Loading…
Pre- versus postdecisional deliberation and goal commitment: The positive effects of defensiveness
Building on Gollwitzer's (1990) mindset theory of action phases, it is proposed that the effects of assigned balanced deliberation on subsequent goal commitment are moderated by people's pre- versus postdecisional status. A balanced deliberation and impartial assessment of pros and cons is...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of experimental social psychology 2012, Vol.48 (1), p.106-121 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-e8fe51ede6e60573325557afc88991e2ebe69cacd5916531623e8df01f464d683 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-e8fe51ede6e60573325557afc88991e2ebe69cacd5916531623e8df01f464d683 |
container_end_page | 121 |
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 106 |
container_title | Journal of experimental social psychology |
container_volume | 48 |
creator | Nenkov, Gergana Y. Gollwitzer, Peter M. |
description | Building on Gollwitzer's (1990) mindset theory of action phases, it is proposed that the effects of assigned balanced deliberation on subsequent goal commitment are moderated by people's pre- versus postdecisional status. A balanced deliberation and impartial assessment of pros and cons is expected to reduce goal commitment in predecisional individuals, whereas a distortion of the assigned balanced deliberation and a partial focus on the pros of goal pursuit should defend and strengthen goal commitment in postdecisional individuals. Indeed, in
Study 1, assigned deliberation on the pros and cons of pursuing a focal goal promoted stronger reported goal commitment in participants who had decided to pursue this goal, but reduced goal commitment for people who had not yet made such a decision. In
Study 2, the same pattern of results emerged when goal commitment was indicated by planning to act on the goal.
Study 3 replicated findings using a different decision status manipulation and goal persistence as a measure of commitment. Finally, results of
Study 4 suggested that the increase in commitment produced by defensive postdecisional deliberation is consequential as it was found to drive real-life behavior by promoting goal-directed action. Moreover,
Studies 2, 3, and 4 explored the underlying process and provided evidence that it is the partial focus on the pros of goal pursuit, meant to defend existing goal commitment, that drives postdecisional deliberation's strengthening effects on goal commitment. Implications for mindset theory, goal commitment theory, and decision making are discussed.
► We examine the effects of assigned deliberation on goal commitment. ► Assigned balanced deliberation reduces goal commitment in predecisional individuals. ► Partial focus on pros of goal pursuit strengthens commitment in postdecisional ones. ► Defensive postdecisional deliberation drives strengthening effect on goal commitment. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.08.002 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_916508689</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0022103111002150</els_id><sourcerecordid>2527539181</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-e8fe51ede6e60573325557afc88991e2ebe69cacd5916531623e8df01f464d683</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1L7DAUhoMoOH78AVfFzV21nqSTTCpuRO5VQdCFrkMnOdGUthlzOgP-e1Pmrly4OpyX9zlwHsYuOFQcuLrqqg5pUwngvAJdAYgDtuDQqBKWSh6yRU5EyaHmx-yEqAOABgRfsPVLwrLYYaItFZtIk0MbKMSx7QuHfVhjaqe8Fu3oiveYUxuHIUwDjtN18fqBMxSmsMMCvUc7URF9Jj2OlMMRic7YkW97wvP_85S9_fv7evdQPj3fP97dPpV2CfVUovYoOTpUqECu6lpIKVett1o3DUeBa1SNba2TDVey5krUqJ0H7pdq6ZSuT9mf_d1Nip9bpMkMgSz2fTti3JKZMdBKN7l5-aPZxW3KL-cSaCnESs7nxL5kUyRK6M0mhaFNX4aDmaWbzszSzSzdgDZZcYZu9hDmR3cBkyEbcLToQspyjIvhN_wb9QaLrA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>908522758</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Pre- versus postdecisional deliberation and goal commitment: The positive effects of defensiveness</title><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>Elsevier</source><creator>Nenkov, Gergana Y. ; Gollwitzer, Peter M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Nenkov, Gergana Y. ; Gollwitzer, Peter M.</creatorcontrib><description>Building on Gollwitzer's (1990) mindset theory of action phases, it is proposed that the effects of assigned balanced deliberation on subsequent goal commitment are moderated by people's pre- versus postdecisional status. A balanced deliberation and impartial assessment of pros and cons is expected to reduce goal commitment in predecisional individuals, whereas a distortion of the assigned balanced deliberation and a partial focus on the pros of goal pursuit should defend and strengthen goal commitment in postdecisional individuals. Indeed, in
Study 1, assigned deliberation on the pros and cons of pursuing a focal goal promoted stronger reported goal commitment in participants who had decided to pursue this goal, but reduced goal commitment for people who had not yet made such a decision. In
Study 2, the same pattern of results emerged when goal commitment was indicated by planning to act on the goal.
