Regulatory fit and cognitive performance: the interactive effect of chronic and situationally induced self-regulatory mechanisms on test performance

Contrasting Regulatory Focus and Reinforcement Sensitivity: A Daily Diary Study of Goal Pursuit and Emotion

This study examined the moderating effects of motivational orientation on daily affect and goal pursuit. Based on recent revisions to Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory, measures of BIS (BIS-r and Fight-Flight-Freeze System or FFFS), BAS, and regulatory focus (Promotion and Prevention) were administered to 84 college students who participated in a 14-day diary study. Diary items assessed goal-directed activities and positive and negative affect (PA and NA). Results showed that higher FFFS and Promotion were consistently associated with higher NA and PA, respectively, and FFFS was also associated with avoidance of responsibilities. Higher Promotion predicted greater daily goal progress and tendencies to rate goals as more promotion- and prevention-focused. Relationships between daily goal-directed activities and both sadness and satisfaction were moderated by BIS-r. Inconsistent with our hypothesis, low BAS Reward Responsiveness predicted increased enthusiasm with greater goal progress. A trend in the data showed evidence of regulatory fit in daily activities predicted by both Promotion and Prevention. Implications for the theoretical and practical distinctions between measures of motivational orientation are discussed.

Differential Gender and Ethnic Differences in Math Performance

The present research investigates the role of self-regulatory mechanisms in the context of gender and ethnic differences (between African Americans and Caucasians) in math test performance. Building on two basic notions proposed in regulatory focus theory, it is argued that gender and ethnic differences in math performance are particularly pronounced under conditions where prevention-focused self-regulation is activated (by emphasizing point deductions for mistakes). This assumption refers to a specific mechanism documented in previous research on regulatory focus theory: The differential-sensitivity mechanism according to which a prevention focus renders individuals particularly sensitive with regard to negative information (such as negative performance expectancies). Results of an archival data analysis document a substantial differential gender and ethnic gap in math performance as a function of test instruction (involving point deductions for mistakes or not) supporting the proposed differential gender and ethnic-gap hypothesis. The gap between women and men as well as the gap between African-American and Caucasian test takers is substantially larger in the Scholastic Aptitude Test for math (which involves point deductions for mistakes) than in the corresponding American College Test.

Tailored interactive multimedia computer programs to reduce health disparities: opportunities and challenges

OBJECTIVE

To review the theory and research evidence suggesting that tailored interactive multimedia computer programs (IMCPs) aimed at optimizing patient health behaviors could lessen socio-demographic health disparities.

METHODS

Selective critical review of research regarding IMCPs tailored to psychological mediators of behavior and their effects on health behavior and outcomes among socio-demographically disadvantaged patients.

RESULTS

Tailored IMCPs can address patient factors (e.g. language barriers, low self-efficacy) and buffer provider (e.g. cognitive bias) and health system (e.g. office visit time constraints) factors that contribute to poor provider-patient communication and, thereby, suboptimal health behaviors. Research indicates disadvantaged individuals' interactions with providers are disproportionately affected by such factors, and that their behaviors respond favorably to tailored information, thus suggesting tailored IMCPs could mitigate disparities. However, no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have examined this question. The optimal design and deployment of tailored IMCPs for disadvantaged patients also requires further study.

CONCLUSION

Preliminary research suggests tailored IMCPs have the potential to reduce health disparities. RCTs designed expressly to examine this issue are warranted.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Many socio-demographic health disparities exist, and there is a dearth of proven disparity-reducing interventions. Thus, if tailored IMCPs were shown to lessen disparities, the public health implications would be considerable.

Zur Erklärungskraft der „Regulatory Focus” Theorie im Sport

Zusammenfassung. Die „Regulatory Focus” Theorie (RFT) von Higgins (1997, 2000 ) unterscheidet zwei Arten der Selbstregulation beim Anstreben eines erwünschten Endzustands, den Promotion-Fokus (z. B. liegt der Fokus auf Erfüllung und Hoffnung) und den Prevention-Fokus (z. B. liegt der Fokus auf Sicherheit und Verantwortung). Des Weiteren postuliert sie einen Leistungsvorteil, wenn eine Person in eine Situation kommt, die ihrem chronisch bevorzugten Fokus entspricht („Regulatory Fit”). Entsprechend konnten Plessner, et al. (2009) in einer Studie zum Elfmeterschießen im Fußball – einer vermeintlichen Prevention-Aufgabe – zeigen, dass Spieler von einem „Regulatory Fit” profitieren. In der vorliegenden Arbeit wurde die Gültigkeit dieses Effekts für weitere Anforderungen im Sport untersucht. In Studie 1 konnte gezeigt werden, dass sich Aufgaben im Sport tatsächlich per se danach unterscheiden lassen, ob sie eher einen Prevention-Fokus (z. B. Elfmeter im Fußball) oder einen Promotion-Fokus (z. B. 3-Punkte-Wurf im Basketball) anfordern. In Studie 2 wurde der „Regulatory Fit” Effekt in einer Promotion-Aufgabe (3-Punkte-Wurf) mit Basketballspielern der 1./2. Bundesliga (n = 17) und der Bezirksliga (n = 23) untersucht. Zwar konnte der „Regulatory Fit” Effekt für die Spieler der unteren Leistungsklasse repliziert werden, nicht aber für die Spitzenspieler. Auf dieser Grundlage wird die RFT hinsichtlich ihrer Gültigkeit für den Bereich sportlicher Leistungen kritisch diskutiert.

The association between regulatory focus and distress in patients with a chronic disease: the moderating role of partner support

OBJECTIVES

To determine the association between two regulatory foci (i.e. promotion and prevention focus) and distress in patients with chronic disease requiring self-management, and to determine whether these associations were moderated by partner support.

DESIGN AND METHOD

Four hundred and seventy-seven patients with diabetes, asthma, or heart disease completed a postal survey consisting of the Regulatory Focus Questionnaire, questionnaires measuring active engagement (i.e. supportive behaviour) and protective buffering and overprotection (i.e. unsupportive behaviour) by the partner as perceived by the patient, and the General Health Questionnaire-12 to measure distress.

RESULTS

A promotion focus was negatively associated with distress. This association was only found when patients reported that their partner engaged in relatively low levels of active engagement or relatively high levels of protective buffering and overprotection. The positive association between prevention focus and distress was not consistently found to be moderated by partner support.

CONCLUSION

Active engagement appears to buffer against high distress in patients with a weak promotion focus, while protective buffering and overprotection appear to aggravate distress in these patients.

Assessment of Individual Differences in Regulatory Focus among Cigarette Smokers

Smoking cessation programs might benefit from tailoring messages to individual differences in regulatory focus (see Higgins, 1997), but there is little evidence on the stability or convergent validity of regulatory focus measures. In two studies, smokers completed four measures of regulatory focus: (a) Regulatory Focus Questionnaire (RFQ); (b) actual-ideal and actual-ought self-discrepancies; (c) response duration in naming name ideal or ought self-guides; and (d) reaction time for lexical decisions about one's ideal or ought self-guides. Study 1 included a one-month retest. Retest reliability was adequate, but convergent validity was poor. Questionnaire and self-discrepancy measures were unrelated to each other or to the reaction time measures. To facilitate future studies of tailored health behavior change interventions, research is needed to determine whether weak convergent validity resulted from (a) invalidity of some or all of the regulatory focus measures or (b) validity of each for measuring a different aspect of the construct.