Feb 10 Flashcards
self regulation
processes via which people INITIATE, ALTER and CONTROL their behaviour
in pursuit of a goal
involves ability to prioritize long term goals over immediate rewards
goals contribute to effective self-regulation by providing…
- direction and focus
- motivation
- planning and strategy
- feedback (allows us to monitor progress, including emotions)
- sense of self-efficacy
multiple versions of ourself: self-discrepancy theory
actual self
ideal self
ought self
self-discrepancy theory: actual self
who you believe you are right now
self-discrepancy theory: ideal self
who you wish you could be
your hopes, dreams, aspirations
self-discrepancy theory: ought self
who you think you should be
based on responsibilities, social expectations, obligations
ideal and ought selves shape…
motivation and self-regulation
discrepancies between actual and ideal and/or ought selves lead to:
- PLAN OF ACTION to ELIMINATE THE DISCREPANCY
- motivated behaviour
- monitoring feedback to assess extent of remaining discrepancy
while both self-guides (ideal and ought) are motivating…
they differ in their emotional consequences
ideal self (promotion focus) - congruencies
congruencies = DECREASING DISTANCE between actual and ideal self…
- presence of POSITIVE OUTCOMES
- CHEERFULNESS-related emotions (joy, happiness, pride, excitement)
ideal self (promotion focus) - discrepancies
discrepancies = INCREASING DISTANCE between actual and ideal self…
- absence of positive outcomes
- DEJECTION-related emotions (disappointment, sadness, depression)
ideal and ought selves: what focuses are they both associated with?
ideal self: PROMOTION focus
ought self: PREVENTION focus
ought self (prevention focus) - congruencies
congruencies = decreasing distance between actual and ought self
- absence of negative outcomes
- QUIESCENCE-related emotions (calm, relaxation, relief)
ought self (prevention focus) - discrepancies
discrepancies = increasing distance between actual and ought self
- presence of negative outcomes
- AGITATION-related emotions (tension, anxiety, restlessness)
ideal self congruencies and discrepancies each elicit what emotions?
ideal self congruency = CHEERFULNESS
ideal self discrepancy = DEJECTION
ought self congruencies and discrepancies each elicit what emotions?
ought self congruency = QUIESCENCE
ought self discrepancy = AGITATION
regulatory focus theory
proposes that different emotions arise because we use 2 DISTINCT MOTIVATIONAL SYSTEMS when pursuing different goals
- promotion system
- prevention system
promotion system used when…
pursuing ideal self goals
prevention system used when…
pursuing ought self goals
promotion system - 4 points
- focused on GAINS and GROWTH
- motivated by MAXIMIZING GAINS and AVOIDING MISSED OPPORTUNITIES
- associated with ideal-self goals (aspirations & desires)
- success leads to positive emotions like HAPPINESS and PRIDE, while failure leads to DISAPPOINTMENT and DEJECTION
prevention system - 4 points
- focused on SAFETY and SECURITY
- motivated primarily by LOSS AVERSION (losses loom larger than gains)
- associated with OUGHT-self goals (duties & responsibilities)
- success leads to RELIEF and CALM, while failure results in ANXIETY, GUILT, STRESS
marathon - promotion versus prevention focus
PROMOTION: “I want to get stronger and improve my endurance so I can run a marathon”
PREVENTION: “I need to exercise so I don’t develop health problems like heart disease”
exam - promotion versus prevention focus
PROM: “I want to ace this exam and be at the top of my class”
PREV: “I need to study so I don’t fail and risk retaking the course”
individual differences in chronic regulatory focus
generally one mental framework is more accessible to each individual
ie. Jake Peralta - promotion focused
^ not scared of failure, driven by challenges & opportunities, takes risks, adventurous & spontaneous
ie. Amy Santiago
^ focused on security, order, fulfilling obligations, strives to avoid mistakes & criticism, risk-averse, meticulous
where does regulatory focus motivation come from?
- temperament
- different styles of caretaker-child interactions
- culture
different styles of caretaker-child interactions that mold regulatory focus
PROMOTION FOCUS:
^ nurturing, bolstering parenting
^ caregivers who emphasize and encourage aspirations and progress
PREVENTION FOCUS:
^ punitive, controlling parenting
^ caregivers that emphasize obedience, obligations and safety
culture’s role in molding regulatory focus
INDEPENDENT/INDIVIDUALISTIC CULTURES:
^ tend to prioritize individual achievement, aspirations and self-reliance
^ increases likelihood of developing PROMOTION FOCUS
INTERDEPENDENT/COLLECTIVIST CULTURES:
^ prioritize social harmony and group wellbeing
^ more PREVENTION FOCUS, concerns about letting others down
different identities (ie. student, friend, employee) can trigger…
DISTINCT regulatory orientations
ie. as a student you may take promotive approach to do well in classes
ie. but as a friend you may take a preventative approach to avoid conflict
which predicts goals better? identity-specific regulatory focus of general regulatory focus?
