Peter M. Gollwitzer

Implementation Intentions and Goal Achievement: A Meta-analysis of Effects and Processes

Holding a strong goal intention (“I intend to reach Z !”) does not guarantee goal achievement, because people may fail to deal effectively with self‐regulatory problems during goal striving. This review analyzes whether realization of goal intentions is facilitated by forming an implementation intention that spells out the when, where, and how of goal striving in advance (“If situation Y is encountered, then I will initiate goal‐directed behavior X !”). Findings from 94 independent tests showed that implementation intentions had a positive effect of medium‐to‐large magnitude ( d = .65) on goal attainment. Implementation intentions were effective in promoting the initiation of goal striving, the shielding of ongoing goal pursuit from unwanted influences, disengagement from failing courses of action, and conservation of capability for future goal striving. There was also strong support for postulated component processes: Implementation intention formation both enhanced the accessibility of specified opportunities and automated respective goal‐directed responses. Several directions for future research are outlined.

The psychology of action : linking cognition and motivation to behavior

Thats it, a book to wait for in this month. Even you have wanted for long time for releasing this book the psychology of action linking cognition and motivation to behavior; you may not be able to get in some stress. Should you go around and seek fro the book until you really get it? Are you sure? Are you that free? This condition will force you to always end up to get a book. But now, we are coming to give you excellent solution.

Goal Achievement: The Role of Intentions

The intention-to-behavior process is analyzed with respect to implementation intentions. These intentions link an intended goal-directed behavior to an anticipated situational context. The reported experimental evidence suggests that implementation intentions create a heightened accessibility of the mental representation of the specified situational cues and induce direct (automatic) control of the intended behavior through these cues. The formation of implementation intentions promotes goal achievement through both of these processes because they eliminate classic problems associated with the control of goal-directed action. Similarities and differences to other theoretical approaches on intentions, planning, and action control are discussed.

Thought contents and cognitive functioning in motivational versus volitional states of mind

Do people who are about to make a decision differ from people who are about to enact a decision just made with respect to (1) the contents of their spontaneous stream of thought, and (2) aspects of cognitive functioning reflective of short-term memory? Subjects either made a choice between, or were assigned to, two available test materials allegedly designed to measure creativity and differentially suited to promote an individuals full creative potential. Subjects were, however, interrupted prior to or shortly after making this choice: In Study 1, they were asked to report on the thoughts they experienced during the time period just before the interruption; in Study 2, subjects were interrupted either before or after making a choice and were asked to recall lists of words designed to test memory span. The results of Study 1 confirmed our assumption that predecisional versus postdecisional streams of spontaneous thought reflectmotivational versusvolitional states of mind. That is, predecisional thought was preoccupied with incentive values of goal options, expectancy of performance outcomes, and metamotivational directives, whereas postdecisional thought was concerned with questions of how to implement the pursued goal. In Study 2, subjects in a motivational state of mind exhibited a greater memory span than subjects in a volitional state of mind. Since, in a further study, performance on arithmetic tasks did not improve for subjects in a motivational as opposed to a volitional state of mind, the results of Study 2 are understood as a state-dependent increase in receptivity with respect to incoming information. In interpreting the present findings, the characteristic features of motivational and volitional states are explicated. Furthermore, it is suggested that the dominating research tradition focusing on motivational problems (i.e., expectancy-value models) and the abandoned research tradition concerned with volitional problems (i.e., formation and implementation of an intent) should be integrated into a functional unit.

The Interplay Between Goal Intentions and Implementation Intentions

Two studies tested whether action control by implementation intentions is sensitive to the activation and strength of participants’ underlying goal intentions. In Study 1, participants formed implementation intentions (or did not) and their goal intentions were measured. Findings revealed a significant interaction between implementation intentions and the strength of respective goal intentions. Implementation intentions benefited the rate of goal attainment when participants had strong goal intentions but not when goal intentions were weak. Study 2 activated either a task-relevant or a neutral goal outside of participants’ conscious awareness and found that implementation intentions affected performance only when the relevant goal had been activated. These findings indicate that the rate of goal attainment engendered by implementation intentions takes account of the state (strength, activation) of people’s superordinate goal intentions.

Preconscious control of stereotype activation through chronic egalitarian goals

This research shows stereotype activation is controlled by chronic egalitarian goals. In the first 2 studies it was found that the stereotype of women is equally available to individuals with and without chronic goals, and the discriminant validity of the concept of egalitarian goals was established. In the next 2 experiments, differences in stereotype activation as a function of this individual difference were found. In Study 3, participants read attributes following stereotypical primes. Facilitated response times to stereotypical attributes were found for nonchronics but not for chronics. This lack of facilitation occurred at stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) where effortful correction processes could not operate, demonstrating preconscious control of stereotype activation due to chronic goals. In Study 4, inhibition of the stereotype was found at an SOA where effortful processes of stereotype suppression could not operate. The data reveal that goals are activated and used preconsciously to prevent stereotype activation, demonstrating both the controllability of stereotype activation and the implicit role of goals in cognitive control.

