Financial incentives for weight loss and what happens afterward

Weight regain and limited evidence of benefit after payments stop

Across 23 post-incentive comparisons in the adult meta-analysis, the standardized mean difference was 0.032 and was not statistically significant. Relatively few studies reported post-incentive data. The evidence therefore does not justify either saying that everyone necessarily regains weight or promising that a reward automatically becomes a lasting habit. It has not clearly demonstrated an additional benefit after removal.[1]

A longer deposit-contract trial, published in 2011, involved veterans with a body mass index of 30–40. It added deposit contracts to weight monitoring and a dietitian consultation. The 32-week intervention comprised a 24-week weight-loss phase followed by an 8-week maintenance phase. Mean weight loss was 8.70 pounds with incentives and 1.17 pounds in the control condition; the 95% confidence interval for the difference was 0.56–14.50 pounds. At 32 weeks the two incentive arms did not differ, whether or not participants were told the final phase was for maintenance.[2]

At follow-up 36 weeks after the intervention ended, weight regain had occurred. Average net losses from baseline were then 1.2 pounds with incentives and 0.27 pounds in control, with no significant between-group difference. A longer intervention and a maintenance label did not, by themselves, resolve the post-intervention problem.[2]

A 2021 randomized trial followed 418 participants with overweight or obesity in an online group weight-control program; 91% were women. Incentives lasted 12 months and were linked to self-weighing, dietary self-monitoring, physical activity, and weight-outcome benchmarks. At 6 months, weight loss was significantly greater with incentives: 6.8%, compared with 4.9% without them. Behavioral engagement was also higher in the incentive group through 12 months.[4]

During months 13–18, when no incentives were provided, engagement declined markedly. At 18 months, there was no difference in sustained weight outcomes between groups. Including behavior targets alongside weight targets had helped participation while rewards lasted, but did not preserve an advantage afterward in this program.[4]

There was also a trial with a remaining difference after incentives stopped. A randomized study of 105 employees with obesity compared monthly weigh-ins alone, individual incentives of $100 per month for meeting a goal, and group incentives. Under the group arrangement, $500 per month was divided among the goal achievers within groups of 5. At 24 weeks, the group-incentive condition had lost an average of 4.4 kg more than control, with a 95% confidence interval of 2.0–6.7 kg, and 3.2 kg more than the individual-incentive condition.[9]

At 12 weeks after incentives ended, the group condition still showed 2.9 kg greater loss than control, with a 95% confidence interval of 0.5–5.3 kg. Its difference from individual incentives was not significant after adjustment for comparisons across the groups. This was a study at a single employer with a short follow-up. It shows that a short post-incentive advantage occurred under one arrangement, rather than settling the question of long-term maintenance.[9]

The group scheme involved rules for sharing money. It was not a test of encouragement from friends alone. Joining a friend for exercise cannot be expected to reproduce the kilogram difference from this payment design. The separate feature on social support considers support from other people; here the relevant details are who qualified for money, how it was divided, and how long the participants were followed.[9]

When incentives did not help, look at the comparison group

Starting to lose weight and maintaining a previous loss are different starting points. A 2018 randomized maintenance trial recruited 191 adults aged 30–80 who had already lost at least 5 kg during the first 4–6 months of a weight-loss program. Their mean age was 49.0 years, 92% were women, and their average loss before randomization was 11.4 kg. The trial asked what to add for people who had already achieved a loss.[3]

All groups received daily self-weighing and text feedback based on the measurements. Researchers compared that support alone with the same support plus lottery incentives or direct monetary incentives. Over the next 6 months, average weight changes were −3.0 kg with lottery incentives, −2.8 kg with direct incentives, and −1.4 kg in control. None of the between-group differences was significant.[3]

At 12 months, after incentives had stopped and participants had been monitored, changes were −1.8 kg with the lottery, −0.7 kg with direct incentives, and −0.3 kg in control. Again, there were no significant between-group differences. The averages look numerically more favorable for incentives, but reporting that appearance as an established benefit would contradict the trial’s statistical result.[3]

