Is regulatory focus related to minimal and maximal standards? Depends on how you ask!

Regulatory focus theory suggests that hopes and aspirations (promotion focus) function like maximal goals, whereas duties and responsibilities (prevention focus) function like minimal goals. However, past research has not always reliably found such a link between regulatory focus and maximal–minimal goals or standards. In the present research, we hypothesised that this inconsistency can be explained, at least in part, by conceptual differences resulting in the use of different, specific wording. In four studies, we compared wording in terms of the relative magnitude of the goals to wording in terms of their absolute versus gradual perception. Results showed that regulatory focus (manipulated or measured) consistently relates to maximal versus minimal standards framed as goals of different magnitudes, but not to the goals framed according to an absolute–gradual perception. Implication of the results for regulatory focus research is discussed.     

Regulatory focus and executive function after interracial interactions

Recent research finds that interracial interactions can negatively impact executive function. The present study examined whether regulatory focus may moderate this effect. Specifically, prior to an interracial interaction, 45 White female students were told either to try to have a positive interracial exchange (promotion focus), avoid prejudice (prevention focus), or given no instruction (control). After the interaction, participants completed the Stroop color-naming task, which assessed executive attentional task performance. Results revealed that participants in the prevention and the no instruction, control conditions performed worse on the Stroop than participants in the promotion condition. The findings suggest that promoting positive contact through active engagement rather than prejudice avoidance attenuates the previously documented negative effects of interracial contact on cognitive functioning.     

The effect of color (red versus blue) on assimilation versus contrast in prime-to-behavior effects

This paper examines whether color can modify the way that primed constructs affect behavior. Specifically, we tested the hypothesis that, compared to the color white, blue is more likely to lead to assimilative shifts in behavior, whereas red is more likely to lead to contrastive changes in behavior. In our experiment, previous findings were replicated in the white color condition: participants’ behavior assimilated to primed stereotypes of (un)intelligence and contrasted away from primed exemplars of (un)intelligence. However, in the blue color condition, participants’ behavior assimilated to the primed constructs, whereas in the red color condition, participants’ behavior contrasted away from the primed constructs, irrespective of whether the primed constructs were stereotypes or exemplars.     

Normative Influences on Secondary Disturbance: The Role of Social Expectancies

A “new wave” within psychotherapy has introduced the concept of acceptance into people's emotional repertoires. Accepting unpleasant emotional states has been demonstrated as an important pathway towards reducing secondary disturbances and improving emotional and psychological functioning. What is often overlooked, however, is whether this move towards acceptance is reinforced within the social and cultural contexts in which people experience their emotional states. Our research has begun to explore the contribution that normative influences make to secondary disturbance, specifically the perception that feeling happy is a desired state, and that experiencing and expressing negative emotions is undesirable and unacceptable to others. We review evidence here that these perceived “social expectancies” are associated with increased negative emotionality and depression, and reduce well‐being. Furthermore, we highlight that the effects of social expectancies are more apparent in Australia than Japan, consistent with the view that a higher premium is placed on happiness within Australia. We also review experimental evidence that social messages that reinforce these social expectancies serve to increase secondary disturbances. The implications of taking a social perspective on emotion regulation and dysfunction, and specifically implications for promoting happiness and acceptance in the field, are discussed.     

Getting what you want: Power increases the accessibility of active goals

Power facilitates goal-directed behavior. Two studies, using different types of goals, examined the cognitive mechanisms that underlie this tendency. Participants, primed with power or powerlessness, performed lexical decision tasks that assessed the relative facilitation of goal-relevant constructs during goal striving and after goal attainment. Results showed that during goal striving powerful participants manifested an increased facilitation of goal-relevant constructs compared to other constructs, and this facilitation decreased immediately after goal completion. In contrast, their powerless counterparts showed less facilitation of goal constructs during goal striving and maintained goal accessibility after completion. These results are consistent with the effects of power on goal-directed behavior found in past research.     

Regulatory focus and the Michelangelo Phenomenon: How close partners promote one another's ideal selves

This work examines the consequences of regulatory focus in the context of the Michelangelo phenomenon, a process whereby interaction partners shape one another's goal pursuits. We advanced predictions regarding the intrapersonal and interpersonal consequences of target and partner promotion orientation using the concepts of target-goal congruence, partner-goal congruence, and interpersonal match. We used data from four complementary measurement methods—self-report questionnaires, daily diary records, partners' ratings of ideal-relevant interaction behaviors, and coders' ratings of interaction behaviors—and using both target- and partner-reports of model criteria. Consistent with predictions, (a) target promotion orientation is associated with the elicitation of partner affirmation, (b) partner promotion orientation is associated with the display of partner affirmation, and (c) partner affirmation partially mediates the associations of target and partner promotion orientation with target movement toward the ideal self. We also examine the motivational, cognitive, and behavioral mechanisms that account for these associations.