Motivated Knowledge Acquisition: Implicit Self-Theories and the Preference for Knowledge Breadth or Depth.

Implicit self-theories posit that individuals ascribe to one of two beliefs regarding the self: an incremental theory motivated by learning goals and an entity theory motivated by performance goals. This work proposes that these theories-and their underlying motivations-reflect individuals' preferences for different knowledge types. Specifically, we propose that incremental theorists prefer knowledge that expands their understanding of diverse experiences within a category (i.e., knowledge breadth), whereas entity theorists prefer knowledge that refines their understanding of a preferred experience within a category (i.e., knowledge depth). Five studies show the effect of implicit self-theories on individuals' preferences for knowledge breadth and depth and the role of learning and performance goals in motivating these knowledge preferences. We address alternative explanations related to general openness, risk-seeking, and perceived quality differences, and we demonstrate the role of negative feedback in reversing these knowledge preferences.

The Effect of an Interprofessional Heart Failure Education Program on Hospital Readmissions.

Heart failure (HF) is an increasing concern to public health, affecting approximately 5.1 million Americans and costing the United States over $32 billion annually. Compounding the concern, research has exposed the significant problem of hospital readmissions for the HF population, with an estimated 25% of HF patients are rehospitalized within 30 days of discharge. This project focuses on an education-based strategy designed to decrease hospital readmissions for this at-risk population. In particular, an interprofessional outpatient educational program (Heart Failure University [HFU]) was initiated to reduce healthcare costs and increase the quality of care for HF patients at a large private hospital in Florida. A retrospective case-control study was conducted to compare 30-day hospital readmissions of patients who attended HFU to patients who received standard education. Results indicated a significant association between HFU attendance and reduced 30-day hospital readmissions (χ [1, N = 106] = 5.68, p = .02). Strengthening this effect, the results showed patients who attended HFU had a significantly greater functional disability than those who did not attend (t(104) = 2.40, p = .018). These findings corroborate with current research on transitional care interventions and emphasize the importance of interprofessional, educational-based disease management programs for the HF population.

The Malleable Efficacy of Willpower Theories.

Emerging research documents the self-control consequences of individuals' theories regarding the limited nature of willpower, such that unlimited theorists consistently demonstrate greater self-control than limited theorists. The purpose of the present research was to build upon prior work on self-validation and perceptions of mental fatigue to demonstrate when self-control is actually impaired by endorsing an unlimited theory and-conversely-enhanced by endorsing a limited theory. Four experiments show that fluency reinforces the documented effects of individuals' willpower theories on self-control, while disfluency reverses the documented effects of individuals' willpower theories on self-control. Moreover, these effects are driven by differential perceptions of mental fatigue-perceptions altered by individuals' level of confidence in their willpower theory-and are bound by conditions that promote effortful thought. Collectively, these findings point to the malleable efficacy of willpower theories and the importance of belief confidence in dictating this malleability and in modulating subsequent self-control behavior.

Decision sidestepping: How the motivation for closure prompts individuals to bypass decision making.

We all too often have to make decisions-from the mundane (e.g., what to eat for breakfast) to the complex (e.g., what to buy a loved one)-and yet there exists a multitude of strategies that allows us to make a decision. This work focuses on a subset of decision strategies that allows individuals to make decisions by bypassing the decision-making process-a phenomenon we term decision sidestepping. Critical to the present manuscript, however, we contend that decision sidestepping stems from the motivation to achieve closure. We link this proposition back to the fundamental nature of closure and how those seeking closure are highly bothered by decision making. As such, we argue that the motivation to achieve closure prompts a reliance on sidestepping strategies (e.g., default bias, choice delegation, status quo bias, inaction inertia, option fixation) to reduce the bothersome nature of decision making. In support of this framework, five experiments demonstrate that (a) those seeking closure are more likely to engage in decision sidestepping, (b) the effect of closure on sidestepping stems from the bothersome nature of decision making, and (c) the reliance on sidestepping results in downstream consequences for subsequent choice. Taken together, these findings offer unique insight into the cognitive motivations stimulating a reliance on decision sidestepping and thus a novel framework by which to understand how individuals make decisions while bypassing the decision-making process. (PsycINFO Database Record

The self-control consequences of political ideology.

