Imagining how you'd feel: the role of motivational experiences from regulatory fit

The authors propose that how people imagine they would feel about making a choice is affected not only by the outcome's anticipated pleasure or pain but also by regulatory fit. Regulatory fit occurs when people pursue a goal in a manner that sustains their regulatory state and it intensifies the motivation to pursue that goal. Considering positive outcomes fits a promotion focus more than a prevention focus, whereas the reverse is true for negative outcomes. Thus, it is proposed that anticipating a desirable choice is more intensely positive for promotion than prevention, and anticipating an undesirable choice is more intensely negative for prevention than promotion. The results of three studies support these predictions. Studies 2 and 3 also demonstrate that motivational intensity underlies the stronger responses. Thus, to understand fully what it means to feel good or bad about a prospective choice, motivational experiences from regulatory fit must be considered.     

Implicit regulatory focus associated with asymmetrical frontal cortical activity

Regulatory focus theory identifies two separate motivational systems, promotion and prevention, that fulfill different regulatory needs and are differentially related to approach and avoidance. In the psychophysiological literature, approach- and avoidance-related emotions and motivational orientations have been linked to asymmetries in frontal cortical activity. In an effort to synthesize these literatures, we examined the relationship between an implicit assessment of chronic regulatory focus and an electroencephalographic (EEG) index of resting frontal cortical asymmetry. Results supported the hypothesis that promotion regulatory focus would be associated with greater left frontal activity, and prevention regulatory focus would be associated with greater right frontal activity. Discussion highlights how this synthesis may benefit theorizing of the relationship between regulatory focus, motivation, and emotion, and of the function of asymmetrical frontal cortical activity.     

消费行为领域中的调节定向

调节定向理论(Higgins,1997)超越传统享乐主义动机,区分出“促进”和“预防”两种调节性动机系统,近年已成为消费行为领域的研究热点之一.调节定向影响着消费者购物决策整个过程,受被试因素(文化背景、自我建构)、刺激因素(信息框架、解释水平、非言语线索、商品属性)和情境因素(决策时间距离、任务操纵)的影响,通过直接作用、调节关联效应和调节匹配效应三种途径决定信息的说服效果,并且受到精细加工可能性的调节.管理者应特别注意具体营销情境中的调节定向,合理利用调节匹配效应.未来研究应关注调节投入理论、调节定向的前因变量以及同网络购物情境相结合,并探索如何削弱预防定向对营销的不利影响.     

特质性与情境性调节定向匹配效应的一致性

研究试图探讨基于不同性质的调节定向(特质性调节定向和情境性调节定向)而达成的匹配所导致的效应是否一致。实验一、二均采用2(调节定向：促进、防御)×2(信息框架：积极、消极)被试间设计, 分别考察了两种匹配对信息说服效果(包括信息价值评价、情绪强度、行为意向3项指标)的影响。MANOVA检验表明, 实验一中信息价值评价、情绪强度2项指标上的交互作用显著, 实验二中信息价值评价、情绪强度和行为意向3项指标上的交互作用显著; 这表明, 基于两种不同性质的调节定向所达成的匹配在对信息价值评价和情绪强度的影响上具有一致的效应, 但在对行为意向的影响上具有不一致的效应。这一结果对于理解两种不同性质的调节定向之间的差异以及基于两者而达成的两种调节匹配之间的差异具有较为重要的意义。     

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.     

Regulatory fit as a determinant of sport performance: How to succeed in a soccer penalty-shooting

ObjectivesAccording to regulatory focus theory, goal pursuit can be achieved by either keeping a promotion or a prevention focus [Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280–1300; Higgins, E. T. (2000). Making a good decision: value from fit. American Psychologist, 55, 1217–1230]. Moreover, it has been assumed that people experience fit when they pursue a goal in a manner that sustains their chronic orientation and that fit has a positive impact on performance. In two studies, we investigated the significance of regulatory focus and fit in the realm of sports performance, such as the success rate in a soccer penalty-shooting task.Methods and ResultsIn a pilot study, we assessed the chronic regulatory orientation of 211 athletes from different sports. Among others, we found more promotion focus with attackers than with defenders. In the main study, we assessed the chronic regulatory orientation of 20 soccer players who took part in a penalty-shooting task. For half of them, the task was described in terms of promotion, for the others in terms of prevention. We found a positive impact of regulatory fit on scoring performance.ConclusionsOur findings demonstrate a great potential of regulatory focus theory for the understanding and enhancement of sport performance. The assessment of athletes' chronic regulatory orientation could be of importance for the selection of athletes, the adjustment of tactics and strategies, and coaches' framing of instructions.     

