Employees around the globe experience manifold challenges to maintain job performance during the so‐called work‐from‐home experiment caused by the COVID‐19 crisis. Whereas the self‐control literature suggests that higher trait self‐control should enable employees to deal with these demands more effectively, we know little about the underlying mechanisms. In a mixed‐methods approach and two waves of data collection, we examine how self‐control strategies elucidate the link between teleworking employees' trait self‐control and their job performance. Using a qualitative approach, we explored which strategies employees use to telework effectively ( N = 266). In line with the process model of self‐control, reported strategies pertained to situation modification (i.e., altering the physical, somatic, or social conditions) and cognitive change (i.e., goal setting, planning/scheduling, and autonomous motivation). Subsequent preregistered, quantitative analyses with a diverse sample of 106 teleworkers corroborated that higher trait self‐control is related to job performance beyond situational demands and prior performance. Among all self‐control strategies, modifying somatic conditions and autonomous motivation was significantly associated with job performance and mediated the self‐control‐performance link. This research provides novel insights into the processes by which employees productively work from home and inspires a broad(er) view on the topic of self‐control at work.

Smartphones cause self-control challenges in people's everyday lives. Supporting this notion, our studies corroborate that trait self-control is negatively associated (1) with students' distraction (via smartphones) during their learning endeavors (Study 1, N = 446) and (2) with several aspects of problematic smartphone-use (Study 2, N = 421). Study 3 (N = 106) investigated whether distinct aspects of smartphone-use also account for the link between students' trait self-control and academic performance. Specifically, we examined (1) smartphone procrastination (i.e., irrational task delays via smartphone), (2) beneficial smartphone habits (placing in a bag [placement habit] or turning the sound off [setting habit]), and (3) the objective amount of smartphone-use (minutes spent on the smartphone[screentime] and times picked up [pickups]). In line with our predictions, students higher in trait self-control showed better academic performance (b = 0.22). Smartphone procrastination (b = -0.23) and placement habits (b = 0.21) were significantly associated with academic performance and both also mediated the self-control-performance-link. Our findings suggest that it is not the objective amount of smartphone-use but the effective handling of smartphones that helps students with higher trait self-control to fare better academically.Implications for future research are discussed from a self-regulatory perspective on smartphone-use.

Marketers' proclivity for just‐below prices (e.g., $9.99) is rooted in an expected higher demand than for round prices ($10.00). The literature, however, lacks a comprehensive assessment of when and how price endings matter. Three mechanisms might explain price‐ending effects on consumers' purchase decisions: just‐below prices (1) improve price perceptions, but (2) impair perceived product quality, and (3) cause consumers to underestimate prices. A preregistered meta‐analysis (k = 69 studies, m = 362 effect sizes, N = 40,541) established that just‐below (vs. round) prices tend to increase purchase decisions (g = 0.13, CI95%[0.01, 0.25]), result in an advantageous price image (g = 0.28, CI95%[0.09, 0.48]), have no effect on perceived product quality (g = 0.00, CI95%[−0.17, 0.18], p = 0.96), and are more often underestimated (g = 0.67, CI95%[0.04, 1.30]). Participant, study, price, and product characteristics moderate the magnitude of these effects. Overall, the effect sizes are small and highly heterogenous, p‐curve analyses revealed a large proportion of nonsignificant effects, and publication bias corrections suggest smaller and, at times, nonsignificant true effects. We discuss theoretical and applied implications for the pricing literature.

Exerting effort in a first task can impair self-control performance in a subsequent task. Hundreds of studies have examined this ego depletion effect, but the underlying mechanisms are still unknown. By contrasting the two most prominent models, the strength model and the process model, the following question takes centre stage: Do participants fail to exert self-control because they run short of an unspecified resource or because they lack the motivation to engage in the subsequent task? We contrasted competing predictions (N = 560) from these two models by manipulating monetary incentives to be donated to charity in the first of two tasks. We found evidence of the standard ego depletion effectself-control performance was impaired after a high-versus a low-demand task in the no-incentive conditions. Incentives had an unexpected effect: Whereas participants in the incentive conditions showed higher intrinsic, autonomous motivation, they did not exert greater effort. This unexpected finding limited the applicability of our registered predictions; thus, we opted to test updated predictions. We discuss the theoretical implications of our understanding of the processes underlying ego depletion effects and their meaning for the ongoing debate about replicability and robustness.

Smartphones cause self-control challenges in people’s everyday lives. Supporting this notion, our studies corroborate that trait self-control is negatively associated (1) with students’ distraction (via smartphones) during their learning endeavors (Study 1, N = 446) and (2) with several aspects of problematic smartphone-use (Study 2, N = 421). Study 3 (N = 106) investigated whether distinct aspects of smartphone-use also account for the link between students’ trait self-control and academic performance. Specifically, we examined (1) smartphone procrastination (i.e., irrational task delays via smartphone), (2) beneficial smartphone habits (placing in a bag [placement habit] or turning the sound off [setting habit]), and (3) the objective amount of smartphone-use (minutes spent on the smartphone [screentime] and times picked up [pickups]). In line with our predictions, students higher in trait self-control showed better academic performance (b = 0.22). Smartphone procrastination (b = -0.23) and placement habits (b = 0.21) were significantly associated with academic performance and both also mediated the self-control-performance-link. Our findings suggest that it is not the objective amount of smartphone-use but the effective handling of smartphones that helps students with higher trait self-control to fare better academically. Implications for future research are discussed from a self-regulatory perspective on smartphone-use.