Evidence from three studies reveals a critical difference in self-control as a function of political ideology. Specifically, greater endorsement of political conservatism (versus liberalism) was associated with greater attention regulation and task persistence. Moreover, this relationship is shown to stem from varying beliefs in freewill; specifically, the association between political ideology and self-control is mediated by differences in the extent to which belief in freewill is endorsed, is independent of task performance or motivation, and is reversed when freewill is perceived to impede (rather than enhance) self-control. Collectively, these findings offer insight into the self-control consequences of political ideology by detailing conditions under which conservatives and liberals are better suited to engage in self-control and outlining the role of freewill beliefs in determining these conditions.

Motivated reflection on attitude-inconsistent information: an exploration of the role of fear of invalidity in self-persuasion.

The mere thought effect is defined in part by the tendency of self-reflective thought to heighten the generation of and reflection on attitude-consistent thoughts. By focusing on individuals' fears of invalidity, we explored the possibility that the mere opportunity for thought sometimes motivates reflection on attitude-inconsistent thoughts. Across three experiments, dispositional and situational fear of invalidity was shown to heighten reflection on attitude-inconsistent thoughts. This heightened reflection, in turn, interacted with individuals' thought confidence to determine whether attitude-inconsistent thoughts were assimilated or refuted and consequently whether individuals' attitudes and behavioral intentions depolarized or polarized following a sufficient opportunity for thought, respectively. These findings emphasize the impact of motivational influences on thought reflection and generation, the importance of thought confidence in the assimilation and refutation of self-generated thought, and the dynamic means by which the mere thought bias can impact self-persuasion.

When ab ≠ c - c': published errors in the reports of single-mediator models.

Accurate reports of mediation analyses are critical to the assessment of inferences related to causality, since these inferences are consequential for both the evaluation of previous research (e.g., meta-analyses) and the progression of future research. However, upon reexamination, approximately 15% of published articles in psychology contain at least one incorrect statistical conclusion (Bakker & Wicherts, Behavior research methods, 43, 666-678 2011), disparities that beget the question of inaccuracy in mediation reports. To quantify this question of inaccuracy, articles reporting standard use of single-mediator models in three high-impact journals in personality and social psychology during 2011 were examined. More than 24% of the 156 models coded failed an equivalence test (i.e., ab = c - c'), suggesting that one or more regression coefficients in mediation analyses are frequently misreported. The authors cite common sources of errors, provide recommendations for enhanced accuracy in reports of single-mediator models, and discuss implications for alternative methods.

Cognitive and affective matching effects in persuasion: an amplification perspective.

Past research suggests that cognitive and affective attitudes are more open to change toward cognitive and affective (i.e., matched) persuasive attacks, respectively. The present research investigates how attitude certainty influences this openness. Although an extensive literature suggests that certainty generally reduces an attitude's openness to change, the authors explore the possibility that certainty might increase an attitude's openness to change in the context of affective or cognitive appeals. Based on the recently proposed amplification hypothesis, the authors posit that high (vs. low) attitude certainty will boost the resistance of attitudes to mismatched attacks (e.g., affective attitudes attacked by cognitive messages) but boost the openness of attitudes to matched attacks (e.g., affective attitudes attacked by affective messages). Two experiments provide support for this hypothesis. Implications for increasing the openness of attitudes to both matched and mismatched attacks are discussed.

Does fast or slow evaluation foster greater certainty?

