No abstract

Empirical studies have revealed contradictory results concerning future time orientation and various other factors. The lack of consensus between the concept and measurements is postulated to be the main reason for the diversity in results. It is necessary to differentiate between (a) experimentally induced future (time) orientation and future time orientation (FTO) considered as a personality trait, and (b) between dimensions of FTO and the manifestation and functional significance of these dimensions in behavior. It is suggested that measurements of FTO should be related to nonspecific situations in order to avoid that certain valences, and thereby different degrees of arousal of FTO, are induced in the FTO measure itself.

No abstract

It was predicted that (a) individuals high in motivation to approach success and low in motivation to avoid failure (approach-oriented) would increase their performance and (b) those with the opposite motivation constellation (avoidance-oriented) would decrease their amount of performance as a distant future achievement task (goal) approached in time. Furhter, it was assumed that individuals high in future time orientation (FTO) would perceive a distant future event (goal) as nearer in time than those who are low in FTO. This implies the hypotheses that (c) the slope of the positive goal gradient is steeper for those of the approach-oriented individuals who are low in FTO as compared with those who are high in FTO, and (d) the slope of the negative goal gradient is steeper for those of the avodiance-oriented individuals who are low in FTO as compared with those who are high in FTO. The results, based on 379 boys and girls (about 12 years old), supported hypotheses a and d, and left also some indications that supported hypotheses b and c.

No abstract