Bad habits
Task 1
Learning goals
1. How can we improve self-control?
2. When/why do we lose self-control?
3. What are the underlying processes of self-control?
4. Explain graph.
Hofmann, W., Friese, M., & Strack, F. (2009). Impulse and self-control from a dual-systems
perspective.
When we lose self-control there is typically a conflict between two forces: one force calls on
us to do what we believe is reasonable, whereas the other urges us to do what pleasure
dictates.
Impulse: is specific rather than unspecific, arising when more global motivations
(e.g., thirst) meet specific activating stimuli in the environment (e.g., a glass of
lemonade on a hot summer's day). Second, an impulse typically possesses a strong
incentive value consisting of a primitive hedonic reaction to the tempting
stimulus. Third, an impulse is immediate in a temporal and a spatial sense—that is,
directed toward short-term gratifications—and its incentive value quickly diminishes
as temporal or spatial distance increases. Fourth, an impulse typically carries an
inclination to perform a certain behavior, often an urge to approach or act on the
temptation at hand. If performed without resistance, behavioral execution may run so
smoothly that one is not even consciously aware of it—at least not until it has come to
a natural end.
Self-control: the capacity to override or inhibit undesired behavioral tendencies (such
as impulses) and to refrain from acting on them.
Dual system perspective of impulse and self-control (reflective-impulsive model):
Impulsive system Reflective system
Responsible for impulsive behaviour. Serves regulatory goals that
Impulses are assumed to emerge from complement the functions of the
the activation of certain associative impulsive system.
clusters in long-term memory by Higher order mental operations (e.g.
perceptual or imagined stimulus input. deliberate judgements, strategic action
These associative clusters have been plan for goal pursuit,
created or strengthened gradually by inhibiting/overriding responses).
temporal or spatial coactivation of Operations achieved slowly and
external stimuli, affective reactions, and controlled.
associated behavioral tendencies in the Cost: operations are dependent on
learning history of the organism. control resources. If control resources
Clusters can be reactivated are low, reflective operations may
quicklypreparedness. break down.
The associative processes described Generates behavioral decisions that
form gradually over time, need no may then activate corresponding
attentional resources to function, and behavioral schemas in the motor cortex
are independent of whether a person of the brain.
consciously endorses or rejects the
implication of an associative link.
A struggle between the two systems may arise: For example, a person who is being offered a
chocolate chip cookie may experience a strong impulse toward the tempting object, but at the
same time that person may be motivated to restrain his or her caloric input.
1
,Which of the two forces will gain control over actual behavior in the end? The RIM can
parsimoniously account for impulsive versus self-controlled behavior by assuming that both
systems access a common final mechanism for overt behavior execution: the activation of
behavioral schemas in the motor cortex. At any time, several different behavioral schemas
may become activated as potential candidates for action. The system finally settles on a
particular course of action based on a competitive winner-takes-all process. Which behavioral
schema wins out over the other in the case of a self-control conflict will depend on the relative
strength of activation for competing schemas triggered by the impulsive and the reflective
system, respectively.
The predictive validity of models of self-control may be enhanced if such models include both
(a) reflective and (b) impulsive precursors of behavior and (c) specify situational and
dispositional boundaries that may shift the weight toward one type of precursor. Depending
on the circumstances, people's behavior may thus be better predicted by reflective precursors
(restraint standards or deliberate evaluations) or by impulsive precursors (automatic affective
reactions toward the source of temptation or automatic tendencies toward approach or
avoidance). It is the joint consideration of these three factors that may enable one to more
precisely predict self-control outcomes than when each factor is studied in isolation.
Individuals clearly differ in their standards of restraint, and they are also likely to differ in
their impulsive reactions toward tempting stimuli. These differences in impulse may be due to
genetic endowment, differences in learning history, and differences in current need states.
Measures of impulsive precursors (implicit) should:
Be specific.
Be designed so that the measure taps into the associative structure underlying
impulsive processing.
Be set up in a way that minimizes influences of conscious control.
Be sensitive to individual differences and state variations in impulse strength.
The two prominent measures now are Implicit Association Test and Affect Misattribution
Paradigm.
Measures of reflective precursors can be self-reports (explicit measures).
Empirical evidence
Situational moderators:
Self-regulatory resources: we assessed both impulsive and reflective precursors of
candy consumption in our participants. As impulsive precursors, automatic affective
2
, reactions toward M&M’s candy were measured with a variant of the Implicit
Association Test. As reflective precursors, dietary restraint standards were assessed
with a questionnaire. After the assessment phase, half of the participants was depleted
of self-regulatory resources with an emotion suppression task. Afterward, participants
were given 5 min to test a 125-g package of M&M’s candy and rate it on a large
number of dimensions such as sweetness, composition, and product design. As
expected, candy consumption was predicted primarily by automatic affective reactions
in depleted participants but not in control participants. In contrast, candy consumption
was effectively regulated in accordance with dietary restraint standards (higher
restraint led to less candy intake) in participants who were not depleted of self-
regulatory resources. Conversely, restraint standards were slightly positively
associated with candy consumption in depleted participants, indicating a
counterregulatory effect. In sum, by taking individual differences in both impulse and
restraint into account, we were able to trace the nature of the processes that determined
overt behavior under varying conditions of self- regulatory resources. The obtained
pattern of results strongly supports the hypothesis that under low self-regulatory
resources, the relative weight of impulsive processes waxes and the relative influence
of reflective processes wanes.
