Using High-Level Construal and Perceptions of Changeability to Promote Self-Change Over Self-Protection Motives in Response to Negative Feedback

Belding, Jennifer N.; Naufel, Karen Z.; Fujita, Kentaro

doi:10.1177/0146167215580776

Cited by 27 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results suggest the importance of progress monitoring and goal specificity in determining behavioral reactions to feedback. The results of the present studies are consistent with other work that has shown the importance of the goal specificity and feedback (Aarts and Dijksterhuis 2000;Belding et al 2015;Fishbach and Dhar 2005;Fishbach et al 2006;Förster et al 2005;Gollwitzer and Moskowitz 1996;Hsee and Abelson 1991;Karsh and Eyal 2015;Kluger and DeNisi 1996;Locke and Latham 2002). The present experiments focused on unexplored aspects of goals striving and discovered that progress monitoring and goal specificity are indeed important factors that determine how feedback valence affects goal striving.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

The effects of feedback valance and progress monitoring on goal striving

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current paper explores how people's goal strivings are influenced by feedback (positively valenced vs. negatively valenced), progress monitoring (remaining vs. accumulated) and goal specificity (vague vs. specific). Two laboratory-based experiments were performed. Experiment 1 reveals that, after receiving positively valenced feedback, participants who focus on accumulated progress show larger boosts in persistence than participants who focus on remaining progress. In contrast, after receiving negatively valenced feedback, participants who focus on remaining progress show larger boosts in persistence than participants who focus on accumulated progress. Experiment 2 extends the scope of the paper from understanding the effects of progress monitoring on goal striving to the effects goal specificity on goal striving. Experiment 2 shows that after receiving negatively valenced feedback, participants asked to consider specific goals (and so likely focus on remaining progress) show more persistence than participants asked to consider vague goals (and so likely focus on accumulated progress). These findings have important implications for motivation theory and applied practice. Keywords Motivation . Goal striving . Feedback . Goals . Behavior change Psychological theories of motivation largely fall within two categories: goal theories and attitude theories (Sloman 1996;Webb and Sheeran 2006). While motivation often unfolds in stages, with attitudes preceding goal formation, goal and attitude theories make conflicting predictions about the effects of feedback valence on goal striving. We propose that this conflict can be explained, at least in part, by an interaction between the type of feedback people receive and the type of progress monitoring they use.The current paper has two sections. Section 1, including Experiment 1, examines the relationship between feedback * Ivo Vlaev

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

The effects of feedback valance and progress monitoring on goal striving

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although there are broader sources for feedback, classic challenges remain. People often find criticism unpleasant, react negatively to it, and perceive the feedback and source as unfair [5,21]. Negative reactions to feedback can lead to reduced effort during revisions [10,17], decreased motivation and commitment to task goals [17], and hindered cognitive abilities [33,39].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fruitful Feedback

Nguyen

Garncarz

et al. 2017

Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Feedback is information that can improve task performance. Online communities, educational forums, and crowd-based feedback platforms all support feedback exchange among a more diverse set of sources than ever before, with greater control over how to moderate this exchange. In this work, we study how the power relationship between the source and receiver and the tone of language influence the receptivity, effort, and work performance resulting from online feedback exchange. We conducted an online experiment manipulating affective language and source of feedback on a writing task. We found that critiques with positive affective language increased positive emotions and reduced participants' annoyance and frustration, which led to an increase in work quality, compared to critiques without positive language. Feedback without positive affective language led to more edits, but not better work outcomes. Participants reacted more positively to feedback from an anonymous source than from a peer or an authority. Our findings provide design implications for platforms to support more fruitful feedback exchange.

show abstract

“…Under an abstract style, individuals prioritize future benefits over immediate costs, something that is directly related to self-control, a self-regulation strategy that specifically implies acting to achieve distal goals (Fujita, 2008(Fujita, , 2011Fujita & Carnevale, 2012). Based on CLT, Fujita and collaborators proposed that an abstract construal facilitates greater self-control by focusing people's attention on the final goals and thus favors healthier and beneficial longterm choices (Belding et al, 2015;Ledgerwood et al, 2010;Libby et al, 2007;Fujita, 2008;Fujita & Han, 2009). A recent study in Nicaragua found that adolescents under severe scarcity who presented a concrete style of thinking reported the highest rates of past and future risk behaviors (Aguilar et al, 2020).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Does poverty promote a different and harmful way of thinking? The links between economic scarcity, concrete construal level and risk behaviors

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We tested the relationships between economic scarcity, concrete construal level and risk behaviors. We manipulated the lack of economic resources using a priming task in Studies 1 and 2, and participants reported their real income and completed the BIF scale to measure their construal level in Study 3. Studies 1–3 supported the link between perceived economic scarcity and the concrete construal level. Study 4 demonstrated the mediating role played by the concrete construal level in the influence of economic scarcity on risk behaviors using two opposite priming procedures (scarcity plus abstraction). Study 5, in a real context of economic vulnerability, supported the link between concrete mindset and risk behavioral intentions, while abstraction was associated with fewer risk intentions. Concrete thinking implies focusing on the immediate situation, which might facilitate adaptation to the demanding conditions that characterize scarcity contexts but leaves people without a broad perspective of the future to make safe decisions in situations that involve self-control, such as health-risk behaviors. Because an abstract construal level can be induced, these findings open up challenging ways to improve the conditions in which people in scarcity contexts make some behavioral decisions while we continue working to reduce situations of economic scarcity.

show abstract

Using High-Level Construal and Perceptions of Changeability to Promote Self-Change Over Self-Protection Motives in Response to Negative Feedback

Cited by 27 publications

References 39 publications

The effects of feedback valance and progress monitoring on goal striving

The effects of feedback valance and progress monitoring on goal striving

Fruitful Feedback

Does poverty promote a different and harmful way of thinking? The links between economic scarcity, concrete construal level and risk behaviors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About