Regulatory focus and self-determination motives interact to predict students’ nutrition-habit intentions.

Abstract

Regulatory focus (Higgins, 1997) and self-determination (Deci & Ryan, 2000) are two motivation theories widely applied in health intervention research but never conjointly, despite sharing a number of theoretical similarities. In three studies (N = 578), we investigated how university students' self-determination motives to act upon their nutrition interact with induced regulatory focus and also regulatory message framing to predict their behaviour or intention to improve their eating habits. Results revealed a fit between extrinsic motives and prevention focus: intention increased with extrinsic motives in a prevention but not promotion focus. The effect of intrinsic motives, however, was independent of the focus, which suggests that these motives drive intention and behaviour independently of external cues. Hence, the results advocate for simultaneously taking into consideration self-determination and regulatory focus when planning a health intervention relying on motivation.

Understanding the dynamics of physical activity practice in the health context through Regulatory Focus and Self-Determination theories

“…First, they confirm the interest of associating these two theoretical models in order to study a behavior. In this respect, they complement both the previous work of Lalot et al [14], who combined these two models to study nutrition habits, and the works of Vaughn [16] and Hui et al [15], who associated these two theoretical frameworks with another concept underlined by SDT (i.e., basic needs), in contexts other than health. Secondly, they improve understanding of the process through which health promotion focus is related with PA and thus complement the work of Laroche et al [10] showing a mediator in this relationship (i.e., SOC strategy).…”

“…To date, so far as we are aware, no research has examined the relationships between the six motivations underlined by SDT and the promotion and prevention foci. However, Lalot et al [14] have examined the interaction effects of intrinsic and extrinsic motives and message framing in terms of promotion versus prevention on the eating behaviors of students (i.e., personal intention to act, willingness to participate in an online program, interest for nutrition-related information). The authors showed that prevention focus framing worked best to promote nutrition behaviors for participants who reported higher extrinsic motives.…”

The Role of Approach and Avoidance Motivation and Emotion Regulation in Coping Via Health Information Seeking

“…Our study corroborates earlier research on the impact of personality dispositions on various kinds of health behavior (e.g., Booth-Kewley and Vickers Jr 1994;Friedman 2000;Hampson et al 2006), as well as research more specifically focusing on the impact of motivational and affective dispositions on health information behavior (e.g., Gerend and Shepherd 2007;Hastall and Wagner 2017;Hevey and Dolan 2014;Lalot et al 2018;Sherman et al 2006). Therefore, with regard to clinical practice, our findings imply the necessity to anticipate divergent health information seeking behaviors and preferences between patients even when they are in the same situation (e.g., before cancer treatment; Eheman et al 2009).…”

Need Support and Regulatory Focus in Responding to COVID-19

“…These results conceptually replicate findings of earlier research on recalled everyday types of experiences ( Vaughn, 2017 , 2019 ; Kim et al, 2019 ; Vaughn et al, 2020 ) and experimental performance tasks ( Vaughn, 2017 ). Additionally, they complement the positive relationships research has found between promotion focus and autonomous, “want-to” motivation ( Lalot et al, 2018 ; Vaughn, 2018 ; Laroche et al, 2019 ).…”