动机理论的新发展：调节定向理论

Higgins（1997）提出的调节定向理论,独立于享乐主义原则,揭示了人们如何趋近积极目标状态和回避消极目标状态。该理论区分了两种不同的调节定向——促进定向和预防定向,两者在服务的需要类型、对目标的表征、对结果的关注点、情绪体验等方面存在区别,并会产生独立的动机结果。文章介绍了关于两种调节定向的特点、调节定向的测量、调节定向对基本心理过程和调节定向理论在社会生活的应用的研究成果,并提出未来研究应重视对调节定向的测量、调节定向与人格、与时间动力等方面的研究。     

“Who I Am Depends on How Fairly I'm Treated”: Effects of Justice on Self‐Identity and Regulatory Focus

Across 2 experiments, we examined motivational processes elicited by justice‐related experiences. Specifically, we examined the effects of justice on recipients' self‐identity and regulatory focus. As predicted, those who experienced unfairness had a strong individual identity and prevention focus owing to the threats of social rejection and economic exploitation communicated by unfairness. Conversely, individuals exposed to fairness had strong interdependent identities and promotion focus owing to the favorable economic and socioemotional information communicated by fairness. These effects were accentuated among participants who reported high sensitivity to injustice and internal loci of control. Our findings are important because they highlight causal associations between justice and key motivation constructs.     

如何道歉更有效:调节聚焦与信息框架的作用

本研究结合调节聚焦理论探讨了如何道歉更有效。两个实验通过启动不同调节聚焦,创设冒犯情境并呈现不同框架的道歉信息,考察调节聚焦与道歉框架对道歉效果的影响。结果表明,向促进聚焦的受害者呈现积极框架的道歉信息、向防御聚焦的受害者呈现消极框架的道歉信息能改善受害者对冒犯者的评价,降低交往回避倾向,获得较好的道歉效果,且正确感是此种影响发生的内在机制。     

Regulatory fit from attribute‐based versus alternative‐based processing in decision making

This paper discusses the fit between attribute-based versus alternative-based processing and regulatory focus, and its impact on decision outcome valuation. Attribute-based processing was found to occur more frequently under prevention focus, whereas alternative-based processing occurred more frequently under promotion focus. The fit between prevention/promotion focus and attribute-based/alternative-based processing was found to enhance satisfaction with choices and the perceived monetary value of chosen options. Moreover, the effect of fit on outcome valuation was found to be mediated by ease of processing. Finally, the effects of fit on ease of processing and outcome valuation disappeared when consumers first practiced to process information based on either attributes or alternatives.     

调节匹配对期望与绩效关系的影响

以往研究发现了调节定向、调节期望与绩效的关系。本研究基于调节匹配理论,以149名大学生为被试、通过与个体长期调节定向相一致或不一致的任务框架(收获/无收获vs无损失/损失)操作调节匹配性,进一步研究了调节匹配对期望与绩效关系的影响。结果显示,调节匹配会进一步加强以往研究中发现的调节定向对期望和绩效关系的调节模式,不匹配会起到削弱作用。当促进定向占主导的个体完成强调有无收获的任务时,高期望对绩效的促进作用显著高于完成强调有无损失的任务;而当预防定向占主导的个体完成强调有无损失的任务时,低期望对绩效的促进作用显著高于完成强调有无收益的任务。     

Regulatory focus and the family–work interface: The role of regulatory fit between cohabiting partners

The aim of the present study was to examine the impact of regulatory focus in goal pursuit and regulatory fit between marital partners on family conditions and the family–work interface. We hypothesized that when both partners are high on promotion focus (fit) they experience higher developmental possibilities at home and have an increased likelihood of family-to-work facilitation (FWF). In addition, we hypothesized that when both partners are prevention focused (fit) they experience less home demands and less family-to-work conflict (FWC). In total, 131 working couples participated in the study. Each partner provided information about his/her own regulatory focus, perceptions of home demands and home developmental possibilities, and experienced FWF and FWC. Results of moderated structural equation modelling analyses largely supported our hypotheses since the interaction between partners’ promotion focus predicted the levels of home developmental possibilities and FWF, whereas the interaction between partners’ prevention focus predicted home demands in the expected direction. In conclusion, the fit between partners’ self regulatory styles can influence family life and, consequently, the impact of family on work.     

决策过程中的调节匹配效应及其机制

以大学生为被试,运用实验法探讨了决策过程中调节定向与信息搜索模式之间的匹配效应及其机制。结果显示：(1) 促进定向组被试决策时更偏好基于属性的信息搜索模式,而预防定向组被试决策时更偏好基于选项的信息搜索模式;(2)当两种调节定向组被试分别使用各自所偏好的信息搜索模式制定决策时,达成了调节匹配,相比调节不匹配,这种匹配使被试对其所做选择给出了更积极的评价,即出现了调节匹配效应;(3)加工流畅性可以部分地解释这种调节匹配效应。     

期望与绩效的关系:调节定向的调节作用

经典动机理论认为高期望能提高绩效水平,本研究结合调节定向理论进一步回答这种效应"何时"存在或"如何"产生的问题。研究1通过测量期望水平、并用任务框架操作调节定向,检验了情景启动的调节定向对期望与行为间关系的影响;研究2采取更严格的被试内设计通过任务难度操作期望,考察了作为个体长期差异的调节定向的作用。结果表明:①调节定向调节成功期望与绩效之间的关系:对于促进定向,成功期望与绩效正相关;对于预防定向,期望与绩效相关不显著。②动机可以部分解释调节定向与期望的交互作用机制:高水平的成功期望会提高促进定向个体的动机强度,进而产生高的绩效结果;其对预防定向个体的动机强度的影响不显著。     

