How effortful decisions get enacted: the motivating role of decision processes, desires, and anticipated emotions

Abstract

Building on recent research examining the influence of decision making on subsequent goal striving and decision enactment, we consider and elaborate on the mechanisms through which effortful decisions are made, maintained, and enacted. Our proposed framework builds on the Dholakia and Bagozzi (2002) model, distinguishes between two important types of intentions and desires, and shows that the motivation-mustering function of the decision process is mediated by goal and implementation desires. In addition to decision processes, the roles of goal feasibility, anticipated emotions, attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control are also elaborated on. Through a two-wave field study tracking real decisions and their pursuit by participants, we find empirical support for our model of effortful decision making and enactment.

Comparing Entrepreneurship Intention: A Multigroup Structural Equation Modeling Approach

“…Attitude is a learned predisposition toward behaviors. In the specific, attitudes reflect reasons for doing something, and focus to attain goals (Bagozzi et al, 2003). In relating with business and non-business students, attitude toward becoming an entrepreneur may differ among them.…”

Transparency Initiative for Enhancing QoL: Behavioural components leading to corruption

“…The model examines the person-based determinants of human behaviour in interaction with a specific situational context (Rabl & Kuhlmann, 2008). This model is developed based on Model of Effortful Decision Making and Enactment (MEDME) by Bagozzi et al (2003) that integrates Rubicon Model of Action Phases (RMAP) (Gollwitzer, 1990) and Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) (Ajzen, 1991) Rabl and Kuhlmann (2008) The combination of these two models (RMAP and TPB) has developed the MEDME by which it is necessary due to three factors: (1) TPB does not specify clearly the relationship between intention and behaviour which have been tackled by RMAP through volition construct, (2) TPB does not incorporates desires as a determinant intention to perform an action, and (3) both TPB and RMAP do not consider emotional aspects (Rabl and Kuhlmann, 2008). The MEDME distinguishes between intentions and desires, and shows that the motivation-mustering function of the decision process is mediated by goal and implementation desires.…”

“…On top of that, the role of goal feasibility, anticipated emotions, attitudes, subjective norm, and perceived behavioural control are also considered. In MEDME, intention represents the proximal determinant of action in model of goal-directed behaviour while desires are necessary antecedents to intention formation (Bagozzi et al, 2003).…”

“…Based on the ideas of Gollwitzer (1990), Ajzen (1991) and Bagozzi et al (2003) provide an input to the full Model of Corrupt Action by Rabl and Kuhlmann (2008). The Model of Corrupt Action consists of two main components the 'desire' and 'intention' to achieve through corrupt actions.…”

A Research Framework on Social Networking Sites Usage: Critical Review and Theoretical Extension

“…Thirdly, emphasizing on the reflective cognitive processing, most prior research on IT usage has overlooked the role of emotions in affecting user behavior [23]. Recent research shows that negative anticipated emotions influence the individual's intentions over and above the cognitive variables [24]. According to the model of goal-oriented behavior [23], individual users tend to take into account the emotional consequences, termed as anticipated emotions.…”