Managing conflicting goals through prioritization? The role of age and relative goal importance

Do compassion and self-compassion moderate the relationship between childhood socioeconomic position and adulthood body composition?

The study aims to investigate the associations of compassion and self-compassion with body composition, and whether adulthood compassion and self-compassion moderate the relationship between childhood SEP and adulthood body composition. The participants came from the Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1986 Study (n = 789, 52.1% women), with a mean age of 34.0 years. Compassion and self-compassion were measured with the Dispositional Positive Emotions Scale and Self-Compassion Scale-Short Form, respectively. Body composition was assessed using anthropometric and body fat measurements at a clinic. Childhood SEP included parental occupation, education, and employment. The results showed that high compassion was associated with three out of the five body composition measurements, namely lower waist circumference (B = -0.960, p = 0.039, 95% CI: -1.870; -0.498), body fat percentage (B = -0.693, p = 0.030, 95% CI: -1.317; -0.069), and fat mass index (B = -0.325, p = 0.023, 95% CI: -0.605; -0.044) (adjusted for sex, and childhood and adulthood SEP) but not with body mass index or waist-to-hip ratio. Self-compassion was not associated with body composition. Neither compassion nor self-compassion moderated the association between childhood SEP and adulthood body composition, as the interaction effects were not significant. Therefore, the dispositions did not protect against the negative effects of childhood SEP on adulthood body composition. High other-directed compassion may be, however, associated with healthier body composition.

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

Pursuing multiple goals with limited time often leads to goal conflicts that can be resolved by prioritizing some goal pursuits over others. This research examines proximal outcomes of two approaches to goal prioritization: Goal shelving (temporarily withdrawing from a goal) and goal disengagement (permanently withdrawing from a goal). We conducted an experiment (N = 214) to compare motivational and emotional consequences of resolving goal conflict through goal shelving and disengagement. Results suggest that goal shelving and disengagement are similarly effective at reducing different facets of experienced goal conflict, but people regret shelving goals less than disengaging from them. Together, these findings provide first evidence that goal shelving may allow people to “have their cake and eat it too:” to reap the benefits of goal prioritization while minimizing its costs.