Ute C. Bayer

Boosting scholastic test scores by willpower : the role of implementation intentions

As both high self-efficacy beliefs (Bandura, 1997) and forming implementation intentions (Gollwitzer & Sheeran, 2006) are known to improve goal attainment, it is suggested that implementation intentions geared at strengthening self-efficacy should be a very helpful self-regulation strategy to achieve high scholastic test scores. In Study 1, female participants had to perform a math test either with the goal intention of solving as many problems as possible or with an additional self-efficacy strengthening implementation intention. In Study 2, male participants worked on an analytic reasoning test under either a mere achievement goal intention, an additional self-efficacy strengthening implementation intention, or an additional self-efficacy strengthening goal intention. In both studies, participants with self-efficacy strengthening implementation intentions outperformed the mere achievement goal intention participants. Moreover, Study 2 showed that additional self-efficacy strengthening goal intentions were not as effective as additional self-efficacy strengthening implementation intentions. The results are discussed in terms of their contribution to research on both self-efficacy and implementation intentions.

Staying on track: Planned goal striving is protected from disruptive internal states

Past implementation intention research focused on shielding goal striving from disruptive internal states (e.g., being anxious) by forming if–then plans that link these very states to instrumental coping responses. In the present line of research, we investigated whether planning out goal striving by means of if–then plans specifying opportunities to initiate goal-directed responses also protects goal striving from the negative impact of disruptive internal states. Indeed, in the face of disruptive internal states, participants who had been asked to form implementation intentions that targeted opportunities for initiating goal-directed responses outperformed participants with a mere goal intention to do well on a focal task goal. Actually, implementation intention participants performed as well as control participants who were not burdened by disruptive internal states such as being in a certain mood (Study 1), ego-depleted (Study 2), or self-definitionally incomplete (Study 3). Results are discussed by pointing to the importance of hypo-egoic self-regulation.

Visual Attention and Goal Pursuit Deliberative and Implemental Mindsets Affect Breadth of Attention

Mindset theory suggests that a deliberative mindset entails openness to information in one’s environment, whereas an implemental mindset entails filtering of information. We hypothesized that this open- versus closed-mindedness influences individuals’ breadth of visual attention. In Studies 1 and 2, we induced an implemental or deliberative mindset, and measured breadth of attention using participants’ length estimates of x-winged Müller-Lyer figures. Both studies demonstrate a narrower breadth of attention in the implemental mindset than in the deliberative mindset. In Study 3, we manipulated participants’ mindsets and measured the breadth of attention by tracking eye movements during scene perception. Implemental mindset participants focused on foreground objects, whereas deliberative mindset participants attended more evenly to the entire scene. Our findings imply that deliberative versus implemental mindsets already operate at the level of visual attention.