The adoption of approach versus avoidance goals: The role of goal-relevant resources

The present research investigated whether the adoption of approach versus avoidance goals is affected by goal-relevant resources. When individuals have few goal-relevant resources, they should prefer avoidance goals, whereas when individuals have many goal-relevant resources, they should adopt approach goals. The individual’s outcome expectancy is assumed to mediate this relationship. This hypothesis is supported by the findings of four multi-method studies with student samples. A cross-sectional field study showed a positive relationship between the extent of goal-relevant resources and approach goal adoption. In a longitudinal field study, a high number of resources predicted the increase in personal approach goal adoption over a period of 4 months, controlling for neuroticism. Two experiments showed that the manipulation of resources affected approach versus avoidance task goal adoption, with outcome expectancy mediating the relationship. These findings complement existing findings on dispositional determinants of approach versus avoidance goal adoption.     

Approach-avoidance motivation in personality: approach and avoidance temperaments and goals

The present research examined the role of approach and avoidance motivation in models of personality. Specifically, it examined the hypothesis that approach and avoidance temperaments represent the foundation of several basic dimensions espoused in the trait adjective, affective disposition, and motivational system approaches to personality. Factor analytic support for the hypothesis was obtained in Studies 1, 2, and 6; measures of extraversion, positive emotionality, and behavioral activation system loaded together on 1 factor (Approach Temperament) and measures of neuroticism, negative emotionality, and behavioral inhibition system loaded on another factor (Avoidance Temperament). This 2-factor structure was shown to be independent of response biases. In Studies 3-7, approach and avoidance temperaments were shown to be systematically linked to achievement goals (both nomothetic and idiographic). The findings are discussed in terms of an integrative approach to personality.     

Perceived consequences underlying approach goals and avoidance goals in relation to anxiety

Numerous studies have examined anxiety from a cognitive and affective perspective but relatively little research has studied anxiety from a motivational perspective. There are theoretical grounds (e.g., Gray, 1982) for expecting anxiety to be characterised by heightened avoidance motivation, but this motivational bias is not thought to be accompanied by diminished approach motivation. A cross-sectional, mixed model design was used to investigate individuals’ response-variations on personal approach and avoidance goal systems. A convenience sample comprising an anxious group (n = 41) and non-anxious group (n = 33) completed tasks that measured number of self-generated approach goals and avoidance goals, and number of associated positive and negative consequence steps for goals. As predicted, anxious individuals, relative to non-anxious individuals, generated more avoidance goals and more negative consequence steps in response to goal non-attainment (irrespective of goal type) but did not differ on number of approach goals or positive consequence steps in response to goal attainment (irrespective of goal type). The present findings highlight the importance of personal goal systems in understanding the nature of anxiety.     

Implementation intentions and the willful pursuit of prosocial goals in negotiations

Three studies examined whether the self-regulation strategy of forming implementation intentions (i.e., if-then plans) facilitates the attainment of prosocial goals when a limited resource is to be distributed between two parties who hold adverse cognitive orientations. In three experiments, pairs of negotiators were assigned prosocial goals that either had to be supplemented with plans (if-then plans, Gollwitzer, 1999) on how to act on these goals or not. Experiment 1 used a mixed-frames negotiation paradigm in which one negotiation partner operated on a gain-frame, the other on a loss-frame. When participants had the prosocial goal to find fair agreements and furnished it with a respective if-then plan, unfair agreements in favor of the loss-frame negotiator no longer occurred. Experiment 2 used a same-frame negotiation paradigm, where both negotiation partners had either a loss or a gain-frame. When loss-frame pairs had furnished their prosocial goals to cooperate with the negotiation partner with a respective if-then plan, reduced profits as compared to gain-frame pairs of negotiators were no longer observed. In addition, negotiators who had formed implementation intentions were more likely to use the integrative negotiation strategy of logrolling (i.e., making greater concessions on low rather than high priority issues). Experiment 3 used a computer-mediated negotiation task in order to analyze the effects of prosocial goals and respective implementation intentions on the course of the negotiation. Again, implementation intentions facilitated the pursuit of prosocial goals in the face of adversity (i.e., loss frames) by use of the integrative negotiation strategy of logrolling. The present research adds a self-regulation perspective to the research on negotiation by pointing out that the effects of negotiation goals can be enhanced by furnishing them with respective plans (i.e., implementation intentions).     