Motivational Influences on Cognitive Performance in Children: Focus Over Fit

Cognitive psychologists have begun to address how motivational factors influence adults' performance on cognitive tasks. However, little research has examined how different motivational factors interact with one another to affect behavior across the life span. In the current study, the authors examined how children perform on a classification task when placed in a regulatory fit or mismatch. Nine-year-old children performed a classification task in which they either gained or lost points for each response. Additionally, children were given either a global promotion focus (trying to earn a gift card) or a prevention focus (trying to avoid losing a gift card). Previous work indicates that adults in this task tend to perform better when there is a match (or fit) between the incentive to gain, or avoid losing, a global reward, and the more local task reward structure to either maximize points gained or minimize points lost on a trial-by-trial basis. Unlike adults, 9-year-olds perform better in the promotion condition than in the prevention condition regardless of task reward structure. Possible explanations for the differences between adults' and children's performance are discussed as are possible applications for academic settings.     

Regulatory fit: A meta‐analytic synthesis

Regulatory fit, or the match between an individual's regulatory orientation and the strategy used to sustain it, offers a pervasive predictor of customer behavior. Merely reaching a decision in a certain way influences the value of a decision or an outcome. In this research, we conduct a meta-analysis to more fully articulate the role of important conceptual moderators and demonstrate their differential effects on evaluation, behavioral intention, and behavior. In particular, we look at the source of regulatory focus (self-prime, situation-prime, chronic), the orientation (prevention, promotion), how fit is created (sustaining, matching), how fit is constructed (action, observation), and the scope of fit (incidental, integral). We also shed light on the role of several contextual factors.     

Asymmetric Perception of Gains versus Non‐losses and Losses versus Non‐gains: The Causal Role of Regulatory Focus

Recent studies show that, while losses loom larger than equivalent non‐gains, gains loom larger than equivalent non‐losses. This finding has been interpreted within the framework of regulatory focus theory. In this study, we highlight the importance of considering the motivational focus independently of the framing and the valence of outcome, thus exploring the causal effect of regulatory focus on the asymmetric perception of gains versus non‐losses and losses versus non‐gains. In two studies, we examine the perceived effects of either actual or hypothetical changes in monetary wealth, while orthogonally manipulating framing, valence, and regulatory focus. We find a significant interaction between the three factors. The gain versus non‐loss asymmetry in perceived satisfaction is stronger in promotion focus, whereas the loss versus non‐gain asymmetry in perceived dissatisfaction is stronger in prevention focus. The results suggest that the effects of incentives framed in terms of (non)gains and (non)losses depend on their congruence with the individual's motivational state. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

不同反应线索条件下调节匹配对建议采纳的影响

研究的目的是为了探究不同反应线索条件下调节匹配对建议采纳的影响。实验中有两个反应线索：言语性反应线索(实验一)与非言语性反应线索(实验二), 两个实验均采用2(调节取向：促进/防御)×2(建议策略：渴望/警惕)的混合设计。实验一、二的被试分别是81和79名在校大学生, 年龄均在19~25岁之间。实验结果表明, 在言语反应线索条件下, 调节匹配时人们对建议的采纳程度更高; 在非言语性反应线索条件下, 防御取向时, 调节匹配时人们显著提高了建议的采纳程度, 但促进取向条件人们对建议的采纳程度无明显差异。结果表明在促进取向下非言语性反应线索对调节匹配具有干扰作用, 这个结果值得进一步研究。     

矛盾视角下调节焦点在领导力领域的应用

根据调节焦点理论, 个体在追求目标和选择行动策略的过程中存在两种调节焦点：促进型调节焦点的个体以利益最大化为目标, 倾向用“接近式”的方式达成目标; 防御型调节焦点的个体以损失最小化为目标, 倾向用“避免式”的方式达成目标。近年来, 调节焦点理论在领导力领域的研究中得到了广泛应用, 但关于两种调节焦点之间的关系及两者共同作用的研究却十分稀少。在回顾调节焦点在领导力领域研究的应用现状的基础上, 本文指出了矛盾视角的必要性和可行性, 并基于矛盾理论, 提出了未来研究的发展方向。     

How regulatory focus–mode fit impacts variety-seeking

Variety-seeking research has examined antecedents in terms of contextual factors and individual differences. However, it does not consider the interaction of individual difference factors such as regulatory focus (promotion vs. prevention) and regulatory mode (locomotion vs. assessment) to predict variety-seeking. Drawing on regulatory fit theory, this study introduces a new kind of regulatory fit based on the interaction between regulatory focus and mode (i.e., regulatory focus–mode fit), thereby extending previous work examining fit based on either regulatory focus or regulatory mode in isolation. Results from five studies, including field data from 10,547 music app consumers (text analysis), two preregistered studies, and two online experiments, show that regulatory focus–mode fit (vs. non-fit) decreases variety-seeking. Engagement and attitude certainty serially mediate regulatory focus–mode fit effects. Findings provide implications for consumer segmentation and message framing.