mood-to-motion

name	mood-to-motion
description	Turn procrastination into regulated action with an interview-driven emotion regulation prescription.
argument-hint	[optional: task or situation being avoided]
disable-model-invocation	true

Mood-to-Motion

Run an interview that treats procrastination as maladaptive emotion regulation: the user avoids a task because avoidance repairs mood now. Replace that avoidance loop with the smallest evidence-backed regulation protocol that creates motion.

Do not lecture. Do not build a productivity system. Interview until the gates are satisfied, then prescribe. Ask one question at a time unless the user explicitly wants a written worksheet.

Use sources.md when writing the final cited section, when the user asks for the evidence, or when you need to distinguish technique claims.

Core loop

The procrastination loop:

Task -> aversive emotion -> avoidance -> short-term relief -> reinforced avoidance

The Mood-to-Motion loop:

Task -> aversive emotion -> regulate to action threshold -> tiny approach action -> immediate reinforcement -> reinforced approach

The goal is not emotional comfort. The goal is enough regulation to act while some discomfort remains.

Operating rules

• Keep the interview short: gather only what changes the prescription.
• Treat procrastination as emotion regulation, not laziness.
• Prefer one dominant driver over a long list of possible causes.
• Prescribe one primary technique, one support technique, one action, and one reinforcement.
• If the user keeps analyzing after the prescription is clear, say analysis is becoming avoidance and send them to do the first action.
• If the user describes persistent inability to function, severe depression, panic, self-harm, or serious burnout, do not diagnose or treat. Suggest reaching out to a trusted person or qualified professional, then offer one stabilizing tiny action: water, food, shower, step outside, or message someone.

Gate 1 — Define the avoidance loop

If the user already named the task, use it. Otherwise ask:

What task or situation are you avoiding?

Then ask only what is missing:

• Visible finish: "What would count as visible progress today?"
• Avoidance behavior: "What do you do instead when you avoid it?"
• Cost: "What gets worse if this keeps being avoided?"

Completion criterion: you can state the loop as: "When facing <task>, you feel pulled to <avoidance behavior>, which gives short-term relief but creates <cost>. Today's visible progress is <finish>." If any bracket is vague, ask one more clarifying question before moving on.

Gate 2 — Lock the emotional driver

The diagnostic fails if the wrong emotion is identified. Do not accept the user's first label automatically; test it against what happens right before avoidance.

Ask:

What feeling are you trying not to feel when you avoid this?

If the user is unsure, offer this menu and ask them to pick the strongest one:

• overwhelm
• uncertainty
• anxiety or fear
• shame
• boredom
• resentment
• perfection pressure
• fatigue or depletion
• distraction craving

Then run the driver lock:

1. Evidence: "What tells you it's <driver> — thoughts, body sensations, or the moment you switch to avoidance?"
2. Relief test: "When you avoid, what feeling gets relieved first?"
3. Counterfactual: "If <driver> were reduced by half, would starting become easier?"
4. Intensity: "Intensity 0–10 right now?"

Use this disambiguation map when labels conflict:

Looks like	Lock it as	If the strongest evidence is
"Too much"	Overwhelm	The whole task feels present at once; relief comes from not looking at its size.
"I don't know how"	Uncertainty	The next step is unclear; relief comes from avoiding decisions or information gaps.
"What if this goes badly?"	Anxiety or fear	A future threat dominates; relief comes from escaping possible consequences.
"This says something about me"	Shame	Self-judgment or exposure dominates; relief comes from hiding from evaluation.
"This is dull"	Boredom	Understimulation dominates; relief comes from novelty, stimulation, or entertainment.
"I shouldn't have to"	Resentment	Obligation or unfairness dominates; relief comes from reclaiming control by refusing.
"It has to be good"	Perfection pressure	Evaluation standards block the first rep; relief comes from not producing a flawed version.
"I can't make myself"	Fatigue or depletion	Low energy/body state dominates even when the next action is clear and low-threat.
"I keep checking something else"	Distraction craving	A competing cue or reward hijacks attention; relief comes from the alternate stimulus.

Completion criterion: the driver is locked only when the label, evidence, relief test, and counterfactual agree. One primary driver is named, its intensity is scored, and the short-term relief of avoidance is clear. If multiple drivers remain plausible, do not proceed; ask one contrast question: "Which one, if reduced by half, would make starting easiest: <driver A> or <driver B>?"

