Results 1 - 10
of
49
Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior
- Personality and Social Psychology Review
, 2004
"... This article describes a 2-systems model that explains social behavior as a joint function of reflective and impulsive processes. In particular, it is assumed that social behavior is controlled by 2 interacting systems that follow different operating principles. The reflective system generates behav ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 365 (5 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
This article describes a 2-systems model that explains social behavior as a joint function of reflective and impulsive processes. In particular, it is assumed that social behavior is controlled by 2 interacting systems that follow different operating principles. The reflective system generates behavioral decisions that are based on knowledge about facts and values, whereas the impulsive system elicits behavior through associative links and motivational orientations. The proposed model describes how the 2 systems interact at various stages of processing, and how their outputs may determine behavior in a synergistic or antagonistic fashion. It extends previous models by integrating motivational components that allow more precise predictions of behavior. The implications of this reflective–impulsive model are applied to various phenomena from social psychology and beyond. Extending previous dual-process accounts, this model is not limited to specific domains of mental functioning and attempts to integrate cognitive, motivational, and behavioral mechanisms. In the history of attempts to discover the causes of human behavior, the most widespread explanations are based on the assumption that human beings do what they believe is good for them. Thus, they are construed as “rational animals ” capable of recognizing the value or utility of their actions. At the same time, however, it is obvious that human beings do not always act this way; that is, under certain circumstances people behave in ways that do not reflect their values. To account for this phenomenon, to which the Greek philosophers gave the name akrasia (e.g., Mele, 1992), several strategies have been pursued. The first strategy assumes ignorance or lack of knowledge on the part of the actor. Socrates, for example, claimed that if people only knew what is good for them, they would act accordingly. A similar position is held by modern economists who imply that irrational decisions This article received the 2003 Theoretical Innovation Price of the
Bringing the frame into focus: The influence of regulatory fit on processing fluency and persuasion
"... helpful comments on earlier drafts of this article. Correspondence concerning this article may be addressed to either author. Electronic mail may be sent to ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 80 (3 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
helpful comments on earlier drafts of this article. Correspondence concerning this article may be addressed to either author. Electronic mail may be sent to
Affect and the functional bases of behavior: On the dimensional structure of affective experience
- Personality and Social Psychology Review
, 2001
"... Social Psychology Review, 5, 345-356. ..."
(Show Context)
A meta-analysis of 25 years of mood-creativity research: Hedonic tone, activation, or regulatory focus? Psychological Bulletin, 134, 779–806. S1: I mean, to be honest with you all Mars is right now, and I think the reasons that words> has worked so much,
, 2008
"... This meta-analysis synthesized 102 effect sizes reflecting the relation between specific moods and creativity. Effect sizes overall revealed that positive moods produce more creativity than mood-neutral controls (r .15), but no significant differences between negative moods and mood-neutral controls ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 54 (3 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
This meta-analysis synthesized 102 effect sizes reflecting the relation between specific moods and creativity. Effect sizes overall revealed that positive moods produce more creativity than mood-neutral controls (r .15), but no significant differences between negative moods and mood-neutral controls (r.03) or between positive and negative moods (r .04) were observed. Creativity is enhanced most by positive mood states that are activating and associated with an approach motivation and promotion focus (e.g., happiness), rather than those that are deactivating and associated with an avoidance motivation and prevention focus (e.g., relaxed). Negative, deactivating moods with an approach moti-vation and a promotion focus (e.g., sadness) were not associated with creativity, but negative, activating moods with an avoidance motivation and a prevention focus (fear, anxiety) were associated with lower creativity, especially when assessed as cognitive flexibility. With a few exceptions, these results generalized across experimental and correlational designs, populations (students vs. general adult population), and facet of creativity (e.g., fluency, flexibility, originality, eureka/insight). The authors discuss theoretical implications and highlight avenues for future research on specific moods, creativity, and their relationships.
Value from hedonic experience and engagement
- Psychological Review
, 2006
"... Recognizing that value involves experiencing pleasure or pain is critical to understanding the psychology of value. But hedonic experience is not enough. I propose that it is also necessary to recognize that strength of engagement can contribute to experienced value through its contribution to the e ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 50 (6 self)
- Add to MetaCart
Recognizing that value involves experiencing pleasure or pain is critical to understanding the psychology of value. But hedonic experience is not enough. I propose that it is also necessary to recognize that strength of engagement can contribute to experienced value through its contribution to the experience of motivational force—an experience of the intensity of the force of attraction to or repulsion from the value target. The subjective pleasure/pain properties of a value target influence strength of engagement, but factors separate from the hedonic properties of the value target also influence engagement strength and thus contribute to the experience of attraction or repulsion. These additional sources of engagement strength include opposition to interfering forces, overcoming personal resistance, using the right or proper means of goal pursuit, and regulatory fit between the orientation and manner of goal pursuit. Implications of the contribution of engagement strength to value are discussed for judgment and decision making, persuasion, and emotional experiences.
Neural correlates of evaluation associated with promotion and prevention regulatory focus
- Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci
, 2005
"... prevention regulatory focus ..."