identity-specific is better
what can activate a regulatory focus?
interacting with someone who resembles an IMPORTANT PERSON (like a parent)
depending on past self-discrepancies (ideal vs ought), such encounters can lead to either approach or avoidance
ie. those with ought discrepancies tend to AVOID the target person
ie. those with ideal discrepancies tend to APPROACH the target person
3 other aspects of the situation that can activate a particular regulatory focus
- PRIMING ideals or oughts
- having individuals REMEMBER episodes of SUCCESS to either promotion or prevention
- having individuals REMEMBER episodes of SUCCESS to either promotion or prevention
PRIMING IDEALS OR OUGHTS (other aspects of the situation that can activate a particular regulatory focus)
PRIMING ideals (for promotion - asking people about dreams, hopes)
PRIMING oughts (for prevention - asking people about fears, worries)
HAVING PEOPLE REMEMBER EPISODES OF SUCCESS TO EITHER PROMOTION OR PREVENTION (other aspects of the situation that can activate a particular regulatory focus)
having individuals REMEMBER episodes of SUCCESS to either promotion or prevention
Ie. remember when you worked really hard at the gym and hit a PR?
ie. remember when you were scared you were gonna fail your math midterm so you pulled an all nighter?
FRAMING OUTCOMES (other aspects of the situation that can activate a particular regulatory focus)
presenting IDENTICAL tasks in terms of gains/nongains (promotion) versus nonloss/loss (prevention)
outright rejection versus passive exclusion may affect…
regulatory focus
online chat with 2 confederates and 1 participant: EXPLICIT REJECTION (direct dismissal) triggers what type of focus?
prevention focus
seen as loss avoidance
online chat with 2 confederates and 1 participant: BEING IGNORED (passive exclusion) triggers what type of focus?
promotion focus
seen as missed opportunity
online chat with 2 confederates and 1 participant: details of the prevention focus brought on by explicit rejection
- ANXIETY and WITHDRAWAL - people pull back to avoid further harm
- REGRET OVER ACTIONS - second guessing what they said or did wrong
online chat with 2 confederates and 1 participant: details of the promotion focus brought on by passive exclusion
- SADNESS BUT MOTIVATION to reconnect - people try harder to engage
- REGRET OVER INACTION - wishing they’d spoken up or done more
analgesia and hyperalgesia in relation to explicit rejection vs being ignored
explicit rejection = hyperalgesia (increased pain sensitivity)
being ignored = analgesia (reduced pain sensitivity)
hyperalgesia related to explicit rejection
- direct, active rejection leads to greater physical pain sensitivity
- triggers anxiety, withdrawal, and hyper-vigilance to avoid further harm
- possible adaptive response: increased pain sensitivity may help detect and avoid future social threats
analgesia related to being ignored
- passive exclusion can lead to reduced physical pain sensitivity
- triggers sadness but motivation to re-engage socially
- possible adaptive response: the body dampens pain to keep focus on reconnecting
promotion focus leads to an ______ approach
eager
promotion focus > eager approach DETAILS
- focus on growth, progress, achieving ideals
- actively seek out opportunities
- generally take risks to get ahead
- sensitive to GAINS vs MISSED GAINS (seeing the difference between making progress and staying the same)
- can maintain enthusiasm by imagining success or inflating positive self-evaluations
prevention focus leads to what type of avoidance?
vigilant avoidance
prevention focus > vigilant avoidance details
- use vigilant strategies - they’re careful, cautious, focused on avoiding mistakes
- sensitive to LOSSES vs NON-LOSSES (seeing the difference between losing ground and staying the same)
- can maintain vigilant strategy by imagining possibility of failure or deflating positive self-evaluations
how can the eager approach (promotion focus) maintain enthusiasm?
- imagining success
- inflating positive self-evaluations
how can the vigilant avoidant approach (prevention focus) maintain enthusiasm?
