People differ in their implicit theories about the malleability of characteristics such as intelligence and personality. These relatively chronic theories can be experimentally altered, and can be affected by parent or teacher feedback. Little is known about whether people might selectively shift their implicit beliefs in response to salient situational goals. We predicted that, when motivated to reach a desired conclusion, people might subtly shift their implicit theories of change and stability to garner supporting evidence for their desired position. Any motivated context in which a particular lay theory would help people to reach a preferred directional conclusion could elicit shifts in theory endorsement. We examine a variety of motivated situational contexts across 7 studies, finding that people’s theories of change shifted in line with goals to protect self and liked others and to cast aspersions on disliked others. Studies 1–3 demonstrate how people regulate their implicit theories to manage self-view by more strongly endorsing an incremental theory after threatening performance feedback or memories of failure. Studies 4–6 revealed that people regulate the implicit theories they hold about favored and reviled political candidates, endorsing an incremental theory to forgive preferred candidates for past gaffes but leaning toward an entity theory to ensure past failings “stick” to opponents. Finally, in Study 7, people who were most threatened by a previously convicted child sex offender (i.e., parents reading about the offender moving to their neighborhood) gravitated most to the entity view that others do not change. Although chronic implicit theories are undoubtedly meaningful, this research reveals a previously unexplored source of fluidity by highlighting the active role people play in managing their implicit theories in response to goals.
The present research examines how the subjective time of relational memories is linked to present relationship satisfaction. We tested the hypothesis that satisfied (but not dissatisfied) partners would keep happy relational events subjectively close in time and relegate transgressions to the subjectively distant past (regardless of when those events actually occurred). We found support for our predictions in the context of romantic relationships (Study 1) and with any type of close other (e.g., friends, family members; Study 2). To better understand the implications of the subjective distancing pattern among highly satisfied versus dissatisfied partners, we examined the role of perceptions of event importance. We found that highly satisfied partners' adaptive pattern of distancing mediates their tendency to ascribe continued importance to past relationship glories, while dismissing earlier relational disappointments as unimportant (Study 2). We then examined the causal impact of subjective time on importance and on subsequent relationship satisfaction by manipulating both event valence and perceptions of subjective distance (Study 3). People were more satisfied when happy relational events felt close and unhappy ones felt distant. This work sheds light on a reciprocal process whereby highly satisfied partners navigate the temporal landscape of their relational histories by retaining and valuing happy memories and by discarding the relevance of painful ones, which then maintains or boosts subsequent relationship satisfaction.
Background: Although health promotion efforts to increase exercise behavior often emphasise long-term outcomes, sustained action in service of a distal reward is challenging. These studies examined how focusing on the proximal benefits of exercise, compared to distal outcomes or more general outcomes, may strengthen individuals' self-regulatory self-efficacy and support physical activity or exercise behavior. Methods: Participants in Study 1 (N = 1057 community members) completed an online survey. Participants in Study 2 (N = 69 students) and Study 3 (N = 107 students) experienced experimental manipulations related to proximal or distal outcomes of exercise, and then completed survey measures. In Study 4, new members at a commercial gym (N = 210) completed a survey and had check-ins recorded over 17 weeks. Results: In Study 1, participants who ranked proximal outcomes of exercise as relatively more important than distal outcomes reported more frequent physical activity. In Studies 2 and 3, participants induced to focus on proximal outcomes reported increased self-regulatory self-efficacy. In Study 4, valuing proximal benefits predicted sustained exercise behavior (i.e. check-ins), particularly when fitness goal adherence felt difficult. Conclusions: Those holding increased proximal outcome beliefs reported more activity and greater efficacy to overcome the barriers that derail exercise.
Voters evaluate political candidates not only based on their recent record but their history, often faced with weighing the relevance of long-past misdeeds in current appraisal. How should a distant transgression be taken to reflect on the present? Across multiple years, political figures and incidents, we found that people’s subjective perceptions of time concerning political candidate’s histories can differ radically, regardless of objective fact; political bias shapes people’s perception of the time of things past. Results showed that despite equidistant calendar time, people subjectively view a favored politician’s successes and opposing politician’s failures as much closer in time, while a favored politician’s failures and opponent’s success seem much further away. Studies 1–3 tested the proposed phenomena across distinct (real and hypothetical) political contexts, while Study 4 tested the causal effects of temporal distance framing. Study 5 provided a final preregistered test of the findings. Overall, we demonstrate that partisans can protect their candidates and attack opponents by shifting their perception of time.
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.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.