Better off without? Benefits and costs of resolving goal conflict through goal shelving and goal disengagement

Individual differences in goal adjustment: convergence and divergence among three theoretical models

Introduction

Individual differences in dealing with unattainable goals or resource-consumptive goal pursuit are conceptualized as goal adjustment processes in three theoretical approaches: accommodative coping (two-process model of developmental regulation), compensatory secondary coping (motivational theory of life-span development), and goal disengagement and goal reengagement (goal adjustment theory). The aim of this paper is to conceptually and empirically analyze convergences and divergences between the three approaches as well as their relationship with indicators of well-being and their intersections with cognitive emotion regulation.

Methods

The empirical study is based on a cross-sectional online survey (N = 433; M = 28.9 years, SD = 8.4 years; 50% female).

Results

The conceptual analysis yields clear convergences, but also differences. Empirically, clear but partially non-redundant relationships between the concepts are found in structural equation models. Accommodative coping showed the strongest correlations with measures of well-being and cognitive emotion regulation. When all goal adjustment measures are included simultaneously as predictors of well-being, accommodation remains as the strongest predictor (and partly goal reengagement as well), while goal disengagement shows opposing relationships with most measures of well-being.

Discussion

We discuss the lessons learnt from these findings and conclude by proposing future avenues to examine goal adjustment processes.

You have to let go sometimes: advances in understanding goal disengagement

While research on tenacious goal pursuit and persistence has evoked a myriad of research efforts, research on goal disengagement has rather been neglected and has been focusing mainly on positive consequences of individual differences in goal disengagement capacities. In recent years, however, research on goal disengagement has seen an upsurge in studies, specifically addressing the conceptualization of goal disengagement, the processes involved, and factors facilitating or undermining it. However, many questions remain unanswered or only partly answered providing numerous opportunities for further investigation. With this special issue of Motivation and Emotion, we aim to stimulate such progress in research on goal disengagement. To this end, this special issue includes empirical studies with cross-sectional, prospective, longitudinal, and experimental designs with a wide range of personal and experimentally induced goals as well as invited commentaries from scholars across different psychological sub disciplines. In this introductory essay, we provide a brief review of the current state of goal disengagement research. We also provide an overview about the contributions to this special issue with reflections related to the current state of research and areas where further advancement in conceptualization and empirical studies is needed.

Commentary: Engage or disengage? Interpretations from a resource conservation perspective

In this commentary, I discuss the eight empirical contributions to the Motivation and Emotion special issue on goal disengagement from a resource conservation perspective. This process was not in the focus of the reported studies, but is central for understanding both engaging and disengaging. I will outline that many of the new findings on disengagement reported in this special issue are highly compatible with the predictions of and research on motivational intensity theory. Examples are the roles of commitment, subjective goal value, affective experiences, autonomy, self-awareness, and action planning. These variables have been found to be central for both engagement and disengagement and their consideration in a resource mobilization perspective should contribute to a more complete understanding of “letting go”.