James Y. Shah

A theory of goal systems

「動機づけ 対 認知」(motivation versus cognition)アプローチ: 社会心理学者は動機づけ(motivation)を認知(cognition)とは「別々の」(separate)ものと考え、また、 いくぶん「静的」(static)なアプローチがされてきた。例えば、Bem(1972)の dissonance vs. self-perception、Kelley(1972) vs. Miller & Ross(1975)。 この分離主義では、動機づけ的変数と認知的変数に別々の機能を割り振った。例えば、説得の二重 モード理論(Petty & Cacioppo, 1986; Chaiken & Chen, 1999)では処理の動機づけの程度が説得モ ードのセレクタになっている。対案である”unimodel”(Kruglanski & Thompson, 1999aなど)にお いてもこれは同様である。

Emotional Responses to Goal Attainment: Strength of Regulatory Focus as Moderator

Goals with a promotion focus versus a prevention focus are distinguished. Chronic ideal goals (hopes and aspirations) have a promotion focus, whereas ought goals (duties and responsibilities) have a prevention focus. The hypothesis that emotional responses to goal attainment vary as a function of promotion versus prevention goal strength (conceptualized as goal accessibility) was tested in correlational studies relating chronic goal attainment (self-congruencies or self-discrepancies) to emotional frequency and intensity (Studies 1-3) and in an experimental study relating immediate goal attainment (i.e., success or failure) to emotional intensity (Study 4). All studies found that goal attainment yielded greater cheerfulness-dejection responses when promotion focus was stronger and greater quiescence-agitation responses when prevention focus was stronger.

Automatic for the people: how representations of significant others implicitly affect goal pursuit.

Five studies are presented that explore how representations of significant others may automatically affect goal pursuit. Specifically, evidence is presented that suggests goals may be primed by ones representation of a significant other and that this priming may be moderated by ones closeness to this other individual. It is also shown to be affected by the number of different goals associated with this person. The greater the number of goals associated with a significant other, the less likely this individual will invoke any 1 goal very strongly. Such goal priming is shown to have implications for the extent to which goals are pursued (as seen through task persistence and performance) as well as the extent to which they are inhibited or ignored (especially when an individual is associated with a goal unrelated to a current pursuit).

Self-Control in Action: Implicit Dispositions Toward Goals and Away From Temptations

Five studies examined whether, in self-control dilemmas, individuals develop an implicit disposition to approach goals and avoid temptations, psychologically as well as physically. Using a method developed by A. K. Solarz (1960; see also K. L. Duckworth, J. A. Bargh, M. Garcia, & S. Chaiken, 2002), the authors assessed the time for pulling and pushing a lever in response to goal- and temptation-related stimuli (e.g., studying and partying). The results show that individuals offset the influence of tempting activities by automatically avoiding these stimuli (faster pushing responses) and by approaching stimuli related to an overarching goal (faster pulling responses). These implicit self-control dispositions varied as a function of the magnitude of the self-control conflict, itself defined by how strongly individuals were attracted to temptations and held the longer term goal. These dispositions were further shown to play a role in successful self-control.

Expectancy × Value Effects: Regulatory Focus as Determinant of Magnitude and Direction

The authors propose that a promotion focus involves construal of achievement goals as aspirations whose attainment brings accomplishment. Commitment to these accomplishment goals is characterized by attempts to attain the highest expected utility. In contrast, a prevention focus involves construal of achievement goals as responsibilities whose attainment brings security. Commitment to these security goals is characterized by doing what is necessary. The different nature of commitment to accomplishment goals versus security goals is predicted to influence the interactive effect of goal expectancy and goal value on goal commitment, as evident in both task performance and decision making. Four studies found that the classic positive interactive effect of expectancy and value on goal commitment increases with a promotion focus and decreases with a prevention focus.

Priming against your will: How accessible alternatives affect goal pursuit.

Four studies examined how diverse aspects of goal pursuit are influenced by the accessibility of alternative goals. It was consistently found that such an accessibility often affects the resources allocated to a focal goal, influencing commitment, progress, and the development of effective means, as well as ones emotional reponses to positive and negative feedback about ones striving efforts. Moreover, the direction of these influences was found to depend on how the alternative goals relate to the focal pursuit. Alternatives unrelated to the focal goal pull resources away from it, whereas alternatives facilitatively related to a focal goal draw resources toward it.

Goals and Framing: How Outcome Focus Influences Motivation and Emotion

Two studies examined the impact on emotion and motivation of framing the same goal in terms of either a positive outcome focus or a negative outcome focus. In Study 1, contingencies associated with either reaching the goal (positive outcome focus) or failing to reach the goal (negative outcome focus) were emphasized. In Study 2, performance feedback was given as subjects worked on a task such that the goal was framed in terms of either a positive or a negative outcome focus. Framing with a positive outcome focus changed dejection-related emotions (e.g., dissatisfaction) more than agitation-related emotions (e.g., nervousness), whereas the reverse was true for framing with a negative outcome focus. In addition, persistence was greater in the positive-outcome-focus condition (both studies), as was performance (Study 2). Implications for self-discrepancy theory and for goal theories of motivation are discussed.

How goal instrumentality shapes relationship evaluations.

Findings from 6 experiments support the hypothesis that relationship evaluations and behavioral tendencies are goal dependent, reflecting the instrumentality of significant others for the selfs progress toward currently active goals. Experiments 1 and 3 found that active goals can automatically bring to mind significant others who are instrumental for the activated goal, heightening their accessibility relative to noninstrumental others. Experiments 2-5 found that active goals cause individuals to evaluate instrumental others more positively, draw closer to them, and approach them more readily, compared with noninstrumental others. Experiment 6 found that people who engage in goal-dependent interpersonal evaluations are more successful, receiving higher grades. Implications for understanding the social nature of self-regulation and the impact of personal goals on interpersonal relationships are discussed.

Regulatory concerns and appraisal efficiency : The general impact of promotion and prevention

It was hypothesized that peoples appraisals both of themselves and of other objects in the world are more efficient when the emotional dimension underlying their appraisals fits their regulatory concerns. Regulatory focus theory distinguishes 2 such fundamental concerns: promotion concerns with accomplishment that relate to cheerfulness- and dejection-related emotions, and prevention concerns with security that relate to quiescence- and agitation-related emotions. Five studies found that individuals with stronger promotion concerns were faster in appraising how cheerful or dejected the object made them feel, whereas individuals with stronger prevention concerns were faster in appraising how quiescent or agitated the object made them feel. These greater appraisal efficiencies were found for both chronic and situationally induced promotion and prevention concerns and were independent of both the valence and the extremity of the appraisals.

Implicit regulatory focus associated with asymmetrical frontal cortical activity

Regulatory focus theory identifies two separate motivational systems, promotion and prevention, that fulfill different regulatory needs and are differentially related to approach and avoidance. In the psychophysiological literature, approach- and avoidance-related emotions and motivational orientations have been linked to asymmetries in frontal cortical activity. In an effort to synthesize these literatures, we examined the relationship between an implicit assessment of chronic regulatory focus and an electroencephalographic (EEG) index of resting frontal cortical asymmetry. Results supported the hypothesis that promotion regulatory focus would be associated with greater left frontal activity, and prevention regulatory focus would be associated with greater right frontal activity. Discussion highlights how this synthesis may benefit theorizing of the relationship between regulatory focus, motivation, and emotion, and of the function of asymmetrical frontal cortical activity.