The control participants were receiving support. The question was whether money added value beyond daily weighing and feedback. It was not a comparison between receiving incentives and being left to manage alone. Equally, because there was no group receiving no intervention, the trial cannot isolate the effect of weighing and messages themselves.[3]

A long incentive period does not necessarily produce a clear difference either. Another randomized trial enrolled 344 adult employees with obesity and an additional cardiovascular risk factor. Mean age was 45.6 years, and 71.8% were women. It compared lottery incentives, individually tailored environmental strategies, their combination, and usual care. Intervention delivery included a website and text messages.[15]

At 18 months, the incentive condition had an average of 2.45 kg greater weight loss than usual care. However, the 95% confidence interval for the difference in weight change was −5.09 to 0.23 kg, and the difference was not statistically significant. Environmental strategies and the combination also did not show significant superiority. At 24 months, including time without intervention, there were still no between-group differences.[15]

Here, environmental strategies means the specific tailored methods used in that trial. It does not stand for every possible change to a kitchen, workplace, or shopping routine. The separate feature on the home food environment addresses that broader household topic. This trial’s finding is that its tested incentive and environmental arrangements did not demonstrate greater long-term loss than usual care.[15]

For your own decision, make the comparison concrete too. Adding a reward to regular records and check-ins addresses a different question from trying to establish a first routine. Differences between trials cannot be explained simply by labeling one set of participants more motivated. Their starting situations, shared resources, targets, and comparison conditions also differ.[3][14]

Common misconceptions

“Paying people makes everyone lose weight” turns a small average effect into a personal guarantee. The adult meta-analysis found a modest additional effect during the incentive phase, and some long trials found no significant difference. These findings provide no basis for blaming participants who did not reach a target. A group estimate is not a verdict on anyone’s effort.[1][15]

“Weight regain proves rewards destroyed internal motivation” also goes beyond the results. Some trials lost their earlier advantage after withdrawal, but that does not identify the psychological cause. The online trial documented a decline in engagement after incentives ended. Observing that behavioral change does not establish precisely what happened to participants’ motivation or why.[4]

“If people receiving money lost weight, the incentive worked” overlooks the comparison. In the maintenance trial, control participants also lost weight, and the incentive groups did not show a significant additional benefit. Weight lost before enrollment, change during the study, and the difference from control must remain distinct. Mixing those quantities makes the apparent effect larger than the trial established.[3]

A personal promise of clothes or a trip is not known to have the same effect as these programs. Research arrangements specified the qualifying conditions, payments, measurements, and accompanying support. Applying their lessons means considering what to evaluate and when to reassess the plan. It does not mean assuming that copying a reward will copy a result.[6][14]

What you can do today

• If you set a reward, put its end date and exercise appointments for the following 6 months in your calendar first. Physical activity was among the rewarded behaviors in the online trial; engagement declined during months 13–18 after 12 months of incentives. Plan to keep moving after the reward ends.[4]
• Use your food record when choosing the next meal, and keep doing so beyond the reward period. The online trial rewarded dietary self-monitoring and found extra weight loss at 6 months, but no sustained between-group advantage at 18 months.[4]
• If you weigh yourself daily, keep that routine independent of payments. Review the weight and food records together: daily weighing and feedback formed the shared support in a maintenance trial, and adding money showed no significant benefit at 6 or 12 months.[3][4]
• Define whether a reward recognizes a behavior or a weight outcome. In the trial assessing at least 5% loss at 6 months, the proportion reaching the target and the average percentage loss told different stories.[14]
• Check your household budget before considering a deposit, and write down what happens if you miss the goal. Avoid an arrangement that pressures essential spending; receiving a reward and risking your own money have different consequences.[6]

Beyond the reward deadline at On the Shore Tachikawa

Plan where you will continue exercising after a reward ends. On the Shore Tachikawa can be a place to keep those exercise appointments beyond the payment deadline.