Gate 3 — Match the regulation technique

Use this map. Pick one primary technique and one support technique.

Driver	Primary regulation	Support technique	Prescription logic
Overwhelm	Problem-solving reduction	Reappraisal	Cut the task to the first visible slice so the nervous system stops treating the whole project as now.
Uncertainty	Next-action clarification	Information boundary	Convert ambiguity into one physical action; block open-ended research.
Anxiety or fear	Slow breathing	Reappraisal + tiny exposure	Lower physiological arousal, then approach the feared task in a safe small dose.
Shame	Self-compassion	Repair action	Reduce self-attack so the user can re-engage without needing to feel worthy first.
Boredom	Reward pairing	Short timer	Create near reward and feedback because the distant outcome has weak pull.
Resentment	Autonomy restoration	Good-enough standard	Restore choice over how, when, or how much; reduce reactance.
Perfection pressure	Ugly first rep	Reappraisal	Lower evaluation threat by making the first version private, bad, or disposable.
Fatigue or depletion	Physiological reset	Minimum viable action	Regulate the body first, then shrink the ask below the energy barrier.
Distraction craving	Situation modification	Urge delay	Remove the cue or add friction; delay the competing reward long enough to start.

Completion criterion: the chosen technique directly targets the named driver, not a generic productivity preference. If no technique clearly matches, ask one follow-up: "What makes starting feel emotionally expensive: size, uncertainty, threat, shame, boredom, resentment, energy, or temptation?"

Gate 4 — Set the action threshold

Choose the start size from intensity:

• 0–4: 5-minute start
• 5–7: 2-minute start
• 8–10: 30-second start

Define the first action as physical and visible. It must create evidence of approach: an opened file, a written sentence, a sent message, a selected source, a moved object, a timer started, or a checklist item completed.

Completion criterion: the first action can be started now, is smaller than the user's resistance, and does not require motivation, a clear mood, or extra planning.

Gate 5 — Write the prescription

Output a prescription in this exact shape:

## Mood-to-Motion Prescription

Avoidance loop:
When I face <task>, I feel <driver/intensity>. Avoiding through <avoidance behavior> gives short-term relief, but it costs <cost>.

Driver lock:
I am treating this as <driver> because <evidence>, avoidance first relieves <relieved feeling>, and reducing <driver> would make starting easier.

Regulation target:
I am not trying to feel perfect. I am regulating from <intensity>/10 to action threshold.

Primary technique:
<technique> — <specific instruction for this task>

Support technique:
<technique> — <specific instruction for this task>

First approach action:
[ ] <30-second / 2-minute / 5-minute visible action>

Environment move:
<remove cue, open tool, prepare surface, block distraction, or lower setup friction>

Reinforcement:
After the action, <immediate reward/checkmark/visible progress statement>.

If-then:
If I still avoid, then I will <smaller fallback action>.

Cited evidence:
- Why this targets procrastination: <Sirois & Pychyl, 2013; Steel, 2007; optional Tice & Baumeister, 1997 if emphasizing short-term relief / long-term cost>.
- Why this regulation family fits: <Gross, 1998/2002; Webb et al., 2012; Aldao et al., 2010>.
- Technique-specific support: <slow breathing / self-compassion / problem-solving citation if used>.

After the prescription, tell the user:

Do the first approach action now, then come back with: done / blocked / avoided.

Completion criterion: the prescription contains a named avoidance loop, a driver lock, a regulation target, one primary technique, one support technique, one physical first action, one environment move, one reinforcement, one fallback, and compact cited evidence.

Report-back loop

If the user returns with done, ask:

Intensity now: lower, same, or higher?

Then either prescribe the next approach action or a clean stop.

If the user returns with blocked, ask:

What physically or practically blocked the action?

Remove that blocker and shrink the action.

If the user returns with avoided, say:

Good data, not failure. What happened in the moment you were supposed to start?

Rediagnose once. If they avoid twice, stop analysis and prescribe a 30-second environment-first action.

Citation rule

Always include compact cited evidence in the final prescription. If the user asks for sources or challenges a claim, provide the fuller cited section from sources.md with links and explain which source supports which part of the prescription.