Metamotivation research suggests that people may be able to modulate their motivational states strategically to secure desired outcomes (Scholer & Miele, 2016). To regulate one’s motivational states effectively, one must at minimum understand (a) which states are more or less beneficial for a given task and (b) how to instantiate these states. In the current article, we examine to what extent people understand the self-regulatory benefits of high-level versus low-level construal (i.e., motivational orientations toward abstract and essential vs. concrete and idiosyncratic features). Seven experiments revealed that participants can distinguish tasks that entail high-level versus low-level construal. Further, participants recognized the usefulness of preparatory exercises with which to instantiate high-level versus low-level construal for task performance, and this knowledge predicted behavioral choices. This research highlights novel insights that the metamotivational approach offers to research on construal level theory and, more broadly, to the study of self-regulation.

Research indicates that inducing high-level construal (processing that highlights invariant, essential features) relative to low-level construal (processing that highlights idiosyncratic, peripheral features) promotes self-control (Fujita & Carnevale, 2012). In the present work, we investigate to what extent people recognize the self-control benefits of high-level construal, and explore the consequences of this knowledge. Studies 1 and 2 provide initial evidence that individuals are aware that high-level relative to low-level construal promotes self-control in the dieting domain. Studies 3 and 4 find that individual differences in this knowledge predict self-control success outcomes (i.e., body mass index) among those who are motivated by dieting goals. Examining academics as a domain of self-control, Study 5 demonstrates that those with higher knowledge of construal level's impact on self-control earned higher end-of-semester grades to the extent that they were motivated to do well academically. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record

When making decisions, people sometimes deviate from normative standards. While such deviations may appear to be alarmingly common, examining individual differences may reveal a more nuanced picture. Specifically, the personality factor of need for cognition (i.e., the extent to which people engage in and enjoy effortful cognitive activities; Cacioppo & Petty, 1982) may moderate decision makers' susceptibility to bias, as could personality factors associated with being a leader. As part of a large-scale assessment of high-level leaders, participants completed a battery of decision-making competence and personality scales. Leaders who scored higher on need for cognition performed better on two of four components of a decision-making competence measure: framing and honoring sunk costs. In addition, the leader sample performed better than published controls. Thus, both individual differences in need for cognition and leadership experience moderate susceptibility to decision biases. Implications for broader theories of individual differences and bias are discussed.

Many goals that people pursue are distal in that they cannot be attained in the here and now but rather must be achieved through action across varied social contexts over time. Self-control requires people to make decisions consistent with distal goals when tempted by more immediate rewards. Inspired by construal-level theory, we propose and review evidence that the way in which people subjectively represent, or construe, events systematically influences these decisions. We suggest that high-level construal (the use of cognitive abstraction to extract the essential and goal-relevant features common across a class of events), relative to low-level construal (the process of highlighting the incidental and idiosyncratic features that render a particular event unique), promotes self-control. We discuss implications for future research.

Construal level theory proposes that viewing events and objects from a distance (whether physical or psychological) leads individuals to construe them in more abstract, higher‐level ways. At high‐level construal, individuals focus on the overall gist or bigger picture, rather than on situationally‐dependent, concrete details. What patterns then emerge in how construal level relates to interpersonal processes? We find that an individual's construal level has implications for both (a) perceptions of others and (b) social influence. Specifically, our review suggests that high‐level (relative to low‐level) construal is related to greater holistic processing of the self and others by discussing literature linking construal level to person‐perception biases such as the fundamental attribution error and correspondence bias, as well as research on how construal level relates to stereotyping and prejudice. We further review a broad array of research examining social influence relating to self‐relevant feedback, the influence of aggregate versus anecdotal information, and the impact of abstract versus concrete language. We propose future avenues for CLT research relating to person‐perception biases, romantic relationships, stereotyping and prejudice, and the strategic use of construal level in the pursuit of specific interpersonal goals.