Study 3 replicated findings using a different decision status manipulation and goal persistence as a measure of commitment. Finally, results of
Study 4 suggested that the increase in commitment produced by defensive postdecisional deliberation is consequential as it was found to drive real-life behavior by promoting goal-directed action. Moreover,
Studies 2, 3, and 4 explored the underlying process and provided evidence that it is the partial focus on the pros of goal pursuit, meant to defend existing goal commitment, that drives postdecisional deliberation's strengthening effects on goal commitment. Implications for mindset theory, goal commitment theory, and decision making are discussed.
► We examine the effects of assigned deliberation on goal commitment. ► Assigned balanced deliberation reduces goal commitment in predecisional individuals. ► Partial focus on pros of goal pursuit strengthens commitment in postdecisional ones. ► Defensive postdecisional deliberation drives strengthening effect on goal commitment.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-1031</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1096-0465</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.08.002</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JESPAQ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>San Diego: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Action theory ; Behavior ; Behavioural psychology ; Behavioural sciences ; Commitments ; Decision ; Decision making ; Defensiveness ; Deliberation ; Evaluation ; Evidence ; Goal commitment ; Mind ; Objectives ; Postdecision action phase ; Predecision action phase ; Social psychology</subject><ispartof>Journal of experimental social psychology, 2012, Vol.48 (1), p.106-121</ispartof><rights>2011 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright Academic Press Jan 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-e8fe51ede6e60573325557afc88991e2ebe69cacd5916531623e8df01f464d683</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-e8fe51ede6e60573325557afc88991e2ebe69cacd5916531623e8df01f464d683</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,4024,27923,27924,27925,33223,33224</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nenkov, Gergana Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gollwitzer, Peter M.</creatorcontrib><title>Pre- versus postdecisional deliberation and goal commitment: The positive effects of defensiveness</title><title>Journal of experimental social psychology</title><description>Building on Gollwitzer's (1990) mindset theory of action phases, it is proposed that the effects of assigned balanced deliberation on subsequent goal commitment are moderated by people's pre- versus postdecisional status. A balanced deliberation and impartial assessment of pros and cons is expected to reduce goal commitment in predecisional individuals, whereas a distortion of the assigned balanced deliberation and a partial focus on the pros of goal pursuit should defend and strengthen goal commitment in postdecisional individuals. Indeed, in
Study 1, assigned deliberation on the pros and cons of pursuing a focal goal promoted stronger reported goal commitment in participants who had decided to pursue this goal, but reduced goal commitment for people who had not yet made such a decision. In
Study 2, the same pattern of results emerged when goal commitment was indicated by planning to act on the goal.
Study 3 replicated findings using a different decision status manipulation and goal persistence as a measure of commitment. Finally, results of
Study 4 suggested that the increase in commitment produced by defensive postdecisional deliberation is consequential as it was found to drive real-life behavior by promoting goal-directed action. Moreover,
Studies 2, 3, and 4 explored the underlying process and provided evidence that it is the partial focus on the pros of goal pursuit, meant to defend existing goal commitment, that drives postdecisional deliberation's strengthening effects on goal commitment. Implications for mindset theory, goal commitment theory, and decision making are discussed.
► We examine the effects of assigned deliberation on goal commitment. ► Assigned balanced deliberation reduces goal commitment in predecisional individuals. ► Partial focus on pros of goal pursuit strengthens commitment in postdecisional ones. ► Defensive postdecisional deliberation drives strengthening effect on goal commitment.</description><subject>Action theory</subject><subject>Behavior</subject><subject>Behavioural psychology</subject><subject>Behavioural sciences</subject><subject>Commitments</subject><subject>Decision</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Defensiveness</subject><subject>Deliberation</subject><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Evidence</subject><subject>Goal commitment</subject><subject>Mind</subject><subject>Objectives</subject><subject>Postdecision action phase</subject><subject>Predecision action phase</subject><subject>Social psychology</subject><issn>0022-1031</issn><issn>1096-0465</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1L7DAUhoMoOH78AVfFzV21nqSTTCpuRO5VQdCFrkMnOdGUthlzOgP-e1Pmrly4OpyX9zlwHsYuOFQcuLrqqg5pUwngvAJdAYgDtuDQqBKWSh6yRU5EyaHmx-yEqAOABgRfsPVLwrLYYaItFZtIk0MbKMSx7QuHfVhjaqe8Fu3oiveYUxuHIUwDjtN18fqBMxSmsMMCvUc7URF9Jj2OlMMRic7YkW97wvP_85S9_fv7evdQPj3fP97dPpV2CfVUovYoOTpUqECu6lpIKVett1o3DUeBa1SNba2TDVey5krUqJ0H7pdq6ZSuT9mf_d1Nip9bpMkMgSz2fTti3JKZMdBKN7l5-aPZxW3KL-cSaCnESs7nxL5kUyRK6M0mhaFNX4aDmaWbzszSzSzdgDZZcYZu9hDmR3cBkyEbcLToQspyjIvhN_wb9QaLrA</recordid><startdate>2012</startdate><enddate>2012</enddate><creator>Nenkov, Gergana Y.