- imagining failure
- deflating positive self-evaluations
for these people, imaging everything that could possibly go wrong is more motivating
as people get closer to their goals, what happens to their strategies?
they INTENSIFY
- promotion focused individuals become EVEN MORE EAGER to reach their ideal outcome
- prevention focused individuals become EVEN MORE VIGILANT to ensure they don’t make a mistake
which regulatory focus strategy is associated with risky versus conservative strategies?
both are associated with both risky and conservative strategies
depends on a person’s current status relative to their goals
0 (neutral starting point)
0 has different meanings within promotion and prevention systems
PREVENTION: state to approach/maintain
^ they want the status quo, it means safety and stability
PROMOTION: state to avoid/move away from
^ they don’t want status quo, so at baseline 0 will be more motivated to take risks
promotion-focused individuals, generally, are motivated to move…
FORWARD
and to take risks
prevention-focused individuals, generally, prefer…
STABILITY
stick with cautious strategies
dropping below baseline of 0 - effects for promotion versus prevention-focused individuals
PROMOTION-focused individuals:
^ NO SPECIAL MEANING (because both 0 and below it rep failure)
PREVENTION-focused individuals:
^ HIGHLY AVERSIVE
dropping below 0 for prevention-focused individuals
dropping below 0 makes them more willing to TAKE RISKS
but ONLY if it’s the only way to RESTORE SAFETY
ie. after financial loss, prevention-focused individuals choose risk only if it helps recover the loss
moving above 0 (success or gain) - effects for promotion versus prevention-focused individuals
PREVENTION FOCUSED: doesn’t have a special meaning for these individuals (both states rep success)
PROMOTION-FOCUSED: they’ll take fewer risks if they feel they’ve made enough progress
^ if they feel they haven’t progressed enough, they’ll continue taking risks
so, which focus is better?
both approaches have STRENGTHS and LIMITATIONS
involve trade-offs between:
1. speed and accuracy
2. confidence and caution
3. commitment and exploration
speed vs accuracy tradeoff
promo focus: speed over accuracy
^ faster decision making, but may increase errors
prev focus: accuracy over speed
^ fewer errors but slow decision-making
confidence vs caution tradeoff - promotion focused individuals
- thrive on success - reflecting on achievements boosts motivation
- struggle with failure - become dejected and lose momentum when things go wrong
- persist longer when they focus on their strengths and potential
- perform worse after failure feedback, but improve after success feedback
- inspired more by positive role models
- expecting things to go right increases pursuit of high value rewards, so optimism is adaptive
optimism and promotion focused individuals
expecting things to go right increases pursuit of high value rewards, so optimism is adaptive
confidence vs caution tradeoff - prevention focused individuals
- thrive on failure - setbacks sharpen their focus and keep them cautious
- struggle with success - feeling calm can make them less alert and engaged
- persist longer when they focus on their weaknesses and risks
- perform better after failure feedback, but worse after success feedback
- inspired more by negative role models/cautionary tales
- setting low expectations (defensive pessimism) fuels vigilant strategy
why do prevention focused individuals perform worse after success feedback?
because it makes them less alert and decreases their engagement
not useful for them to take overly positive self view or to think about how well things have gone
instead inspired by tales of how things have gone very wrong
promotion’s weakness
overconfidence and avoiding failure
prevention’s weakness
excessive caution and anxiety
while optimism helps promotion-focused individuals bounce back, it can also…
blind them to areas needing improvement
promotion-focused individuals are more likely to _________ their control over outcomes and ______ risks
overestimate control
downplay risks
promotion focused individuals’ tendencies to overestimate control and downplay risks can lead to…
can lead to UNREALISTIC OPTIMISM or even MANIC TENDENCIES
vigilance helps prevention-focused individuals stay alert, but it can be…
mentally exhausting
prevention focused individuals tend to fixate on ______ and generate…
fixate on FAILURES
generate “WHAT-IF” counterfactuals that sustain their cautious mindset
prev-focused individuals may do what to maintain their vigilance?
lower their expectations (too much)
can lead to self doubt and excessive worry
prev-focus: in extreme cases, hyper-vigilance can contribute to…
anxiety disorders
commitment & stability associated with which focus style?
prevention
prevention focus > commitment and stability details
- prefer consistency, security, maintaining the status quo
- stick with commitments and long-term habits (ie. health routines)
- resist change, even when it could improve their situation
- settle for “good enough”, avoiding risk rather than seeking gains
- may stay in suboptimal situations because they don’t see them as failure
promotion focus > exploration and change details
- seek new experiences, opportunities and innovation
- embrace risk for big rewards, prefer high highs over stability
- more willing to switch activities, relationships or possessions
- can struggle with commitment, always wondering if something better exists
- more prone to distraction and thrill-seeking behaviours, which can sometimes be unhealthy
commitment vs exploration - key tradeoffs
prevention focus = STABILITY but risk of MISSED OPPORTUNITIES
promotion focus = GROWTH but risk of CONSTANT SEARCHING and DISSATISFACTION, LACK of COMMITMENT
regulatory fit theory
people are more engaged and motivated when their strategy MATCHES their motivational style
- promotion-focused individuals thrive with eager, gain-seeking strategies
- prevention-focused individuals perform best with vigilant, loss-avoiding strategies
regulatory fit improves…
performance
psychological wellbeing