Effects of Mindset on Positive Illusions

S. E. Taylor and J. D. Browns (1988) position that mentally healthy people exhibit positive illusions raises a dilemma: How do people function effectively if their perceptions are positively biased? Using Gollwitzers deliberative-implemental mindset distinctiion, we assessed whether people in a deliberative mindset show less evidence of positive illusions than people in an implemental mindset. Participants completed a mindset task and assessments of mood, self-perceptions, and perceived (in)vulnerability to risk. Deliberation led to worsened mood, greater perceived risk, and poorer self-perceptions, relative to implementation; control (no mindset) participants typically scored in between. Study 3 demonstrated that the mindset manipulation corresponds to how people actually make decisions or implement them. Results suggest that people use relatively realistic thinking when setting goals and more positive thinking when implementing them.

Goal Contagion: Perceiving Is for Pursuing

Six studies examined the goal contagion hypothesis, which claims that individuals may automatically adopt and pursue a goal that is implied by another persons behavior. Participants were briefly exposed to behavioral information implying a specific goal and were then given the opportunity to act on the goal in a different way and context. Studies 1-3 established the goal contagion phenomenon by showing that the behavioral consequences of goal contagion possess features of goal directedness: (a) They are affected by goal strength, (b) they have the quality of goal appropriateness, and (c) they are characterized by persistence. Studies 4-6 show that people do not automatically adopt goals when the observed goal pursuit is conducted in an unacceptable manner, because the goal will then be perceived as unattractive. The results are discussed in the context of recent research on automatic goal pursuits.

Deliberative and implemental mind-sets: Cognitive tuning toward congruous thoughts and information

Study 1 established either deliberative mind-set by having Ss contemplate personal change decision or implemental mind-set by having Ss plan execution of intended personal project. Ss were subsequently requested to continue beginnings of 3 fairy tales, each describing a main character with a decisional conflict. Analysis revealed that deliberative mind-set Ss ascribed more deliberative and less implementational efforts to main characters than implemental mind-set Ss. In Study 2, Ss were asked to choose between different test materials. Either before or after making their decision, Ss were given information on deliberative and implementational thoughts unrelated to their task at hand. When asked to recall these thoughts, predecisional Ss recalled more deliberative and less implementational thoughts, whereas for postdecisional Ss the reverse was true. These findings suggest that deliberative and implemental mind-sets tune thought production and information processing. A course of action may be conceived rather narrowly as extending from its initiation (starting point) to its termination (end point). Alternatively, one may adopt a broader perspective that embraces the motivational origins of an action as the actual starting point and the individuals evaluative thoughts about the achieved action outcome as the final end point. In the present article, we take this broader perspective and segment the course of action into four distinct, sequential phases (Heckhausen, 1986). The first segment is the predecisional phase, where potential action goals entailed by a persons many wants and wishes are deliberated. When a decision to pursue one of these goals is made, a transition to the postdecisional (preactional) phase takes place, where the individual becomes concerned with implementing the chosen goal. However, this phase ends and the actional phase starts when actions geared toward achieving the chosen goal are initiated. Once these actions have resulted in a particular outcome, the postactional phase is entered and the individual proceeds to evaluate the achieved outcome. We postulate that each of these phases is accompanied by a distinct mind-set (Gollwitzer, 1990). Following the lead of the WUrzburg School (Kiilpe, 1904; Marbe, 1901; Watt, 1905; for reviews, see Boring, 1950, pp. 401-406; Gibson, 1941; and Humphrey, 1951, pp. 30-131), we assume that the characteristics of each of these mind-sets are determined by the unique qualities of the different tasks to be solved within each phase. That is, the different mind-sets tailor a persons cognitive appa

Metacognition in Action: The Importance of Implementation Intentions

When people furnish their goal intentions (“I intend to attain the goal x!”) with implementation intentions (“I will initiate the goal-directed response y when situation z arises!”), the initiation of goal-directed responses becomes automatized. As this type of automaticity stems from a single act of will, it is referred to as strategic automaticity. We report various studies demonstrating that strategic automaticity leads to immediate and efficient responding, which does not need a conscious intent. In addition, the situational cues specified in implementation intentions seem to be easily detected and readily attended to. Further research indicates that the strategic automaticity induced by implementation intentions also helps resist temptations and fight bad habits. Following Nelsons (1996; Nelson & Narens, 1994) model of metacognition, we suggest that goal intentions and, in particular, implementation intentions are important components of the metacognitive control of action geared toward its initiation, continuation, and termination.