forecast.
Use the original facts and limits. For an urgent medical, safety, financial, or legal issue, contact a qualified local professional or service.
THE ENGLISH EDITION
Original recommendation and evidence
11. Tie your money to your commitment — but first ask if you’re willing to pay
Cost: Under this deposit‑based approach, participants must put up their own cash upfront; if they fail to meet the target, the money is forfeited. In this trial, the required deposit was $150.
In plain terms: A randomized trial compared two incentive models: one offering a cash reward for success, and another requiring an upfront deposit that is refunded plus a bonus only if the goal is met. Among those willing to join either program, the deposit model produced a success rate 13 percentage points higher than the reward model. Yet only 13.7% of participants agreed to pay the deposit, while 90% opted for the reward option. Thus the deposit approach works best for those willing to pay; for everyone else it essentially has no effect.
Benefit: In a U.S. trial with 2,538 participants, employees and their relatives were randomly assigned to one of four incentive schemes or standard care. The reward model (earning roughly $800 for success) attracted 90.0% participation, whereas the deposit model (requiring a $150 upfront payment plus a $650 bonus) attracted just 13.7%. After six months, overall quit rates ranged from 9.4% to 16.0% across all incentive groups, compared with 6.0% under standard care. The reward model yielded a 15.7% quit rate, while the deposit model produced 10.2%. However, when looking only at the 13.7% of participants willing to pay the deposit, the deposit model achieved a six‑month quit rate 13.2 percentage points higher than the reward model (95% CI 3.1–22.8, a reliable range).
Evidence grade: A
Sources: Halpern SD, French B, Small DS, et al. (2015). Randomized trial of four financial-incentive programs for smoking cessation. New England Journal of Medicine, 372(22), 2108–2117. <https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1414293>
Notes: This trial focused on smoking cessation; extrapolating the findings to activities such as essay writing or exercise suggests a moderate overall benefit. The key takeaway is not which method is more effective, but whether you’d actually be willing to use it: a powerful incentive that most people reject is essentially useless for them. Therefore, pick an approach you’re comfortable with — even a modest deposit can be more effective than no deposit at all. For practical smoking‑cessation strategies, see Section 2, Item 3 (smoking‑cessation medications).
Read the complete Chinese source and notes
11. 想让自己做到就把钱押上,但先问自己肯不肯押
成本: 押金式的方案要先拿出一笔自己的钱,做不到就没收。试验里押的是 150 美元。
说人话: 想逼自己做到,可以做到了就领奖金,也可以先交押金、做到才退还再加奖。两种都肯参加的人里,交押金的做到的多出 13 个百分点。但肯交押金的只有 13.7%,肯拿奖金的有 90%,所以押金只对肯押的人有用。
收益: 美国一项 2538 人的随机试验,把员工和他们的亲友随机分到四种激励方案或常规照护。奖励型(做到给约 800 美元)的接受率 90.0%,押金型(先交 150 美元,另加 650 美元奖励)13.7%。六个月的持续戒烟率:四种激励方案在 9.4% 到 16.0% 之间,常规照护 6.0%。奖励型 15.7%,押金型 10.2%。但在只算「两种都肯参加」的那 13.7% 的人里,押金型的六个月戒烟率比奖励型高 13.2 个百分点(95% CI 3.1 到 22.8,这是可信范围)。
证据等级: A
来源: Halpern SD, French B, Small DS, et al. (2015). Randomized trial of four financial-incentive programs for smoking cessation. New England Journal of Medicine, 372(22), 2108–2117. <https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1414293>
备注: 这个试验测的是戒烟,搬到写论文、健身这类事上属于顺推,所以收益量级记「中」。选方案时先看自己会不会真的用它。多数人不肯接受的办法,效果再强,对这些人也没有用。所以先挑你肯接受的那种,押小一点也比不押强。戒烟本身怎么戒见第 2 节第 3 条(戒烟药)。
YOUR PRIVATE LIST