This research investigates the effect of perceived evaluation duration--that is, the perceived time or speed with which one generates an evaluation--on attitude certainty. Integrating diverse findings from past research, the authors propose that perceiving either fast or slow evaluation can augment attitude certainty depending on specifiable factors. Across three studies, it is shown that when people express opinions, evaluate familiar objects, or typically trust their gut reactions, perceiving fast rather than slow evaluation generally promotes greater certainty. In contrast, when people form opinions, evaluate unfamiliar objects, or typically trust more thoughtful responses, perceiving slow rather than fast evaluation generally promotes greater certainty. Mediation analyses reveal that these effects stem from trade-offs between perceived rational thought and the perceived ease of retrieving an attitude. Implications for research on deliberative versus intuitive decision making are discussed.

When perception is more than reality: the effects of perceived versus actual resource depletion on self-regulatory behavior.

Considerable research demonstrates that the depletion of self-regulatory resources impairs performance on subsequent tasks that demand these resources. The current research sought to assess the impact of perceived resource depletion on subsequent task performance at both high and low levels of actual depletion. The authors manipulated perceived resource depletion by having participants 1st complete a depleting or nondepleting task before being presented with feedback that did or did not provide a situational attribution for their internal state. Participants then persisted at a problem-solving task (Experiments 1-2), completed an attention-regulation task (Experiment 3), or responded to a persuasive message (Experiment 4). The findings consistently demonstrated that individuals who perceived themselves as less (vs. more) depleted, whether high or low in actual depletion, were more successful at subsequent self-regulation. Thus, perceived regulatory depletion can impact subsequent task performance-and this impact can be independent of one's actual state of depletion.

A new look at the consequences of attitude certainty: the amplification hypothesis.

It is well established that increasing attitude certainty makes attitudes more resistant to attack and more predictive of behavior. This finding has been interpreted as indicating that attitude certainty crystallizes attitudes, making them more durable and impactful. The current research challenges this crystallization hypothesis and proposes an amplification hypothesis, which suggests that instead of invariably strengthening an attitude, attitude certainty amplifies the dominant effect of the attitude on thought, judgment, and behavior. In 3 experiments, the authors test these competing hypotheses by comparing the effects of attitude certainty manipulations on univalent versus ambivalent attitudes. Across experiments, it is demonstrated that increasing attitude certainty strengthens attitudes (e.g., increases their resistance to persuasion) when attitudes are univalent but weakens attitudes (e.g., decreases their resistance to persuasion) when attitudes are ambivalent. These results are consistent with the amplification hypothesis.

Assimilation and contrast in persuasion: the effects of source credibility in multiple message situations.

The present research explores a contextual perspective on persuasion in multiple message situations. It is proposed that when people receive persuasive messages, the effects of those messages are influenced by other messages to which people recently have been exposed. In two experiments, participants received a target persuasive message from a moderately credible source. Immediately before this message, participants received another message, on a different topic, from a source with high or low credibility. In Experiment 1, participants' attitudes toward the target issue were more favorable after they had first been exposed to a different message from a low rather than high credibility source (contrast). In Experiment 2, this effect only emerged when a priming manipulation gave participants a dissimilarity mindset. When participants were primed with a similarity mindset, their attitudes toward the target issue were more favorable following a different message from a high rather than low credibility source (assimilation).

Resisting persuasion by the skin of one's teeth: the hidden success of resisted persuasive messages.

Recent research has suggested that when people resist persuasion they can perceive this resistance and, under specifiable conditions, become more certain of their initial attitudes (e.g., Z. L. Tormala & R. E. Petty, 2002). Within the same metacognitive framework, the present research provides evidence for the opposite phenomenon--that is, when people resist persuasion, they sometimes become less certain of their initial attitudes. Four experiments demonstrate that when people perceive that they have done a poor job resisting persuasion (e.g., they believe they generated weak arguments against a persuasive message), they lose attitude certainty, show reduced attitude-behavioral intention correspondence, and become more vulnerable to subsequent persuasive attacks. These findings suggest that resisted persuasive attacks can sometimes have a hidden yet important success by reducing the strength of the target attitude.