Blocked goals, persistent action: Implementation intentions engender tenacious goal striving

Research on goal attainment has demonstrated that people are more likely to reach their goals when they form implementation intentions. Three experiments tested whether implementation intentions lead to tenacious goal striving following blockage of an initial attempt to reach the goal. In all three experiments some participants were instructed to form an implementation intention and other participants were not. Subsequently, the initial goal-directed attempt of all participants was unexpectedly blocked. Experiment 1 found that implementation intentions resulted in more attempts to realize one’s goal. Experiment 2 showed that when participants formed an implementation intention their repeated attempt was acted out as intensely as their first, blocked attempt. Experiment 3 found that implementation intentions still allow people to seize an alternative, more onerous means to realize their intention. These results imply that implementation intention conserve self-regulatory strength. After goal blockage, the remaining strength can be used to continue goal-directed action.     

Perfectionism and achievement goals in athletes: Relations with approach and avoidance orientations in mastery and performance goals

ObjectivesChallenging views that perfectionism is a maladaptive factor in sport and that it is related to a preoccupation with performance goals and a neglect of mastery goals, the present article argues that perfectionism in athletes is not generally maladaptive, but shows differential relationships with mastery and performance goals depending on which facets of perfectionism are regarded.MethodGoing beyond the dichotomous achievement goal framework, two studies with N=204 high school athletes and N=147 university student are presented investigating how two facets of perfectionism—striving for perfection and negative reactions to imperfection [Stoeber, J., Otto, K., Pescheck, E., Becker, C., & Stoll, O. (2007). Perfectionism and competitive anxiety in athletes: Differentiating striving for perfection and negative reactions to imperfection. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 959–969.]—relate to athletes’ achievement goals.DesignStudy 1 employed a cross-sectional correlational design, Study 2 a longitudinal correlational design.ResultsFollowing the trichotomous achievement goal framework, Study 1 found striving for perfection to be positively related to mastery and performance-approach goals, whereas negative reactions to imperfection were positively related to performance-approach and performance-avoidance goals and inversely to mastery goals. Following the 2×2 framework, Study 2 found striving for perfection to be positively related to mastery-approach and performance-approach goals whereas negative reactions to imperfection were positively related to mastery-avoidance, performance-approach, and performance-avoidance goals. Moreover, negative reactions to imperfection predicted residual increases in mastery-avoidance goals over 3 months.ConclusionsIt is concluded that striving for perfection in athletes is associated with an adaptive pattern of achievement goals whereas negative reactions to imperfection are associated with a maladaptive pattern. Thus, striving for perfection in sport may be adaptive in athletes who do not experience strong negative reactions when performance is less than perfect.     

Satisfaction pursuing approach and avoidance goals: Effects of regulatory fit and individual temperaments

Going beyond previous studies on satisfaction in pursuing approach versus avoidance goals, the current study is the first to examine individual satisfaction in pursuing approach and avoidance goals as determined by regulatory fit between type of goal and type of strategy. Specifically, the present study shows that people with approach goals have greater satisfaction when they use an approach strategy rather than an avoidance strategy. People with avoidance goals have greater satisfaction when they use an avoidance strategy rather than an approach strategy. In addition, we explored how individual differences in the Behavioral Activation System and the Behavioral Inhibition System influenced reactions to approach and avoidance goals and strategies.     

When planning is not enough: Fighting unhealthy snacking habits by mental contrasting with implementation intentions (MCII)

In two experiments a self‐regulatory strategy combining mental contrasting with the formation of implementation intentions (MCII) was tested for its effectiveness in diminishing unhealthy snacking habits. Study 1 (N = 51) showed that participants in the MCII condition consumed fewer unhealthy snacks than participants in a control condition who thought about and listed healthy options for snacks. In Study 2 (N = 59) MCII was more effective than mental contrasting or formulating implementation intentions alone and mental contrasting was found to increase perceived clarity about critical cues for unhealthy snacking. Together, these findings suggest that MCII is an effective strategy for fighting habits and that one of the underlying processes making MCII superior to implementation intentions alone may be that mental contrasting produces clarity about the critical cues for the unwanted habitual behavior. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Antecedents and consequences of approach and avoidance achievement goals: A test of gender invariance

ObjectiveBased on Elliot's revised achievement goal framework [Elliot and McGregor (2001). A 2×2 achievement goal framework. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 501–519], the present study tested the gender invariance of the multiple achievement goal measurement model as well as the hypothesized antecedents and consequences of the multiple achievement goals embedded in a structural model.MethodA sample of 450 British male and female athletes (M age=22.17, SD=6.59) were used. A multi-section questionnaire, assessing approach and avoidance achievement goals, perceived sport competence, fear of failure, and motivation regulations, was administered to the athletes before or after training. Data were collected with the informed consent of the coaches and the athletes.DesignCross-sectional design.ResultsAnalyses of factorial invariance revealed that the four goal model could be considered as equivalent across gender. Only partial invariance was supported with respect to the antecedents-achievement goals-consequences model. The paths between fear of failure to mastery-avoidance goal, mastery-approach goal to intrinsic motivation, and performance-approach goal to extrinsic motivation regulation were not invariant for males and females.ConclusionThe factorial validity of multiple achievement goal measure was supported for both genders. The present findings provided only partial support for gender invariance in the 2×2 model.     

