Impulsive processes in the self-regulation of health behaviour: theoretical and methodological considerations in response to commentaries

Abstract

In this issue, a number of renowned health psychology researchers have commented on our 2008 article Impulsive versus reflective influences on health behavior: A theoretical framework and empirical review (Hofmann, Friese, & Wiers, 2008a). The impetus for this article was our observation that most health researchers, though typically aware of the notion of impulsive influences on behaviour, tend to neglect this component in their theoretical model building and predictive frameworks. The purpose of our article was to provide such a model based on dual-system theorizing and to provide evidence on how such a framework can be implemented in practice. By taking impulsive processes into account in addition to intentional pathways to behaviour, we hope to come to a better theoretical understanding to predict why many people act the way they do when it comes to health behaviours that fall under a self-regulation umbrella (arguably the vast majority of health behaviours).We were happy to see that our commentators responded with a great deal of agreement to the general tenet of our proposal. At the same time, these comments identify a variety of controversial issues and provide several valuable directions for how to 'move on' in the spirit of our target article. In the following, we bundled together what we considered the gist of this exchange under four main headings: conceptual issues, assessment of impulsive precursors, the need for more dynamical modelling and implications for intervention. Conceptual issuesAs Gibbons, Wills, Kingsbury, and Gerrard (2011) point out, dual-processing conceptions have been out there for some time and so has been the suggestion to incorporate non-intentional precursors to action. A prominent example of a modified dual-processing model is their social reactions model (Gibbons, Gerrard, & Lane, 2003) which distinguishes between an analytic, reasoned pathway to health

Obesity, overconsumption and self-regulation failure: the unsung role of eating appropriateness standards

“…In situations in which eating appropriateness standards are unclear or lacking, people have to rely solely on their self-regulation competence when trying to act upon their intention not to eat unhealthy snacks, because there is no clear guidance to decide what to do. Importantly, in the absence of clear standards, even good selfregulators can regulate their behaviour on their own only to a certain extent and for a short period of time, because self-regulation resources are limited (e.g., Hagger, Wood, Stiff, & Chatzisarantis, 2009;Muraven, Tice, & Baumeister, 1998) and people may tend to engage in impulsive behaviour (Gibbons, Wills, Kingsbury, & Gerrard, 2011;Hofmann, Friese, & Wiers, 2011;Veling & Aarts, 2011). Therefore, such individual self-regulation is doomed to fail if one encounters too many situations in which eating appropriateness standards are lacking, even if a person would generally be a 'good self-regulator'.…”

The subjective experience of habit captured by self-report indexes may lead to inaccuracies in the measurement of habitual action

“…Gardner makes it clear that a distinction needs to be made between learned cue-induced triggers to action, which may be habitual, and the subsequent chain of actions and behavioural responses that require considerable planning and deliberative processing (c.f. Hagger, 2013, in press;Hagger & Chatzisarantis, 2014;Hagger & Luszczynska, 2014;Hofmann, Friese, & Wiers, 2011;Sheeran, Gollwitzer, & Bargh, 2013;Strack & Deutsch, 2004). Events in the environment may trigger thoughts of an intended behaviour that are activated automatically, but the processes that lead to enacting that behaviour require considerable planning and, possibly, flexibility of thought.…”

The Effect of Implicit Preferences on Food Consumption: Moderating Role of Ego Depletion and Impulsivity

“…Not everyone likes calorie-rich foods to the same degree (Hofmann et al, 2011). Therefore, individual differences in impulse strength toward specific foods should be considered in the study of the human diet (Friese et al, 2008b).…”