For a schedule that outlasts a reward, the studio is open every day 8:00–23:30. Its location is 3F Etoile Bldg, 2-14-10 Akebonocho, Tachikawa, Tokyo, a 1-minute walk from JR Tachikawa Station’s North Exit.

The choice includes more than 25 kinds of yoga lessons, including lava-stone hot yoga and room-temperature yoga. Pilates, women-only kickboxercise, boxercise, HIIT, and personal training are also available. Many of our yoga instructors speak English, and the studio’s owner often helps guests from the US bases in English herself.

Before choosing a class, check the participation conditions: lava-stone hot yoga is unavailable during pregnancy, while room-temperature maternity yoga is offered. Anyone instructed by a doctor to avoid exercise cannot participate.

The yoga trial is a 60-minute lesson priced at ¥1,980 (tax included); rental of 2 bath towels, 1 face towel, and a mat is included. Details are on the studio website, with lesson prices and trial reservations available when planning your next visit.

References

1. Enhancing Weight Loss Programs: A Meta‐Analysis of Financial Incentives and Behavior Change Techniques — Sara M. Hondmann et al., 2026, Obesity Reviews. DOI: 10.1111/obr.70124
2. Financial Incentives for Extended Weight Loss: A Randomized, Controlled Trial — L. John et al., 2011, Journal of General Internal Medicine. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-010-1628-y
3. Financial incentive strategies for maintenance of weight loss: results from an internet-based randomized controlled trial — W. S. Yancy et al., 2018, Nutrition & Diabetes. DOI: 10.1038/s41387-018-0036-y
4. Randomized Controlled Trial of Financial Incentives During Weight Loss Induction and Maintenance in Online Group Weight Control — D. West et al., 2021, Obesity (Silver Spring, Md.). DOI: 10.1002/oby.23322
5. A randomized controlled trial of financial incentives for weight loss — K. Volpp et al., 2008, JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2008.804
6. The effectiveness of financial incentives on clinical outcomes of cardiovascular disease risk factors: A systematic review and meta-analysis. — Ayelet Prigozin et al., 2026, Public health. DOI: 10.1016/j.puhe.2026.106179
7. Individual vs. Group-Based Incentives for Weight Loss: A Randomized, Controlled Trial — J. Kullgren et al., 2013, Annals of internal medicine. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-158-7-201304020-00002
8. Effectiveness of Goal-Directed and Outcome-Based Financial Incentives for Weight Loss in Primary Care Patients With Obesity Living in Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Neighborhoods: A Randomized Clinical Trial. — J. Ladapo et al., 2022, JAMA internal medicine. DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2022.5618
9. Effect of Financial Incentives and Environmental Strategies on Weight Loss in the Healthy Weigh Study — K. Glanz et al., 2021, JAMA Network Open. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.24132
10. The utility of monetary contingency contracts for weight loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis — Bianca J. Sykes-Muskett et al., 2015, Health Psychology Review. DOI: 10.1080/17437199.2015.1030685

Cover photo: Several ceramic piggy banks are arranged together in a row. (Photo: Abraham / CC0 / Wikimedia Commons)

Information as of October 2026. For your own health, consult a doctor.

More from Diet Science (English)