Attachment styles and interpersonal approach and avoidance goals in everyday couple interactions

Sixty undergraduates at a public university in the northwest United States recorded their approach and avoidance communal (closeness), uncommunal (distance), agentic (assertion), and unagentic (submission) goals during a total of 836 naturalistic interactions with romantic partners. They also completed a self‐report measure of attachment style. Secure attachment predicted more approach than avoidance goals, especially agentic goals. Avoidant attachment predicted goals to avoid and not to approach closeness and submission. Anxious attachment predicted more intense and inconsistent goals; for example, anxiety predicted focusing more on avoiding distance yet less on creating closeness and predicted more within‐person variability across interactions in goals to approach distance, avoid closeness, avoid assertion, and avoid submission. In sum, the study revealed strong relationships between enduring attachment styles and momentary interpersonal goals in everyday life.     

Performance‐approach and performance‐avoidance classroom goals and the adoption of personal achievement goals

Background. Students’ perceptions of classroom goals influence their adoption of personal goals. To assess different forms of classroom goals, recent studies have favoured an overall measure of performance classroom goals, compared to a two‐dimensional assessment of performance‐approach and performance‐avoidance classroom goals (PAVCG). Aims. This paper considered the relationship between students’ perceptions of classroom goals and their endorsement of personal achievement goals. We proposed that three (instead of only two) classroom goals need to be distinguished. We aimed to provide evidence for this hypothesis by confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and also by divergent associations between the respective classroom goal and students’ personal goal endorsement. Sample. A total of 871 (474 female) 10th grade students from several German high schools participated in this study. Method. Students responded to items assessing their perception of mastery, performance‐approach, and performance‐avoidance goals in the classroom. Additionally, the students reported how much they personally pursue mastery, performance‐approach, and performance‐avoidance goals. All items referred to German as a specific school subject. Results. A CFA yielded empirical support for the proposed distinction of three (instead of only two) different kinds of classroom goals. Moreover, in hierarchical linear modelling (HLM) analyses all three classroom goals showed unique associations with students’ personal goal adoption. Conclusions. The findings emphasized the need to distinguish performance‐approach and PAVCG. Furthermore, our results suggest that multiple classroom goals have interactive effects on students’ personal achievement strivings.     

Implementation intentions do not enhance all types of goals: The moderating role of goal difficulty

Three studies tested whether Gollwitzer and Brandst?tter’s (1997) failure to find an implementation effect for easy goals was due to a ceiling effect, to the moderating effect of previously formed habits, or to a moderating effect of earlier implementation intentions. The studies strongly indicated that easy goals did benefit from forming implementation intentions (i.e., specifying where or when one would perform the action). This suggests that Gollwitzer and Brandst?tter’s failure to find significant implementation effects for easy goals was due to a ceiling effect and not to other moderating effects. However, in the three experiments, we found no positive effect of implementation intentions for the enactment of goal-related behavior corresponding to a certain type of difficult goal. More specifically, when the focus was on the outcome of goal-directed action rather than on the goal-directed actions themselves, implementation intentions specifying when or in what conditions the relevant actions were to be performed did not enhance enactment. When the focus was on the goal-directed actions, we replicated the positive effect of forming implementation intentions. We argue that specifying when or where a goal-directed action should be enacted does not enhance enactment when the actor is not aware of the actions that are required to reach the goal. Possibly, implementation intentions specifying what one should do (rather than where or when) might be more helpful to enhance enactment rates of this type of goal.     

Implementation intentions do not enhance all types of goals: The moderating role of goal difficulty

Three studies tested whether Gollwitzer and Brandstätter’s (1997) failure to find an implementation effect for easy goals was due to a ceiling effect, to the moderating effect of previously formed habits, or to a moderating effect of earlier implementation intentions. The studies strongly indicated that easy goals did benefit from forming implementation intentions (i.e., specifying where or when one would perform the action). This suggests that Gollwitzer and Brandstätter’s failure to find significant implementation effects for easy goals was due to a ceiling effect and not to other moderating effects. However, in the three experiments, we found no positive effect of implementation intentions for the enactment of goal-related behavior corresponding to a certain type of difficult goal. More specifically, when the focus was on the outcome of goal-directed action rather than on the goal-directed actions themselves, implementation intentions specifying when or in what conditions the relevant actions were to be performed did not enhance enactment. When the focus was on the goal-directed actions, we replicated the positive effect of forming implementation intentions. We argue that specifying when or where a goal-directed action should be enacted does not enhance enactment when the actor is not aware of the actions that are required to reach the goal. Possibly, implementation intentions specifying what one should do (rather than where or when) might be more helpful to enhance enactment rates of this type of goal.     

