Forming an implementation intention or “if-then plan” promotes the attainment of different types of goals (Gollwitzer, 1999; Gollwitzer & Sheeran, 2006). So far, research on implementation intentions has focused on the initiation of goal striving, whereas the issue of shielding of ongoing goal striving has been largely neglected. In two field experiments concerned with dieting (Study 1) and athletic goals (Study 2), goal shielding was supported by implementation intentions geared at controlling potentially interfering inner states (i.e., cravings for junk food in Study 1, and disruptive thoughts, feelings, and physiological states in Study 2). In both experiments, forming if-then plans enhanced the rate of goal attainment. Thus, implementation intention formation can be used to promote the realization of desired outcomes not only by facilitating getting started with goal striving but also by preventing goal striving from straying off course.
In a representative sample of the German population (n = 946), we explored the links between self-control, compulsive buying, and debts. Participants completed the self-control scale (Tangney, Boone, & Baumeister, 2004) and the German Addictive Buying Scale (Raab, Neuner, Reisch, & Scherhorn, 2005). Additionally, they gave information about their real debts. It was observed that self-control was negatively related to debts while compulsive buying was positively related to debts. Detailed analyses revealed that the link between selfcontrol and debts was fully mediated by compulsive buying. Finally, there was a gender effect on compulsive buying: women were more prone to compulsive buying than men. Age also was significantly negatively related to compulsive buying and positively linked to selfcontrol. Household income was not linked to self-control, compulsive buying, and debts.Implications for practice, policy, and research are discussed.
We present a simple model for decision making under uncertainty building on dual-process theories from psychology, and use it to illustrate a possible component of intuitive decision making of particular relevance for managerial settings. Decisions are the result of the interaction between two decision processes. The first one captures optimization based on Bayesian updating of beliefs. The second corresponds to a form of reinforcement learning capturing the tendency to rely on past performance. The model predicts that (i) in the case of conflict between the two processes, correct responses are associated with longer response times, but (ii) if both processes are aligned, errors are slower. Furthermore, (iii) response times in the case of conflict are longer than in the case of alignment. We confirm the predictions of the model in an experiment using a paradigm where an associative win-stay, lose-shift process conflicted with rational belief updating. Data, as supplemental material, are available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2013.1793 This paper was accepted by Yuval Rottenstreich, judgment and decision making.
We study the effects of ego depletion, a manipulation which consumes self-control resources, on social preferences in a dictator game. Depleted dictators give considerably less than nondepleted dictators and hence exhibit strong preferences for selfish allocation. In contrast to earlier studies, participants were explicitly paid for completing the ego-depletion task (with either a flat rate or strictly performance-based payment). We studied the dynamics of decisions by repeating the dictator game 12 times (anonymously). Depleted dictators start with much lower offers than nondepleted ones, but, strikingly, offers decrease in time for both groups, and more rapidly so for nondepleted dictators. We conclude that, whereas depleted dictators neglect fairness motives from the very first decision on, nondepleted dictators initially resist the tendency to act selfishly, but eventually become depleted or learn to act selfishly. Hence, pro-social behavior may be short-lived, and ego depletion uncovers the default tendencies for selfishness earlier.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.