“…There is a problem with self‐regulation. The concept is extremely popular, but its definition is ambiguous: “management of the self, by the self” (e.g., Hammerberg, , p. 366; Martin & McLellan, , p. 135); “control over the self, by the self” (Audiffren & André, in press, p. 2; Baumeister & Exline, , p. 30; Carlson, , p. 88; Converse, Piccone, & Tocci, , p. 65; Farley & Kim‐Spoon, , p. 434; Fischer, Greitemeyer, & Frey, , p. 1309; Muraven & Baumeister, , p. 247); and—self‐referentially—“regulation of the self, by the self” (Bown & White, , p. 434; Cukrowicz & Joiner, , p. 160; Duckworth, , p. 2639; Effeney, Carroll, & Bahr, , p. 774; Flouri, Midouhas, & Joshi, , p. 1044; Forgas, Baumeister, & Tice, , p. 4; Gawrilow et al., , p. 806; Hofer, Busch, & Kärtner, , p. 211; McDermott & Fox, , p. 91; McKee, Ntoumanis, & Taylor, , p. 300; Sheldon, Joiner, Pettit, & Williams, , p. 305; punctuation, emphasis, and cited provenance varies). The result is that different interpretations are being reflected in the scholarly literature (cf.…”