Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Front Psychol ; 12: 710491, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34630218

ABSTRACT

Numerous major holidays celebrate socially gathering in person. However, in major holidays that happened during the pandemic, desires to nurture relationships and maintain holiday traditions often conflicted with physical distancing and other measures to protect against COVID-19. The current research sought to understand wellbeing during American Thanksgiving in 2020, which happened 8months into the COVID-19 pandemic, after months of physical distancing and stay-at-home orders. American Thanksgiving is a major holiday not limited to any religion. We asked 404 American adults how they spent Thanksgiving Day and to report on their experiences of that day. Predictors of wellbeing that we drew from self-determination theory were satisfaction of the fundamental needs for social connection (relatedness), for doing what one really wants (autonomy), and feeling effective (competence). The predictors of wellbeing that we drew from regulatory focus theory were a focus on growth (promotion), and a focus on security (prevention). We found that feeling socially connected and focusing on growth related most strongly to wellbeing. Additionally, participants who saw even one other person face-to-face reported significantly higher relatedness satisfaction, promotion focus, and wellbeing than those who did not. Our research could help construct persuasive messages that encourage nurturing close relationships at major holidays while remaining safe against the virus.

2.
Front Psychol ; 11: 589446, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33329250

ABSTRACT

Prevention focus is a self-regulatory orientation that serves the need for security, and promotion focus is a self-regulatory orientation that serves the need for growth. From mid-March to early April 2020, did people judge prevention focus to be more useful than promotion focus for responding to COVID-19? Our study tested and showed support for this hypothesis with 401 American and Canadian participants, who we sampled in 100-person waves on the first 4 Thursdays of the pandemic. For this study, we developed a new measure of the judged usefulness of promotion and prevention focus. Additionally, results showed that the judged usefulness of promotion and prevention focus related positively to support of the psychological needs for autonomy and relatedness, respectively, in responding to COVID-19. Exploratory analyses showed that day-to-day differences in autonomy, competence, and relatedness support and in promotion and prevention focus tended to be small, which is notable given the large-scale changes to social distancing, employment, and media coverage of the virus during this time. Our research could be useful for crafting persuasive advocacy and narrative communications that encourage social distancing to protect others about whom people care most.

3.
Front Psychol ; 9: 757, 2018.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29867701

ABSTRACT

People in a prevention focus tend to view their goals as duties and obligations, whereas people in a promotion focus tend to view their goals as hopes and aspirations. The current research suggests that people's attention goes to somewhat different experiences when they describe their hopes vs. duties. Two studies randomly assigned participants (N = 953) to describe a hope vs. duty. Specifically, Study 1 asked participants to describe a personal experience of pursuing a hope vs. duty, and Study 2 asked participants to describe a current hope vs. duty they had. I analyzed these descriptions with Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) 2015. Consistent with earlier research on regulatory focus, participants wrote more about positive outcomes when describing hopes and social relationships when describing duties. The current research suggests that the effectiveness of common regulatory focus and regulatory fit manipulations could depend on participants' freedom to choose the experiences they bring to mind when they describe their hopes and duties.

4.
Pers Soc Psychol Bull ; 43(3): 313-328, 2017 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28903697

ABSTRACT

This article introduces the need-support model, which proposes that regulatory focus can affect subjective support for the needs proposed by self-determination theory (autonomy, competence, and relatedness), and support of these needs can affect subjective labeling of experiences as promotion-focused and prevention-focused. Three studies tested these hypotheses ( N = 2,114). Study 1 found that people recall more need support in promotion-focused experiences than in prevention-focused experiences, and need support in their day yesterday (with no particular regulatory focus) fell in between. Study 2 found that experiences of higher need support were more likely to be labeled as promotion-focused rather than prevention-focused, and that each need accounted for distinct variance in the labeling of experiences. Study 3 varied regulatory focus within a performance task and found that participants in the promotion condition engaged in need-support inflation, whereas participants in the prevention condition engaged in need-support deflation. Directions for future research are discussed.


Subject(s)
Models, Psychological , Self Concept , Self-Control , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Motivation , Personal Autonomy , Psychological Theory , Young Adult
5.
J Pers Soc Psychol ; 91(4): 601-11, 2006 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17014287

ABSTRACT

Three experiments show that the motivational effects of regulatory fit (consistency between regulatory state and strategic means) are context dependent. With no explicit decision rule about when to stop (Experiment 1) or an explicit enjoyment stop rule (Experiments 2 and 3), participants exerted more effort on tasks when experiencing regulatory fit than when experiencing regulatory nonfit. With an explicit sufficiency stop rule (Experiments 2 and 3), participants exerted less effort when experiencing regulatory fit than when experiencing regulatory nonfit. The interactive effect of regulatory fit and stop rules can be explained by misattribution of rightness feelings from regulatory fit; the effect was eliminated by drawing participants' attention to an earlier event as a source of rightness feelings (Experiments 1 and 3).


Subject(s)
Decision Making , Motivation , Adult , Affect , Attention , Female , Humans , Male , Psychology/statistics & numerical data , Surveys and Questionnaires
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...