Success/Failure Feedback, Expectancies, and Approach/Avoidance Motivation: How Regulatory Focus Moderates Classic Relations

Abstract Applying regulatory focus theory ( 17 ), we hypothesized that success-related approach motivation and increased expectancies are more likely to occur when performers are in a promotion than a prevention focus and that failure-related avoidance motivation and decreased expectancies are more likely to occur when performers are in a prevention than a promotion focus. Study 1 used arm flexion pressure as an on-line measure of approach strength and arm extension pressure as an on-line measure of avoidance strength. Study 2 used a persistence measure of motivational strength. The “goal looms larger” effect of increased motivational strength as one moves closer to a goal was greatest for approach when there was success feedback and promotion focus framing and was greatest for avoidance when there was failure feedback and prevention focus framing. Performance expectancies were increased more by promotion than prevention success and were decreased more by prevention than promotion failure. These effects support the hypotheses and were independent of one another.

[1]  E. Higgins,et al.  Performance incentives and means: how regulatory focus influences goal attainment. , 1998, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[2]  Koch Sigmund Ed,et al.  Psychology: A Study of A Science , 1962 .

[3]  Jens Förster,et al.  Approach and avoidance strength during goal attainment : Regulatory focus and the goal looms larger effect , 1998 .

[4]  E. Higgins.  Making a good decision: value from fit. , 2000, The American psychologist.

[5]  N. Liberman,et al.  Approach and avoidance strength during goal attainment: regulatory focus and the "goal looms larger" effect. , 1998, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[6]  F. Strack,et al.  Motor Actions in Retrieval of Valenced Information: II. Boundary Conditions for Motor Congruence Effects , 1998, Perceptual and motor skills.

[7]  K. Lewin,et al.  A Dynamic Theory of Personality , 1936 .

[8]  F. Strack,et al.  Motor Actions in Retrieval of Valenced Information: A Motor Congruence Effect , 1997, Perceptual and motor skills.

[9]  J. H. Curtis,et al.  Learning Theory and Behavior , 1960 .

[10]  B. Weiner.  Theories of motivation : from mechanism to cognition , 1972 .

[11]  N. Lewis.  A dynamic theory of personality , 1935 .

[12]  C. Carver,et al.  Attention and Self-Regulation: A Control-Theory Approach to Human Behavior , 1981 .

[13]  S. Freud.  Beyond the Pleasure Principle , 1925 .

[14]  E. Higgins,et al.  Beyond pleasure and pain. , 1997, The American psychologist.

[15]  D. Mcclelland,et al.  The Achievement Motive , 1954 .

[16]  E. Hearst,et al.  Concurrent generalization gradients for food-controlled and shock-controlled behavior. , 1962, Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior.

[17]  J. S. Brown,et al.  Gradients of approach and avoidance responses and their relation to level of motivation. , 1948, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[18]  J. Hunt,et al.  Personality and the behavior disorders , 1944 .

[19]  E. Higgins,et al.  Expectancy x value effects: regulatory focus as determinant of magnitude and direction. , 1997, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[20]  S. Chaiken,et al.  Personality and Social Psychology Bulle- Tin Chen, Bargh / Consequences of Automatic Evaluation Immediate Behavioral Predispositions to Approach or Avoid the Stimulus , 2022 .

[21]  A. Bandura.  Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory , 1985 .

[22]  A. K. Solarz,et al.  Latency of instrumental responses as a function of compatibility with the meaning of eliciting verbal signs. , 1960, Journal of experimental psychology.

[23]  A. Bandura.  Social Foundations of Thought and Action , 1986 .

[24]  N Liberman,et al.  Promotion and prevention choices between stability and change. , 1999, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[25]  S. Epstein,et al.  Relative steepness of approach and avoidance gradients as a function of magnitude and valence of incentive. , 1977 .

[26]  E. Hearst.  Simultaneous Generalization Gradients for Appetitive and Aversive Behavior , 1960, Science.

[27]  E. Higgins,et al.  Ideal versus ought predilections for approach and avoidance: distinct self-regulatory systems. , 1994, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[28]  N. Miller,et al.  Displacement: greater generalization of approach than avoidance in a generalized approach avoidance conflict. , 1952, Journal of experimental psychology.

[29]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Rudimentary determinants of attitudes. II: Arm flexion and extension have differential effects on attitudes. , 1993, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[30]  John W. Atkinson,et al.  Introduction: Motivation , 1964 .

[31]  E. Higgins.  Promotion and Prevention: Regulatory Focus as A Motivational Principle , 1998 .

[32]  E. Higgins,et al.  Expectancy × Value Effects: Regulatory Focus as Determinant of Magnitude and Direction , 1997 .

[33]  E. Higgins,et al.  Principles of Judging Valence: What Makes Events Positive or Negative? , 1996 .

[34]  J. Förster.  [Effect of motor perceptions on affective judgment of attractive and unattractive portraits]. , 1998, Experimental Psychology.

[35]  John T. Cacioppo,et al.  The Influence of Motor Processes on Attitudes Toward Novel Versus Familiar Semantic Stimuli , 1996 .

[36]  E. Higgins,et al.  Regulatory Focus and Strategic Inclinations : Promotion and Prevention in Decision-Making , 1997 .

[37]  N. Liberman,et al.  Distinguishing Gains from Nonlosses and Losses from Nongains: A Regulatory Focus Perspective on Hedonic Intensity , 2000 .