Human decision-making is sometimes systematically biased toward suboptimal decisions. For example, people often make short-sighted choices because they don't give enough weight to the long-term consequences of their actions. Previous studies showed that it is possible to overcome such biases by teaching people a more rational decision strategy through instruction, demonstrations, or practice with feedback. The benefits of these approaches tend to be limited to situations that are very similar to those used during the training. One way to overcome this limitation is to create general tools and strategies that people can use to improve their decision-making in any situation. Here we propose one such approach, namely directing people to systematically reflect on how they make their decisions. In systematic reflection, past experience is re-evaluated with the intention to learn. In this study, we investigate how reflection affects how people learn to plan and whether reflective learning can help people to discover more far-sighted planning strategies. In our experiment participants solve a series of 30 planning problems where the immediate rewards are smaller and therefore less important than long-term rewards. Building on Wolfbauer et al. (2020), the experimental group is guided by four reflection prompts asking the participant to describe their planning strategy, the strategy's performance, and his or her emotional response, insights, and intention to change their strategy. The control group practices planning without reflection prompts. Our pilot data suggest that systematic reflection helps people to more rapidly discover adaptive planning strategies. Our findings suggest that reflection is useful not only for helping people learn what to do in a specific situation but also for helping people learn how to think about what to do. In future work, we will compare the effects of different types of reflection on the subsequent changes in people's decision strategies. Developing apps that prompt people to reflect on their decisions may be a promising approach to accelerating cognitive growth and promoting lifelong learning.

Well-doing, broadly construed, encompasses acting and thinking in ways that contribute to humanity’s flourishing in the long run. This often takes the form of setting a prosocial goal and pursuing it over an extended period of time. To set and pursue goals in a way that is extremely beneficial for humanity (effective well-doing), people often have to employ critical thinking and far-sighted, rational decision-making in the service of the greater good. To promote effective well-doing, we need to better understand its determinants and psychological mechanisms, as well as the barriers to effective well-doing and how they can be overcome. In this article, we introduce a taxonomy of different forms of well-doing and introduce a conceptual model of the cognitive mechanisms of effective well-doing. We view effective well-doing as the upper end of a moral continuum whose lower half comprises behaviors that are harmful to humanity (ill-doing), and we argue that the capacity for effective well-doing has to be developed through personal growth (e.g., learning how to pursue goals effectively). Research on these phenomena has so far been scattered across numerous disconnected literatures from multiple disciplines. To bring these communities together, we call for the establishment of a transdisciplinary research field focussed on understanding and promoting effective well-doing and personal growth as well as understanding and reducing ill-doing. We define this research field in terms of its goals and questions. We review what is already known about these questions in different disciplines and argue that laying the scientific foundation for promoting effective well-doing is one of the most valuable contributions that the behavioral sciences can make in the 21st century.

What should I work on first? What can wait until later? Which projects should I prioritize and which tasks are not worth my time? These are challenging questions that many people face every day. People’s intuitive strategy is to prioritize their immediate experience over the long-term consequences. This leads to procrastination and the neglect of important long-term projects in favor of seemingly urgent tasks that are less important. Optimal gamification strives to help people overcome these problems by incentivizing each task by a number of points that communicates how valuable it is in the long-run. Unfortunately, computing the optimal number of points with standard dynamic programming methods quickly becomes intractable as the number of a person’s projects and the number of tasks required by each project increase. Here, we introduce and evaluate a scalable method for identifying which tasks are most important in the long run and incentivizing each task according to its long-term value. Our method makes it possible to create to-do list gamification apps that can handle the size and complexity of people’s to-do lists in the real world.