</creator><creator>Gollwitzer, Peter M.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Academic Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2012</creationdate><title>Pre- versus postdecisional deliberation and goal commitment: The positive effects of defensiveness</title><author>Nenkov, Gergana Y. ; Gollwitzer, Peter M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-e8fe51ede6e60573325557afc88991e2ebe69cacd5916531623e8df01f464d683</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Action theory</topic><topic>Behavior</topic><topic>Behavioural psychology</topic><topic>Behavioural sciences</topic><topic>Commitments</topic><topic>Decision</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Defensiveness</topic><topic>Deliberation</topic><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Evidence</topic><topic>Goal commitment</topic><topic>Mind</topic><topic>Objectives</topic><topic>Postdecision action phase</topic><topic>Predecision action phase</topic><topic>Social psychology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nenkov, Gergana Y.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gollwitzer, Peter M.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Journal of experimental social psychology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nenkov, Gergana Y.</au><au>Gollwitzer, Peter M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Pre- versus postdecisional deliberation and goal commitment: The positive effects of defensiveness</atitle><jtitle>Journal of experimental social psychology</jtitle><date>2012</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>48</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>106</spage><epage>121</epage><pages>106-121</pages><issn>0022-1031</issn><eissn>1096-0465</eissn><coden>JESPAQ</coden><abstract>Building on Gollwitzer's (1990) mindset theory of action phases, it is proposed that the effects of assigned balanced deliberation on subsequent goal commitment are moderated by people's pre- versus postdecisional status. A balanced deliberation and impartial assessment of pros and cons is expected to reduce goal commitment in predecisional individuals, whereas a distortion of the assigned balanced deliberation and a partial focus on the pros of goal pursuit should defend and strengthen goal commitment in postdecisional individuals. Indeed, in
Study 1, assigned deliberation on the pros and cons of pursuing a focal goal promoted stronger reported goal commitment in participants who had decided to pursue this goal, but reduced goal commitment for people who had not yet made such a decision. In
Study 2, the same pattern of results emerged when goal commitment was indicated by planning to act on the goal.
Study 3 replicated findings using a different decision status manipulation and goal persistence as a measure of commitment. Finally, results of
Study 4 suggested that the increase in commitment produced by defensive postdecisional deliberation is consequential as it was found to drive real-life behavior by promoting goal-directed action. Moreover,
Studies 2, 3, and 4 explored the underlying process and provided evidence that it is the partial focus on the pros of goal pursuit, meant to defend existing goal commitment, that drives postdecisional deliberation's strengthening effects on goal commitment. Implications for mindset theory, goal commitment theory, and decision making are discussed.
► We examine the effects of assigned deliberation on goal commitment. ► Assigned balanced deliberation reduces goal commitment in predecisional individuals. ► Partial focus on pros of goal pursuit strengthens commitment in postdecisional ones. ► Defensive postdecisional deliberation drives strengthening effect on goal commitment.</abstract><cop>San Diego</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><doi>10.1016/j.jesp.2011.08.002</doi><tpages>16</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0022-1031 |
ispartof | Journal of experimental social psychology, 2012, Vol.48 (1), p.106-121 |
issn | 0022-1031 1096-0465 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_916508689 |
source | International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); Elsevier |
subjects | Action theory Behavior Behavioural psychology Behavioural sciences Commitments Decision Decision making Defensiveness Deliberation Evaluation Evidence Goal commitment Mind Objectives Postdecision action phase Predecision action phase Social psychology |
title | Pre- versus postdecisional deliberation and goal commitment: The positive effects of defensiveness |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T05%3A09%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Pre-%20versus%20postdecisional%20deliberation%20and%20goal%20commitment:%20The%20positive%20effects%20of%20defensiveness&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20experimental%20social%20psychology&rft.au=Nenkov,%20Gergana%20Y.&rft.date=2012&rft.volume=48&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=106&rft.epage=121&rft.pages=106-121&rft.issn=0022-1031&rft.eissn=1096-0465&rft.coden=JESPAQ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.08.002&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2527539181%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c403t-e8fe51ede6e60573325557afc88991e2ebe69cacd5916531623e8df01f464d683%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=908522758&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |