By Elisabeth McKay, founder of Break Method and PredictiveMind

On October 13, Forbes published a feature on PredictiveMind and the work that began with Break Method. Written by Dr. Shaheena Janjuha-Jivraj, the article explores a question with consequences far beyond technology: how do we understand the distance between what someone intends to do and how they actually behave? Read the Forbes feature.

For me, that question belongs as much in a marriage or a difficult conversation as it does in a discussion about AI. Consider someone who wants a closer relationship but withholds what they need until resentment takes over. Or someone who wants more responsibility at work but becomes defensive whenever their judgment is questioned. In both examples, the stated goal can be sincere while the behavior repeatedly moves the person further from it.

The contradiction is useful information. If we explain it away each time, we lose the opportunity to examine what keeps producing it.

Why sincere intentions do not always predict behavior

An honest answer describes what a person currently recognizes and is willing to report. It does not necessarily account for the response they will have when they feel challenged, disappointed, exposed, or uncertain. Someone can value direct communication and still avoid a difficult conversation. They can recognize the cost of micromanaging and still take over the moment someone approaches a task differently.

Research on habit offers one useful explanation for this gap. Repeated responses can become associated with recurring contexts, allowing familiar cues to prompt behavior with less deliberate consideration. Those learned responses can operate alongside conscious goals, which helps explain why wanting a different outcome does not automatically change the action that occurs in a familiar situation (Wood & Rünger, 2016).

The practical implication is that a promise made after an argument needs a plan for the conditions that precede the next one. Understanding what you wish you had done is only part of the work. You also need to recognize the interpretation, expectation, and response that keep showing up together.

What this means in Break Method

Break Method focuses on identifying recurring patterns and developing strategies to interrupt the responses that sustain them. Its purpose is practical: helping someone move from recognizing a problem afterward to responding differently while the situation is unfolding.

For example, a person might describe their silence as keeping the peace. Looking at the sequence more carefully could reveal that they anticipate an uncomfortable reaction, withhold their preference, and later resent an agreement they never wanted to make. A useful strategy has to address that sequence. It might involve expressing a preference clearly before agreeing, then allowing the other person to respond without immediately softening or withdrawing it.

The learning opportunity comes from observing what actually happens. Does disagreement lead to the outcome they anticipated? Can they remain engaged without retreating or escalating? These observations give them something concrete to examine beyond the familiar explanation for why withholding felt necessary.

A 2025 pilot study published in JMIR Formative Research examined self-reported outcomes among 175 Break Method participants and found improvements in reported mental health following participation. The findings are preliminary: the study had no control group and used a nonvalidated self-report measure. It evaluated the program, rather than PredictiveMind’s ability to predict future behavior (Salik, Gold, & Krier, 2025).

Why the Forbes conversation matters

The Forbes feature follows the development from Break Method to PredictiveMind and examines the limits of relying on self-perception when modeling behavior. PredictiveMind’s approach uses developmental-history inputs to build a behavioral model, then compares that model with self-perception responses. The article also identifies independent validation against behavior observed over time as an important next milestone.

I welcome that conversation because the questions deserve careful investigation. A useful behavioral model should help us ask more precise questions about recurring decisions and the conditions surrounding them. Its value depends on what those insights allow people to understand and do.

For readers encountering this work for the first time, start with a situation that keeps repeating in your own life. Describe what you intended, what you expected would happen, what you actually did, and the result. Keep the description specific enough that you can recognize the sequence when it begins again.

That is where a broad desire to change becomes a concrete behavior you can work on.

Read the full Forbes feature on Elisabeth McKay and PredictiveMind. To explore the behavior-change work behind the technology, learn more about Break Method.