Regulatory focus systems and personal values

The present studies sought connections between two highly influential, but separate motivational systems: the regulatory foci and personal values. Study 1 (N = 173) showed that promotion focus was positively associated with Achievement and negatively with Tradition values, whereas prevention focus was positively associated with Conformity and Security values, and negatively with Self‐Direction and Stimulation values. Furthermore, interdependent self‐construal moderated trait prevention focus' associations with Power, Benevolence, Universalism, and Conformity values. Study 2 (N = 150) showed that a promotion‐framed message evoked more compliant behavior among those scoring high on Stimulation, Achievement, and Self‐Direction values, but that a prevention‐framed message evoked more compliance among those high in Conformity values. The results suggested that the regulatory foci are associated with certain values, and that these values may increase motivation in promotion‐ versus prevention‐relevant situations. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Cultural regulatory fit and strategies for coping with unsuccessful outcomes

The present research seeks to explain cross‐cultural differences in two strategies for coping with unsuccessful outcomes (consideration of multiple options and persistence) through regulatory fit, a development of the self‐regulation theory. We propose that, because of regulatory fit, eager consideration of multiple options is more encouraged in promotion‐focused cultures, whereas vigilant persistence is more encouraged in prevention‐focused cultures (a culture‐strategy regulatory fit). In addition, if an incentive is introduced to motivate the use of these strategies, a gain‐framed incentive is more effective in promotion‐focused cultures whereas a loss‐framed incentive is more effective in prevention‐focused cultures (a culture‐incentive regulatory fit). The hypotheses for the culture‐strategy fit (Study 1) and the culture‐incentive fit (Study 2) were both supported, with samples of Israeli Jews, Israeli Arabs (in both studies), and Hong Kong Chinese (in Study 1). Taken together, the findings contribute to the understanding of cross‐cultural differences in coping with unsuccessful outcomes and suggest the existence of cultural regulatory fit. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The influence of lay theories of Feng Shui on consumers' peace of mind: The role of regulatory fit

With its history dating back five millennia, the art of creating harmonious surroundings – commonly referred to as Feng Shui – has become deeply rooted in Chinese culture. Yet despite its significant effect on people's daily lives, a dearth of research is available on how Feng Shui influences consumers' decisions. This study investigates the influence of Feng Shui on customers' attitude based on their regulatory focus, providing suggestions for business opportunities. Three studies examine whether Feng Shui's goals influence participants' decisions and feelings of appropriateness. Study 1 demonstrated that the fit between Feng Shui's suggestions and consumers' regulatory focus impacted decision making. Participants were more likely to adopt the Feng Shui practitioner's suggestions of a goal compatible with the consumers' regulatory focus. Study 2 provided evidence that a regulatory focus also impacts participants' peace of mind. Study 3 tested whether the value experienced from regulatory fit is reflected in the price. Specifically, promotion‐oriented individuals feel more accepting of promotion‐focused Feng Shui that is consistent with an approach goal while prevention‐oriented individuals are more persuaded by prevention‐focused Feng Shui that is consistent with an avoidance goal. When the Feng Shui appeal is compatible with the self‐regulatory focus, individuals demonstrate a greater feeling of appropriateness and produce a higher level of peace of mind.     

When fit matters more: The effect of regulatory fit on adaptation to change

Regulatory fit theory predicts that motivation and performance are enhanced when individuals pursue goals framed in a way that fits their regulatory orientation (promotion vs. prevention focus). Our aim was to test the predictions of the theory when individuals deal with change. We expected and found in three studies that regulatory fit is beneficial only when a prevention focus is involved. In Study 1, an experiment among students, prevention- but not promotion-focused participants performed better in a changed task when it was framed in fit with their regulatory orientation. In Study 2, a survey among employees experiencing organizational changes, only the fit between individual prevention (and not promotion) focus and prevention framing of the changes by the manager was associated with higher employee adaptation to changes. In Study 3, a weekly survey among employees undergoing organizational change, again only prevention regulatory fit was associated with lower employee exhaustion and higher employee work engagement. Theoretical and practical implications of applying regulatory focus theory to organizational change are discussed.     

