A meta-analysis of the dark side of the American dream: Evidence for the universal wellness costs of prioritizing extrinsic over intrinsic goals.

Abstract

Self-determination theory holds that the intrinsic and extrinsic content of people's aspirations differentially affect their wellness. An evidence base spanning nearly 30 years indicates that focusing on intrinsic goals (such as for growth, relationships, community giving, and health) promotes well-being, whereas a focus on extrinsic goals (such as for wealth, fame, and beauty) deters well-being. Yet, the evidence base contains exceptions, and some authors have argued that focusing on extrinsic goals may not be universally detrimental. We conducted a systematic review and used multilevel meta-analytic structural equation modeling to evaluate the links between intrinsic and extrinsic aspirations with indices of well-being and illbeing. Across 92 reports (105 studies), 1,808 effects, and a total sample of N = 70,110, we found that intrinsic aspirations were linked positively with well-being, r = 0.24 [95% CI 0.22, 0.27], and negatively with ill-being, r = −0.11 [−0.14, −0.08]. When the variety of extrinsic aspiration scoring methods were combined, the link with well-being was not statistically significant, r = 0.02 [−0.02, 0.06]. However, when extrinsic aspirations were evaluated in terms of their predominance in the overall pattern of aspiring the effect was universally detrimental, linking negatively to well-being, r = −0.22 [−0.32, −0.11], and positively to ill-being, r = 0.23 [0.17, 0.30]. Meta-analytic conclusions about the associations between goal types and wellness are important because they inform how individuals could shape aspirations to support their own happiness and how groups and institutions can frame goals such that their pursuit is for the common good.

We know this much is (meta-analytically) true: A meta-review of meta-analytic findings evaluating self-determination theory.

“…When calculated as a relative centrality score, however, the effect of extrinsic aspiring on ill-being was positive ( r = .23). Taken together, the results of Bradshaw et al’s (2022) meta-analysis indicated that to the extent that extrinsic aspirations dominate in the overall pattern of aspiring, the more they both hinder well-being and conduce to ill-being. The effects associated with the relative centrality of extrinsic aspirations were not moderated by gender, age, region, or socioeconomic status, suggesting that the negative consequences of prioritizing extrinsic aspirations appear universal.…”

“…A central proposition of GCT is that intrinsic and extrinsic aspirations link differentially with indices of well-being and ill-being. Bradshaw et al (2022) examined this key proposition by meta-analyzing 92 studies containing correlations between intrinsic and extrinsic aspirations with well-being and ill-being, together comprising 1,808 effect sizes and 70,110 participants from 27 countries. Using multilevel meta-analytic structural equation modeling, Bradshaw et al’s (2022) results found that intrinsic aspirations linked moderately and positively with indices of well-being ( r = .24) and negatively with ill-being ( r = −.11).…”

“…A core tenet of GCT is that extrinsic aspirations are not “bad” per se, but that they have the potential to be detrimental the more they predominate relative to intrinsic aspirations. In this regard, Bradshaw et al’s (2022) meta-analysis was decisive. When the effect sizes on extrinsic aspirations were analyzed according to whether extrinsic aspirations were calculated as a “simple score” (i.e., the mean across all extrinsic aspirations) or a “relative centrality score” (i.e., the mean across extrinsic aspirations minus, or controlling for, the mean across all aspirations), the effect sizes diverged both in terms of magnitude and direction.…”

“…Bradshaw et al's (2022) results could be interpreted as contradicting evidence that national (Hagerty & Veenhoven, 2003) and personal wealth (Tan et al, 2020) are associated with gains in individuals' well-being, but such a conclusion would be a misinterpretation. As Bradshaw et al (2022) outlines, extrinsic goals can serve positive functions; money can provide security and safety, maintaining a positive image can support feelings of esteem and confidence. However, regardless of the underlying motivation, Bradshaw et al's (2022) results suggest that if extrinsic pursuits are allowed to predominate, the overall pattern of aspiring any possible gains will be undermined to some extent.…”

“…Duineveld (2018) found important age differences in the relations between perceived autonomy support and perceived control, reflecting a developmental effect. However, other meta-analyses have found little effect of age (e.g., Bradshaw et al, 2022;. Gender has also been examined but has not emerged as a significant moderator (with an exception being Stanley et al, 2021).…”