• Metabolic adaptation and why your weight loss can slow down
• Body composition and weight loss beyond the bathroom scale
• Food logging and weight loss: what matters beyond perfect records
• Protein and weight loss beyond fullness and the bathroom scale
• Dietary fiber and weight loss: what gut research really shows
• Low-carb vs low-fat diets: what long-term weight loss shows
• Time-restricted eating and weight loss: what trials reveal
• Breakfast and weight loss: what eating or skipping really changes
• Sleep deprivation and appetite: why nighttime snacks add up
• Stress and emotional eating beyond the cortisol explanation
• Aerobic vs resistance training for fat loss and lean mass
• HIIT and body fat loss: what shorter workouts can really offer
• Strength training, metabolism and the science of weight regain
• Yoga and weight loss: what body composition research shows
• Hot yoga calories and sweat: what a lighter scale really means
• Pilates and body composition: what posture and fat studies show
• NEAT and weight loss: what everyday movement can really do
• Daily steps and weight loss: what 8,000 steps really tells us
• Keeping weight off: what long-term maintainers do and how they recover
• Daily self-weighing and weight loss: how to use the numbers
• Water before meals and weight loss: what 500 ml trials show
• Sugary drinks and sweeteners: what replacement means for weight
• Alcohol and weight loss through calories, appetite and fat use
• Ultra-processed foods and overeating through the trial evidence
• Eating rate and weight loss: what slower chewing can change
• Menopause weight gain and why your waist can change first
• Postpartum weight loss through diet, exercise and support
• Sarcopenia and protein: protecting muscle as you grow older
• Visceral fat in men and what exercise changes beyond weight
• Supervised exercise and weight loss: building lasting habits
• GLP-1 drugs and exercise for muscle and weight maintenance
• Weight cycling and metabolism: what 23 studies actually found
• Low GI diets and weight loss: blood sugar is only part of the story
• Mediterranean diet trials separate weight loss from fat loss
• Plant-based diets and weight loss depend on what trials compare
• Snacking frequency alone cannot tell you how weight will change
• Late eating and weight gain: what meal timing trials show
• Portion size and weight loss: change the serving before the plate
• Eating out and weight loss: what meal frequency really tells us
• Menu calorie labeling changes some orders, but results vary
• Coffee and caffeine affect metabolism more clearly than weight
• Green tea catechins and weight loss: what the numbers mean
• Fat burner supplements can raise metabolism without fat loss
• Meal replacements for weight loss and the return to regular food
• Probiotics show small weight differences, not a uniform effect
• Genetics and obesity: what FTO studies say about weight loss
• Weight stigma and self-criticism can accompany daily barriers
• Exercise and appetite: why hunger and eating back calories differ
• Weekend warrior exercise and what it means for weight loss
• Exercise timing and weight loss: morning or evening workouts?
• Fat-burning zone measures fuel use, not future weight loss
• Interval walking for weight loss: what the trials really show
• Stair climbing for weight loss: what fitness studies really show
• Holiday weight gain and why it may still be there in spring
• Menstrual cycle and weight loss: reading hunger and the scale
• Energy density and weight loss without shrinking every meal
• Whole grains and weight loss depend on more than a staple swap
• Nuts and weight loss: why high fat does not mean weight gain
• Body fat measurement accuracy in home scales and DXA scans
• Wearables and weight loss: why more steps may not move the scale
• Alternate-day fasting and 5:2 compared with daily dieting
• Ketogenic diets and weight loss beyond the first few months
• Dairy and calcium have different results in weight-loss trials
• Legumes and weight loss: what fullness can and cannot tell us
• Fish and omega-3 offer no consistent shortcut to weight loss
• Fruit and vegetables for weight loss: what adding more changes
• Meal sequence and blood sugar: what vegetables first can change
• Distracted eating and why lunch can affect your next snack
• Social eating and weight loss: how friends shape meal size
• Home food environment connects shopping, meals and weight
• Mindful eating and weight loss: what changes beyond the scale
• Implementation intentions can help diet and exercise plans work
• Social support and weight loss depend on what a partner does
• Rapid versus gradual weight loss and what happens afterward
• Food diary underreporting and why calorie totals can mislead
• BMR estimation equations can miss your individual metabolism
• Sedentary breaks change blood sugar without proving weight loss
• Active commuting may mean smaller weight gains over the years
• Swimming and weight loss: what changes beyond the scales?
• Running vs walking changes the comparison for weight loss
• Resistance training volume and frequency for muscle and fat
• Cold exposure activates brown fat but may not reduce weight
• Sauna and bathing for weight loss: what the scale cannot tell
• Weight loss and bone density depend on diet and exercise
• Weight loss and mood: why mental health follows its own path
• Shift work and weight gain beyond the late-night snack story
• Remote work changes meals, but weight gain is not inevitable
• Weekly weight fluctuations and what a Monday gain really means
• High-protein diet types and what their weight-loss results mean

All Diet Science articles (English)