Cognitive capacity: we manipulated the amount of cognitive load participants
experienced while engaging in a consumer choice task. Participants deliberately
evaluated chocolate and fruit on explicit questionnaire measures. In the experimental
session that followed, participants completed a chocolate versus fruit Implicit
Association Test (IAT) designed to assess their relative preferences on the level of
automatic affective reactions. As a reward for their participation, participants were
then allowed to choose five items from a selection containing a variety of chocolate
bars and fruits. While making their choice, half of the participants had to keep an
eight-digit number in mind (low capacity group). The other half of the participants,
however, was instructed to keep only a one- digit number in mind (high capacity
group). As expected, choice behavior was predicted well by deliberate evaluations (but
not automatic affective reactions) for participants who had to remember only a one-
digit number. That is, the more participants explicitly preferred chocolate over fruit,
the more chocolate bars they picked. However, choice behavior was predicted well by
automatic affective reactions (but not deliberate evaluations) for participants in the
eight-digit condition. cognitive load moderated influence of impulsive and
reflective processes on choice behaviour.
Alcohol consumption: At the beginning of the study, female participants completed a
number of screening questionnaires including a measure of dietary restraint standards.
Subsequently, automatic affective reactions toward candy were assessed with a variant
of the IAT. Participants then engaged in two different product tests. In the first product
3
, test, they consumed either a drink consisting of orange juice with vodka (alcohol
condition) or a glass of orange juice (control condition). An intermediate filler task
gave the alcohol time to enact its effects. As expected, dietary restraint standards
effectively regulated candy consumption in a subsequent task for sober participants,
but they were ineffective for intoxicated participants. In contrast, automatic affective
reactions predicted candy consumption for intoxicated participants but not for sober
participants. These results clearly indicate stronger impulsive influences on behavior
under alcohol intoxication.
Terror Management: posits that thoughts about death are aversive so individuals try
to suppress these thoughts/redirect attention. These activities are mentally exhausting
suggesting that impulsive processes should have an increased impact on subsequent
behavior. This hypothesis was confirmed in a study in which automatic affective
reactions predicted the total consumption of chocolate in a product test for participants
who had recently thought about their own death, but not for participants who had
thought about a control topic.
Dispositional moderators:
Working memory capacity: Individuals high in working memory capacity are
assumed to be more successful in enacting goal-directed processing and in shielding
their goals from interference. Therefore, reflective precursors of behavior should
predict behavior better for individuals with high working memory capacity. We
recorded participants’ viewing time of erotic pictures relative to art pictures as a
dependent variable. As an impulsive precursor, we assessed automatic affective
reactions toward different erotic pictures of women with a variant of the IAT. As a
reflective precursor, participants’ deliberate evaluations of erotic material were
collected via self-report. Participants also completed a measure of working memory
capacity. Results indicated that deliberate evaluations predicted viewing time well for
high working memory capacity individuals. he opposite pattern emerged with regard
to the impulsive precursor: more positive affective reactions on the IAT were related
to longer relative viewing times of erotic material for only low working memory
capacity individuals. Research suggests that that the hypothesized moderator effect of
working memory capacity appears to be quite robust and generalizable across self-
regulatory domains, samples, and measures of impulsive precursors.
Trait self-control: in one study, we used a variant of the IAT to predict actual potato
chip consumption in a product test. In two further studies in the domain of drinking,
we measured automatic affective reactions again with a variant of the IAT or an affect
misattribution procedure and predicted self-reported alcohol consumption. In all three
studies, we found that automatic affective reactions were significantly related to self-
regulatory behavior for individuals with low trait self-control.
It is possible that the connecting element lies in the impairment of working memory
functioning.
Conclusions
By specifying and assessing both reflective and impulsive precursors as predictors—rather
than treating individual differences in these constructs as error variance—the present
framework offers a flexible measurement approach for tracing the nature of the processes that
influence a given self-control outcome of interest. Taken together, the pattern of results shows
that the behavioral impact of impulsive precursors increases under conditions of ego
depletion, cognitive load, time pressure, alcohol intoxication, mortality salience, low working
memory capacity, or low trait self-control. In a complementary manner, the impact of
reflective precursors is hampered under such circumstances.
4
