If you start with the understanding that chocolate is a possibility (...) then you are effectively punishing yourself 3/4 of the time.
This seems counter-intuitive to me. I do like chocolate, a lot, so I do not eat chocolate every chance I get -- that wouldn't end well. I have to pick some way to choose when I get chocolate, and my usual method (and any proposed method that may involve dice, really) denies me chocolate more than just 75% of the times that I would like chocolate. So why not use an arbitrary but useful method of choosing when I get chocolate? I'm not going to be very disappointed when I roll "not chocolate", because I am usually in the "not chocolate" state by default...
On the other hand, I do understand why this system might not be good; increasing chocolate intake is not ideal, or I would be doing it anyway. So this reward system should be short term, not long term. But I think it would be motivating (for me).
http://measureofdoubt.com/2011/04/12/pulling-levers-killing-monsters-the-lure-of-unpredictable-rewards/ (how do I put a link like this in a word with blue letters?)
I've read that unpredictable rewards associated with a behavior actually encourage that behavior more effectively than consistent rewards.
The optimal habit-forming figure given in the link above is a 25% chance of reward for each instance of performing the behavior.
My hypothesis then, is that if I want to establish a habit by rewarding myself upon successfully performing a certain task, I should reward myself only 25% of the time if I want to ingrain the habit as forcefully as possible into my unconscious.
Anyone else think so, or have any other research to add?