Underlying motivation in the approach and avoidance goals of depressed and non-depressed individuals

Neurobiological theories predict decreased approach motivation and increased avoidance motivation in depression, but the results of previous studies have been equivocal. This study addressed a key limitation of previous research by assessing participants' underlying motivation for adopting their goals. Depressed (N=26) and non-depressed (N=33) participants listed approach and avoidance goals and wrote down their underlying reasons for adopting those goals. The groups did not differ on either the number of goals or underlying reasons but when underlying reasons were coded for approach or avoidance motivation depressed participants, compared to controls, showed less approach motivation and more avoidance motivation in relation to their approach goals. There were no effects related to avoidance goals. The results suggest that while the goals of depressed persons appear to be similar to those who are not depressed there are important differences at the level of underlying motivation.     

When goals collide: Monitoring the goals of multiple characters

Most story plots contain multiple characters who are independent, interact, and often have conflicting goals. One would expect that narrative understanding would require monitoring of the goals, concerns, and situations of multiple agents. There is considerable evidence that understanders monitor the primary protagonist's goal plans (e.g., Suh & Trabasso, 1993). However, there is relatively little research on the extent to which understanders monitor the goals of multiple agents. We investigated the impact of characters' roles and prominence on the extent to which understanders monitor the goal plans of multiple characters in a feature length film. In Experiment 1, participants made situation change judgments, and in Experiment 2, they verbally described scenes. Both types of judgments indicated that viewers monitor the goals and plans of multiple agents but do so to a greater extent for characters more prominent to the plotline.     

Implementation intentions, perfectionism, and goal progress: perhaps the road to hell is paved with good intentions

Two studies explored whether perfectionism moderates the impact of implementation intentions on goal progress. Study 1 used an implementation intention manipulation to examine the effects of these plans in interaction with perfectionism on the progress of New Year's resolutions. Study 2 added a repeated implementation intention condition and monitored affect and monthly goal progress. The results of both studies revealed a significant backfire effect of the implementation intentions on goal progress for participants high on a particular dimension of perfectionism (socially prescribed perfectionism). These perfectionists reported doing significantly worse at reaching their personal goals when they were asked to formulate implementation intentions than when they completed a control exercise. There also was evidence that implementation planning aroused negative affect for socially prescribed perfectionists. These results are the first to suggest that implementation planning may be contra-indicated for individuals with self-critical tendencies.     

When focusing on a goal interferes with action control: action versus state orientation and over-maintenance of intentions

People vary in action versus state orientation, or the ease versus difficulty by which they can form and enact goals under demanding conditions (Kuhl and Beckmann in Volition and personality: action versus state orientation, Hogrefe, Göttingen, 1994). According to the over-maintenance hypothesis, state-oriented people are prone to think about their intentions in a narrow linguistic format that prevents flexible action control. Two studies tested this hypothesis by manipulating intention focus among action- versus state-oriented participants and examining how well they performed difficult actions. Focusing strongly (rather than weakly) on the task goal led state-oriented participants to make more errors during incongruent trials of a Stroop task (Study 1) and led to greater task-switch costs in response latencies (Study 2). Action-oriented participants showed the reverse pattern, and performed difficult actions more effectively when focusing on the task goal. These findings suggest that focusing on intentions may paradoxically impair action control among state-oriented people.     

Planning is for doing: Implementation intentions go beyond the mere creation of goal-directed associations

Studies on implementation intentions so far have mainly pointed towards strengthened cue-behavior associations as the mechanism underlying the effectiveness of this self-regulatory tool. However, we propose that because it triggers people to look into the future and to mentally simulate their future behavior, planning by means of implementation intentions might go beyond the creation of goal-directed associations and thus lead to more enduring effects on behavior. We tested this hypothesis in an experiment using a longitudinal design, where participants formed an intention for a behavior that deviates from their routine, and furnished it either with associative learning of cue and behavior, forming implementation intentions, or nothing at all. Results showed that initially, learning cue-behavior associations led to the same rate of goal completion as forming implementation intentions. However, only the effect of implementation intentions was maintained at the second measurement one week later. These findings suggest that planning does more than merely create goal-directed associations, which might offer a new perspective on the workings and use of this important tool for behavior change.