PROBLEM 2 – AVOIDING AND APPROACHING GOALS
Part 1
1. What is the efeet of promotion and prevention foeus
2. Someone ean be more influeneed by a or b eaused by whieh faetors
Part 2
1. Whieh faetors determine goals
2. What are the diferent inds of learning goals
FREITAS ET AL. (2002): WHEN TO BEGIN? REGULATORY
FOCUS AND INITIATING GOAL PURSUIT.
RFT: hedonic value (seek pleasure, avoid pain). Ideal self (sensitive to attain
goals), ought self (high sensitivity to avoid impediments). Ideal self-guide is
related to promotion focus, ought self-guide to prevention focus.
Minimum goals are goals that are seen as ‘must obtain’ (negative or non-
negative): prevention, maximum goals are goals you hope to obtain (positive or
non-positive outcome): promotion. Prevention focus: must obtain minimum goals.
Expectancy is less relevant than with promotion focus.
Who starts frst: general results:
The authors expected prevention focused individuals to initiate action earlier.
Students had to write an essay and predict when they will start; prevention
focused started earlier. Same results with diferent framing. The last study
showed that prevention-framed anagrams were completed frst. Conelusion:
prevention starts frst. Note: when there are a lot of alternatives, this might not
work.
HIGGINS (1997): BEYOND PLEASURE AND PAIN.
Abstract
People seek pleasure and avoid pain (= pleasure principle). One of the
underlying principles of this approach-avoidance motivation is the regulatory
focus. Self-regulation exists of promotion-focus (achieving goals and dreams) and
prevention-focus (safety and responsibilities). There also is a distinct between
regulatory anticipation and regulatory reference.
Psychologists have focused too much on the hedonic pleasure principle as an
explanation for motivation. This caused there to be less attention for diferent
kind of approach-avoidance principles. This article focuses on regulatory focus.
Regulatory Focus as Motivational Principle
Hedonic principle: observations showed that when behaviour led to fun, this
behaviour was repeated, and when it led to pain, it would be less likely to be
repeated. We can look further to specifc approach and avoidance processes that
are underlying the hedonic principle regulatory focus.
Self-regulation toward desired end-states. Characteristic: approach motivation
(reduce discrepancies). Current models make a distinct between approaching
wanted end-states and avoiding unwanted end-states, but don’t make a
,diference between the diferent kinds of end-states end neither between the
diferent kinds of ways of achieving the wanted end-states.
Theory of self-regulatory focus: the hedonic principle should work diferently
at diferent kinds of needs (like nurturancessecurity). Surviving requuires
adjustment to the environment, especially in a social environment:
- To receive nurturance and security that children need to survive, they have to
build up relationships with their caretakers. They can provide the children with
these needs. To build up these
relationships, the children should
learn how their appearance and
behaviour can infuence the
caretaker’s reactions
approach pleasure, avoid pain.
- Regulatory focus says that
regulation for nurturance
(promotion-focus) is diferent
than regulation for security
(prevention-focus).
Two kinds of regulatory focus:
- Promotion-focus (ideal self-
regulation): progress, growth,
achievement, performance.
o Pleasure by presence of
positive outcomes (hugging,
supporting).
o Pain by absence of positive
outcomes (taking away toys).
- Prevention-focus (ought self-
regulation): safety,
responsibility, obligations.
o Pleasure by absence negative
outcomes (teaching your kids
to be alert).
o Pain by presence of negative outcomes (punishment, screaming).
Some situations can cause a temporarily focus. Teachers can use gain-non gain
(promotion) or loss- non loss (prevention) communication in their feedback.
When the Hedonic Principle is Not Enough (psychological phenomena
that are traditionally treated in hedonic terms)
Approach and Avoidance
Hedonic principle: people approach pleasure and avoid pain. How people do this,
has important motivational consequuences. Some consequuences:
- Approaching matches versus avoiding mismatches as strategic
means.
Studies it’s important to distinguish between approach and avoidance
strategies of attaining desired end-states because these strategies underlie what
people consider signifcant in their lives. The hedonic principle is totally silent
about diferences in strategic inclinations.
- Approach-avoidance and strategic compatibility.
Studies regulatory diferences in strategic inclinations infuence the impact of
other motivational variables (incentives and means). To understand this, we
should go further than the hedonic principle and recognize that people approach
, desired end-states by either approaching matches (promotion) or avoiding
mismatches (prevention). Both of the strategies include tendencies to insure
certain forms of outcome and insure against certain others.
- Strategic tendencies to insure certain forms of outcome and insure
against certain others.
People in promotion focus (approach matches) should be eager to attain
advancement and gains. People in prevention focus (avoid mismatches0 should
be vigilant to insure safety and non-losses. Strategic tendency in promotion focus
insure hits and insure against errors of omission. The tendency to insure
against errors of omission need not involve response suppression. Insure hits,
insure against misses.
Strategic tendency in prevention focus insure correct rejections and insure
against errors of commission. Insure correct rejections, insure against false
alarms.
In a task promotion focus says yes, prevention-focus says no.
Sorting prevention focus uses same criterion across categories, promotion
focus uses alternative criteria across categories.
Difcult task promotion focus persevere, prevention focus quuit more readily.
So: we need to go beyond the hedonic principle that people approach pleasure
and avoid pain. There are diferent strategic means, and they both involve
diferent tendencies.
Expectancy x Value Efects
As either expectancy or value increases, the impact of the other variable on
commitment increases. This assumption refects the notion that the goal
commitment involves a motivation to maximize the product of value and
expectancy. This is compatible with the hedonic principle it suggests that
people are motivated to attain as much pleasure as possible.
Predictions:
1. Promotion-focused people are more likely to involve the motivation to
maximize the product of value and expectancy. T
2. The positive interactive efect of value and expectancy assumed by classic
e-v models would not be found as prevention focused increased. When it
increases, the interactive efect should be negative.
These predictions were proven by studies. So: the E x V interaction depends on
regulatory focus. So again we need to move beyond the hedonic principle.
Emotional and Evaluative Sensitivities
The hedonic principle doesn’t go into the kinds of pleasure or pain people can
experience. When self-regulation doesn’t work, people experience diferent kinds
of painful emotions, depending on their regulatory focus.
- Regulatory focus underlying variability in painful emotions from self-
discrepancies.
Actual-ideal discrepancies are being associated with depressive symptoms and
actual-ought discrepancies are being associated with social anxiety symptoms,
but not the other way around. It’s also possible to have temporarily efects of
depression and nervousness when there’s a temporarily increase of the
prevention of promotion focus caused by priming for example.
When someone’s promotion-focused they react extra happy or depressed when
the promotion goal is (not) achieved. When someone’s prevention-focused they
react extra nervous or relaxed when the prevention goal is (not) achieved.
People also react faster to words of chronical focus preference.