Exploring the effect of regulatory focus on ad attitudes: the moderating roles of message sidedness and argument quality

This research explores the interaction effects of message sidedness and argument quality of ads on how either promotion‐focused or prevention‐focused individuals engender their ad attitudes. Two hundred and forty undergraduates were randomly assigned to a 2 (regulatory focus: prevention‐focus/promotion‐focus) × 2 (message sidedness: one‐sided messages/two‐sided messages) × 2 (argument quality (AQ): weak/strong) between‐subjects design. Results indicate that promotion‐focused individuals tend to engender more favourable attitudes to weak AQ ads than strong AQ ads, whereas prevention‐focused individuals tend to engender more favourable attitudes to strong AQ ads than weak AQ ads. In addition, results indicate more favourable attitudes for one‐sided messages over two‐sided messages for promotion‐focused individuals, as well as more favourable attitudes for two‐sided messages over one‐sided messages for prevention‐focused individuals. Furthermore, one‐sided messages result in more favourable ad attitudes when linked with weak AQ for promotion‐focused individuals; in contrast, two‐sided messages elicit more favourable ad attitudes when linked with strong AQ for prevention‐focused individuals. Results suggest that message sidedness and argument quality are closely related to regulatory focus, which has a direct impact on ad attitudes. Practical implications, theoretical contributions, limitations and directions for future research are discussed.     

Gain or non‐loss: The message matching effect of regulatory focus on moral judgements of other‐orientation lies

Previous studies found that individuals with promotion focus are more likely to be persuaded by messages framed in terms of gain‐related words; individuals with prevention focus are more likely to be persuaded by messages framed in terms of loss‐related words. This is known as the message matching effect of regulatory focus. The present study extended this effect into the field of moral judgement of other‐orientation lies. Two experiments were conducted, revealing that (a) individuals with promotion focus judged gain‐framed other‐orientation lies to be more moral, while individuals with prevention focus judged non‐loss‐framed other‐orientation lies to be more moral; and (b) the subjective processing fluency had a partial mediating role in the message matching effect. Theoretical implications and future research directions were discussed.     

Safe driving communication: A regulatory focus perspective

This research article examines the effects of self‐regulation on adolescents' aggressive driving tendencies and their attitudes toward safe driving communication. Two experimental studies demonstrate that an individual's regulatory orientation is a good predictor of aggressive driving tendencies and that self‐regulation plays a moderating role on the effects of safe driving messages on recipients' attitudes. Specifically, the findings reveal that promotion‐oriented (vs. prevention‐oriented) individuals are more likely to demonstrate aggressive driving tendencies. In addition, promotion‐oriented individuals show more favorable attitudes toward gain‐framed safe driving messages than loss‐framed messages. Prevention‐oriented individuals show the opposite pattern. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.     

How regulatory fit enhances motivational strength during goal pursuit

Higgins' (2000) theory of regulatory fit proposes that motivational strength will be enhanced when the manner in which people work toward a goal sustains (rather than disrupts) their regulatory orientation. This enhanced motivational strength in turn should improve efforts at goal attainment. In Experiment 1, predominantly promotion‐ and prevention‐focused participants were given the goal of writing a report on their leisure time, and were assigned either eagerness‐ or vigilance‐framed means to use. Promotion/eagerness and prevention/vigilance participants were about 50% more likely to turn in their reports than promotion/vigilance and prevention/eagerness participants. In Experiment 2, participants read either a promotion‐ or a prevention‐framed health message urging them to eat more fruits and vegetables, and were then asked to imagine either the benefits of compliance or the costs of non‐compliance. Promotion/benefits and prevention/costs participants subsequently ate about 20% more fruits and vegetables over the following week than promotion/costs and prevention/benefits participants. The implications of regulatory fit's enhancement of motivational strength are discussed. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Effects of Regulatory Focus on Braking Speed1

According to regulatory focus theory ( Higgins, 1997 ), promotion focus is concerned with accomplishments and aspirations leading to strategic eagerness; whereas prevention focus is concerned with safety and responsibilities leading to strategic vigilance. In this study, we investigate how regulatory focus theory can predict braking behavior in driving. In Study 1, participants' assessed regulatory focus strength as measured by chronic personality differences in regulatory focus predicted braking speed, in that chronic prevention‐oriented participants initiated braking earlier, as compared to promotion‐oriented people. In Study 2, we experimentally induced regulatory focus and showed that induced prevention focus enhanced braking speed (i.e., faster), as compared to induced promotion focus.     

