Social Influence, Public
Communication and
Advertisement (SIPA)
Week 1
Scholer, A. A., Cornwell, J. F. M., & Higgins, E. T. (2019). Regulatory focus theory and
research: Catching up and looking forward after 20 years. In R. M. Ryan (Ed.), Oxford
handbook of motivation. New York: Oxford University Press. (pp. 47 – 52) (3 pages)
Introduction
People want to understand motivation and want to know how to motivate themselves,
parents, children and employees. In this chapter they explore the regulatory focus theory and
discuss how motivational distinctions contribute to more knowledge of the dynamics of goal
pursuit.
After the regulatory focus theory was introduced, there were more discoveries from new
studies on motivation science. These discoveries has led to developments in the theory.
What is regulatory focus theory?
The regulatory focus theory distinguishes two motivational systems: promotion and
prevention. These systems are essential but different survival needs. The two core
differences between the systems:
Differences in what motivates goal pursuit. Promotion: growth and advancement VS
prevention: security and safety.
Differences which regulatory strategies are preferred in goal pursuit. Promotion:
eagerness VS prevention: vigilance.
Psychological theories have long recognize growth and security as fundamental needs. Thus
people need both systems to be effective in the world. But, in any given moment, the
concerns of one system may predominate over the other, because of chronic or situational
differences in accessibility.
What is promotion motivation?
Individuals with a promotion focus are sensitive to growth-related concerns, such as
advancement and progress. They dream big, are aspiring for the next step and are pursuing
ideals. Because of this, they are sensitive to two outcomes: gains VS nongains. Success is
reflected in gains: positive deviations from the status quo/neutral state (difference between 0
and +1). Failure is reflected in nongains: captured by remaining at 0 and failing to advance.
Promotion-focused people are less sensitive to negative deviations from the status
quo/neutral state (difference between 0 and -1).
Moving toward gains and away from nongains leads to eager approach strategies in goal
pursuit: enthusiastically approaching matches to desired end states or gains. This eagerness
is reflected in many tactics, like considering multiple alternatives, focusing on the forest over
the trees and emphasizing positive possibilities.
What is prevention motivation?
Individuals with a prevention focus are sensitive to security-related concerns, such as
maintaining safety and upholding responsibilities. They focus on the absence and presence
,of negative consequences. Because of this, they are sensitive to two outcomes: losses VS
nonlosses. Success is reflected in nonloss: maintaining a satisfactory state, by holding onto
0. Failure is reflected in the losses: the inability to maintain the 0, being less than 0 at -1.
This means that a satisfactory status quo or 0 has a different meaning withing the
prevention system than the promotion system: a negative nongain in promotion
system and a positive nonloss in prevention system.
Moving toward nonlosses and away from losses leads to vigiliant avoidance strategies in
goal pursuit: avoiding mismatches to desired end state or nonlosses. This vigilance is
reflected in many tactics: emphasizing the possibility that things might go wrong, focusing on
the trees over the forest and embracing norms and status quo.
Where does regulatory focus motivation comes from?
The interactions between care-taker and child that contribute to children developing a
promotion focus, emphasizes end states as ideals and making advancements that move to a
better state. Focus on making progress, gains. (example: instructional scaffolding (steiger) to
support children’s progress in learning)
The interactions between care-taker and child that contribute to children developing a
prevention focus, emphasizes desired end states as oughts (responsibilities, duties) and
maintaining a satisfactory state rather than a worse state. Focus on safety and security.
(example: teaching children good manners and proper social practices)
Nurturing and bolstering parenting styles (lot of encouragement) stronger ideal self-guides
in children and stronger promotion focus in adults.
Punitive (bestraffend) and controlling parenting styles stronger ought self-guides in
children and stronger prevention focus in adults.
Important to note: Children can receive both promotion and prevention care-taking styles and
thus develop both promotion and prevention systems.
So, caretakers can establish a world that strengthens promotion and prevention sensitivities,
situations can also activate promotion and prevention concerns (tasks that highlight growth
VS security, leaders who focus on aspirations VS duties).
A study found that individuals show variability in the strength of regulatory focus motivations
across identities (student VS relationship partner) and that these identity-specific regulatory
focus motivations are better predictors of domain-specific goals.
They also provided evidence that activating a particular identity (student VS best friend) led
to increased accessibility of the regulatory focus motivation associated with that identity.
(example: individual has a promotion focus when with her boss and a prevention focus when
with her romantic partner, the likelihood of doing current task with a prevention or a
promotion focus depends on ‘who she saw for lunch’).
A study also found that encountering new individuals who resemble significant others can
influence whether a promotion or a prevention system is activated.
How is regulatory focus motivation measured and manipulated?
Individuals can simultaneously have strong promotion and prevention systems. However, at
any given moment, one system is likely to predominate and guide behavior.
Two measures to assess chronic differences in regulatory focus are:
, Regulatory focus strength measure. This measure assess differences in the chronic
accessibility and sensitivity of the promotion or prevention systems. The scores on
strength provide information about the accessibility but about the success/failure in
the individual’s history.
Regulatory Focus Questionnaire. This Questionnaire captures differences in
individual histories of being successful in the promotion and the prevention systems
(higher score on promotion scale reflects promotion pride, a subjective history of
success with promotion-related eagerness).
Several different approaches for manipulating regulatory focus have been employed.
Framing an identical set of task payoffs for success or failure as involving
gain/nongain and nonloss/loss.
Individuals remembers episodes from their past when they were successful.
Priming ideals or oughts or by having participants complete a maze (doolhof) that
highlights nurturance VS security concerns.
Ask individuals to reflect on current ideals or oughts.
Are promotion and prevention different from approach and avoidance?
The short answer to this question is no.
The long answer involves a discussion and is more complicated. They all emphasize the
importance of recognizing that the levels of self-regulation are defined by different concerns
(goals, strategies, behaviors) and that they are independent (more than one behavior that
can serve a given goal). These approaches differ in the way that they parse (ontleed) levels
of hierarchy.
System level: promotion and prevention goals
The system level defines an individual’s overarching motivational concerns and goals. Goals
serve as end state or standards. A distinction made at the system level is about approach VS
avoidance motivation: whether individuals are regulating in relation to a desired end state
(goal to achieve professional success) or undesired end state (goals to avoid being a
professional failure).
The system level also reflects what type of desired and undesired end states individuals are
regulating. Individuals in a promotion focus are concerned with approaching gains, ideals
and growth and avoiding nongains. Individuals in a prevention focus are concerned with
approaching nonlosses, oughts and safety and avoiding losses and danger.
The distinction between approach/avoidance and promotion/prevention at the system level
has been supported in many ways. Measures of system-level approach/avoidance are
distinct from measures of regulatory focus. The ‘goal looms larger’ effect is that motivation is
increasing as individuals draw closer to the desired end state. This occurs for both promotion
and prevention goals.
Success and failure feel different
Success in the promotion system reflects the presence of a positive outcome (gain), leading
to cheerfulness related emotions (happiness). Failure in a promotion system reflects the
absence of a positive outcome (nongain), leading to dejection-related emotions (sadness).
Success in a prevention system reflects the absence of a negative outcome (nonloss),
leading to quiescence-related emotions (peacefulness). Failure in a prevention system
reflects the presence of a negative outcome (loss), leading to agitation-related emotions
(anxiety).
Distinct patterns of neural activation
