My husband and I view the act of making change quite differently. It makes sense: we are different people. Although I suppose much of the way we approach it depends on the change itself, I’m fascinated by the fact that what works for some people won’t necessarily work for others.
Take the act of quitting smoking. Some people need to quit cold turkey, while others are more apt to want to quit over time by slowly weaning themselves off of their addiction. Another example of making change could be cutting out fried foods. Some people will rarely, if ever, touch fried foods, while others may stay clear of fried foods 80 to 90 percent of the time, indulging in them once in awhile.
Although dealing with addiction isn’t the same as dealing with a less drastic modification such as our fried food example, many people tend to approach change in one of two ways: All or nothing, or more moderately with wiggle room. There are arguments to both sides. Those who advocate for an all or nothing approach will argue that allowing yourself to indulge once in awhile can very easily morph into indulging a little more often, and more and more often, until you are ultimately back at where you started. On the other hand, those who advocate for a moderate approach will argue an individual feels less deprived and more encouraged to stay with the change they’ve made by allowing themselves to go off course once in awhile.
When making change in your own life, do you tend to approach it in a certain way? Do you prefer the all or nothing approach? Or, are you more likely to succeed through moderation? Finally, do you think this varies depending on the type of change you are making?
Looking to make real, lasting change for better health? Read 52 Small Changes: One Year to a Happier, Healthier You – an easy to follow, week-by-week guide to health and happiness. Get it now at Amazon.com.