Everyday risk taking as a function of regulatory focus

Uncertainty is an inherent aspect of everyday life. However, faced with uncertainty, some individuals take risks more eagerly than others. Regulatory focus theory may explain such differences because risky behavior may arise naturally from the eagerness of promotion focused individuals, while safe behavior may arise naturally from the vigilance of prevention focused individuals. A highly relevant real-life context for studying risk is mobility, as engaging in traffic inherently carries uncertainty about negative outcomes. We present two studies showing a direct link between regulatory focus and risky behavior going beyond traditional laboratory approaches. In both naturalistic speeding behavior (Study 1) and simulated risk taking (Study 2) promotion focus was positively, and prevention focus was negatively related to actual risky behavior.     

Stressed out over possible failure: The role of regulatory fit on claimed self-handicapping

The self-protective mechanism of self-handicapping appears to be motivated by the need to protect ability attributions in the face of concern about possible failure. Indeed, the present research finds a correlation between trait self-handicapping and chronic prevention focus. Moreover, the present research examines the role of “regulatory fit” on the use of claimed self-handicapping by exposing high and low trait self-handicappers to performance situations framed in prevention or promotion terms. Consistent with our regulatory fit hypothesis, high self-handicappers (HSHs) handicapped significantly more (by reporting higher levels of stress) when the task was framed in prevention focus rather than promotion focus terms, and did so even when the viability of the handicap was dubious. Self-handicapping in the prevention focus condition was mediated by elevated feelings of evaluative concern. The findings suggest that conditions of regulatory fit (i.e., HSHs under prevention focus) can lead to increased use of self-handicapping.     

The Effects of Regulatory Fit between Explanation Framing and Applicants’ Regulatory Foci on Applicant Reaction

Abstract

Drawing from regulatory fit theory and the literature on persuasion, the current study is the first to explore whether the fit between explanation framing and applicants’ regulatory foci could enhance applicant reaction. We hypothesized that a positively framed explanation fits with applicants’ promotion foci and that a negatively framed explanation fits with applicants’ prevention foci. Three studies were conducted in which participants with different regulatory foci rated their perceived procedural fairness and organizational attractiveness after reading differently framed recruitment advertisements, rejection letters, and job offer letters. The results supported our hypothesis by showing significant interactions between explanation framing and participants’ regulatory foci on procedural fairness and organizational attractiveness perception in the contexts of recruitment advertising and rejection letters. In these contexts, compared with receiving a negatively framed explanation, promotion-focused recipients reported higher levels of perceived fairness and organizational attractiveness after receiving a positively framed explanation, and promotion-focused recipients’ fairness and attractiveness perceptions were higher than prevention-focused recipients’, after receiving a positively framed explanation. Moreover, perceived procedural fairness mediated the relationship between regulatory fit and perceived organizational attractiveness. However, regulatory fit effects were not found in the context of job offer letters.     

Regulatory Framing and Collective Action: The Interplay of Individual Self‐Regulation and Group Behavior

Two studies examined the relations between regulatory focus and collective action. In Study 1, undergraduate women expressed stronger action intentions when they were primed to consider prevention (ought‐self) self‐discrepancies than promotion (ideal‐self) self‐discrepancies, suggesting that collective action is more likely to occur when individuals are prevention‐ rather than promotion‐focused. In Study 2, however, prevention‐focused women expressed stronger action intentions in response to security framing, whereas promotion‐focused women expressed stronger action intentions in response to achievement framing. This suggests that the relative disinterest in collective action among promotion‐focused individuals can be overcome with the appropriate promotion‐focused framing. Implications for analyses of both collective action and regulatory focus are discussed.     

Framing effects of per‐person versus aggregate prices in group meals

This research draws on regulatory focus theory and applies it to the context of price framing in group meals. Specifically, it examines the possibility that a per‐person framing of price (an aggregate price) may activate a promotion focus (prevention focus) in consumers. The results of five experiments show that participants (a) generated more promotion‐relevant (vs. prevention‐relevant) thoughts, (b) were more inclined to consume the group meal when a persistent focus on promotion (vs. prevention) was exhibited, (c) rated promotion‐focused (vs. prevention‐focused) messages more favorably, and (d) reported a higher intention to opt for an offer where the chance of obtaining a positive goal was enhanced, in response to a per‐person price rather than an aggregate price. Mediation analyses provide additional evidence for the notion that pursuit of promotion goals (prevention goals), which relate to obtaining value (avoiding loss) primed by a per‐person price (an aggregate price), had the effect of regulating one's choices. Managerial implications of the findings are discussed, followed by recommendations for future research.     