(Show Context)
Effects of self-other decision making on regulatory focus and choice overload
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
"... A growing stream of research is investigating how choices people make for themselves are different from choices people make for others. In this paper, I propose that these choices vary according to regulatory focus, such that people who make choices for themselves are prevention focused, whereas peo ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 7 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
A growing stream of research is investigating how choices people make for themselves are different from choices people make for others. In this paper, I propose that these choices vary according to regulatory focus, such that people who make choices for themselves are prevention focused, whereas people who make choices for others are promotion focused. Drawing on regulatory focus theory, in particular work on errors of omission and commission, I hypothesize that people who make choices for others experience a reversal of the choice overload effect. In 6 studies, including a field study, I found that people who make choices for themselves are less satisfied after selecting among many options compared to few options, yet, people who make choices for others are more satisfied after selecting among many options compared to few options. Implications and suggestions for other differences in self–other decision making are discussed.
Retaliation as a response to procedural unfairness: A self-regulatory approach
, 2008
"... This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of record. Unfair Treatment, Retaliation, and Self-Regulation 2 When does procedural unfairness result in retaliation, and why do unfair-treatment recipients sometimes pursue and other times inh ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 6 (2 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of record. Unfair Treatment, Retaliation, and Self-Regulation 2 When does procedural unfairness result in retaliation, and why do unfair-treatment recipients sometimes pursue and other times inhibit retaliation? Five studies addressed these questions. We proposed and found that regulatory focus moderates retaliation against an unfairness-enacting authority: Promotion-focus participants were more likely to retaliate than prevention-focus participants. Promotion focus was associated with, and also heightened the accessibility of, the individual self. In turn, individual-self accessibility influenced retaliation. In fact, preventionfocus participants were as retaliatory as promotion-focus participants under conditions of high individual-self accessibility. Implications for the procedural fairness and regulatory focus literatures are discussed and suggestions for future research are offered.
A longitudinal analysis of self-regulation and well-being: Avoidance personal goals, avoidance coping, stress generation, and subjective wellbeing
- Journal of Personality
, 2011
"... ABSTRACT We conducted 2 longitudinal meditational studies to test an integrative model of goals, stress and coping, and well-being. Study 1 documented avoidance personal goals as an antecedent of life stressors and life stressors as a partial mediator of the relation between avoidance goals and long ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 5 (2 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
ABSTRACT We conducted 2 longitudinal meditational studies to test an integrative model of goals, stress and coping, and well-being. Study 1 documented avoidance personal goals as an antecedent of life stressors and life stressors as a partial mediator of the relation between avoidance goals and longitudinal change in subjective well-being (SWB). Study 2 fully replicated Study 1 and likewise validated avoidance goals as an antecedent of avoidance coping and avoidance coping as a partial mediator of the relation between avoidance goals and longitudinal change in SWB. It also showed that avoidance coping partially mediates the link between avoidance goals and life stressors and validated a sequential meditational model involving both avoidance coping and life stressors. The aforementioned results held when controlling for social desirability, basic traits, and general motivational dispositions.Thefindingsarediscussedwithregardtotheintegrationofvarious strands of research on self-regulation. The scientific study of stress and coping commenced in earnest in the mid 20th century, and has burgeoned over the years to the point that it now represents one of the most extensive areas of inquiry in psychology. The stress and coping literature focuses on the challenges and threats that individuals encounter in daily life, and on people’s affective, cognitive, and behavioral responses to these challenges and threats (Lazarus, 1999). Given both the content area and breadth of focus of the stress and coping literature, one would think that the goal construct would hold a prominent place within it. Surprisingly, this is not the case. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Andrew J. Elliot,
Buyers versus sellers: How they differ in their responses to framed outcomes
- Journal of Consumer Psychology
, 2005
"... Consumers’reactions to a difference in price can depend on how it is framed. If buyers interpret paying $60 rather than $65 as getting a $5 discount, then they are likely to consider paying $60 to be a gain and paying $65 to be a nongain. Alternatively, if they interpret having to pay $65 rather tha ..."
Abstract
-
Cited by 5 (0 self)
- Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Consumers’reactions to a difference in price can depend on how it is framed. If buyers interpret paying $60 rather than $65 as getting a $5 discount, then they are likely to consider paying $60 to be a gain and paying $65 to be a nongain. Alternatively, if they interpret having to pay $65 rather than $60 as incurring a $5 penalty, then they may consider paying $60 to be a nonloss and paying $65 to be a loss. Similarly, sellers can also experience gains, nongains, nonlosses, and losses. This article suggests that buyers are prevention focused and consequently place a greater emphasis on loss-related frames, whereas sellers are promotion focused and place a greater emphasis on gain-related frames. Therefore, for equivalent positive outcomes, buyers feel better about nonlosses, but sellers feel better about gains. For equivalent negative outcomes, buyers feel worse about losses, but sellers feel worse about nongains. These effects, however, disappear when there is little motivation to process information about the monetary transaction. Consumers acquire products as buyers and dispose them of as sellers. After they decide to buy or sell, however, they might interpret the price they pay or receive using different