Collective fit increases team performances: extending regulatory fit from individuals to dyadic teams

People experience “regulatory fit” when they pursue a goal in a manner that suits their chronic regulatory orientation. This regulatory fit impacts performance positively. The present research extends performance gains due to fit from individuals to dyadic team performance. Study 1 manipulated team fit of 32 table football participants (i.e., promotion vs. prevention orientation and offense vs. defense positions). Team fit significantly predicted team success in an experimental tournament beyond team skill level. Study 2 replicated this result with data from a real‐life tournament including 66 highly experienced competitors. These findings broaden the concept of regulatory fit from individual to dyadic teams, and suggest collective fit as a possible important predictor for team success.     

Fading of Affect Associated with Negative Child‐Related Memories Varies by Parental Child Abuse Potential

Positive memories tend to hold their affective intensity across time better than negative memories, a phenomenon referred to as the fading affect bias (FAB). An initial study explored this bias in the context of parents' affective responses to memories involving their children. Specifically, parents (N = 90 for Study 1) were asked to recall three positive events and three negative events involving their children. Next, parents rated how positively or negatively they felt when each event occurred and at recall. Results revealed that parents at high risk of physical child abuse showed a smaller FAB than low‐risk parents. The smaller FAB effect observed among high‐risk parents occurred largely because affect associated with negative child‐related events faded minimally over time. This risk moderation effect did not emerge in a second study in which parents (N = 90 for Study 2) recalled general events that were not limited to events involving children. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Decide like Lionel Messi! The impact of regulatory focus on divergent thinking in sports

According to Higgins, the regulatory focus theory states that in terms of motivational information processing, it makes a difference whether people have a promotion or prevention focus. A focus on aspirations is labeled as promotion focus, whereas a focus on responsibility is called prevention focus. In our study, the theory will be applied to the area of sport decision making. We showed that soccer players make different decisions in a sport‐specific divergent‐thinking task depending on their regulatory focus (promotion vs. prevention). Promotion‐framed athletes were able to produce more original, flexible, and adequate solutions than prevention‐framed athletes. Theoretical and practical implications for sport psychology are discussed.     

Relative effectiveness of differently framed health messages: the influence of ambivalence

The present studies test the hypothesis that the degree of experienced ambivalence toward health behaviors moderates the impact of differently framed messages. In line with prospect theory, it is argued that positive frames can either involve attaining desirable outcomes or avoiding undesirable outcomes, and negative frames can either emphasize the presence of undesirable outcomes or the absence of desirable outcomes. The results of three studies are supportive of the hypothesis that highly ambivalent individuals are more persuaded by negatively framed messages whereas individuals low in ambivalence are more persuaded by positively framed messages. The greater persuasiveness of negatively framed messages at higher levels of ambivalence can be explained by a negativity bias involved in ambivalence. Several preventive behaviors such as eating a low‐fat diet or using condoms were addressed. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed in light of current theories on health behavior. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The impact of regulatory focus on affective responses to social discrimination

The impact of individuals' regulatory focus and the domain of outcomes (non‐gains vs. losses) on the target's affective responses to social discrimination were tested. Based on regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1997 ), it was predicted that a prevention focus would lead to more anger and agitation after social discrimination, because experiencing social discrimination is similar to experiencing failure. This pattern was predicted to be more pronounced when social discrimination was based on losses than when social discrimination was based on non‐gains (i.e., when the in‐group was evaluated more negatively vs. less positively compared to the out‐group). The results of three studies using chronic and situationally induced regulatory focus confirmed these predictions. No effect was found for the promotion focus. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

How regulatory focus influences consumer behavior

According to Higgins ( 1997 ) the theory of regulatory focus says that in terms of both information processing and motivation it makes a difference whether people have a promotion or prevention focus. In this paper, this theory will be applied to the area of consumer psychology. In three experiments we show that consumer's regulatory focus either measured or induced in a given situation influences product evaluations. Study 1 shows that consumers are interested in different product features depending on their focus; whereas in the prevention focus they are more interested in safety‐oriented aspects, in the promotion focus they concentrate more on comfort‐oriented qualities. In Study 2, a typical prevention product and a typical promotion product are compared with one another and data shows that focus compatible products are evaluated more positively. In Study 3 we demonstrate that advertisments that correspond to the focus of the consumer lead to more positive evaluations of the product than advertisments that are incompatible with the focus of the consumer. Theoretical and practical implications will be discussed. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.