Loss of control stimulates approach motivation

Greenaway, Katharine H.; Storrs, Katherine R.; Philipp, Michael C.; Louis, Winnifred R.; Hornsey, Matthew J.; Vohs, Kathleen D.

doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2014.10.009

Cited by 62 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The data we collected on subjective and phenomenal experiences measures suggested that low approach affect arose only when the periods of preliminary control deprivation were shorter and the entire manipulation was less cognitively demanding. Previous research showed that threats to personal control induced approach based motivational states (Greenaway et al 2015). We did not find higher approach after longer lasting experiences of control deprivation (i.e.…”

Section: The Role Of Uncertainty and Approach-based Positive Affect Icontrasting

confidence: 88%

Different faces of (un)controllability: Control restoration modulates the efficiency of task switching

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Uncontrollability has been often associated with impaired or rigid cognitive processing. However, perceived stability of uncontrollable events modulated some of these detrimental effects on cognition. We investigated whether the experience of sequential control loss and restoration can enhance cognitive flexibility. We manipulated uncontrollability using a concept formation procedure that entailed either only unsolvable tasks (control deprivation condition), unsolvable tasks followed by solvable ones (control restoration condition) or only solvable tasks (control condition). To assess cognitive flexibility, we used a task-switching procedure that incorporated social categories. In Experiment 1 participants categorized people based on gender or age, and in Experiment 2 and 3 based on gender or social roles. Participants showed more flexibility in control restoration than in control deprivation condition. Additionally, in Experiments 2 and 3 this effect was mainly pronounced in the condition where the task evoked more cognitive conflict. We discuss the motivational underpinnings of unstable experiences of control loss and restoration.

show abstract

Section: The Role Of Uncertainty and Approach-based Positive Affect Icontrasting

confidence: 88%

Different faces of (un)controllability: Control restoration modulates the efficiency of task switching

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, our review of the resource scarcity literature demonstrates that control-restoration involves numerous approach-oriented behaviors, such as approaching luxury goods (Griskevicius et al, 2013) and aggressive actions toward a vending machine (Kristofferson et al, 2017). This is further supported by evidence linking a lack of control with approach motivation (Greenaway et al, 2015). Second, one assumption in the problem-and emotion-focused coping literature is that the processes are conscious and deliberative (Han, Duhachek, & Agrawal, 2015;Lazarus & Folkman, 1984).…”

Section: Relation To Existing Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 76%

A Self‐Regulatory Model of Resource Scarcity

Cannon¹,

Goldsmith

Roux³

2018

J Consum Psychol

182

194

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Academics have shown a growing interest in the effects of resource scarcity—a discrepancy between one's current resource levels and a higher, more desirable reference point. However, the existing literature lacks an overarching theory to explain the breadth of findings across different types of resources. To address this, we introduce a self‐regulatory model of resource scarcity. In it, we propose that consumers respond to resource scarcity through two distinct psychological pathways: a scarcity‐reduction route aimed at reducing the discrepancy in resources and a control‐restoration route aimed at reestablishing diminished personal control by attaining security in other domains. We explain how a key determinant of which route the consumer will pursue is the perceived mutability of the resource discrepancy. We also specify moderators, based on our proposed model, to identify when each of the two routes is pursued. This model is assessed in the context of alternative theoretical perspectives, including commodity theory, life history theory, and models of compensatory behavior. Finally, we provide a research agenda for those interested in studying the psychology of resource scarcity from a self‐regulatory perspective.

show abstract

“…Therefore, one prediction is that power may produce its effects through increased feelings of control (Fast, Gruenfeld, Sivanathan, & Galinsky, 2009;Scholl & Sassenberg, 2014). Furthermore where power increases the reliance on heuristics, control decreases it (Greenaway et al, 2015). A different prediction-and one that we favored a priori-is that power and personal control would not work hand in hand, but that personal control would have opposite effects and would reduce the self-serving bias.…”

Section: Power and Controlmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…This prediction was based on the notion that whereas power increases exploitative tendencies, personal control decreases those tendencies (Cislak et al, 2018). Furthermore where power increases the reliance on heuristics, control decreases it (Greenaway et al, 2015). We test these predictions in Experiment 3.…”

Section: Power and Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Power increases the self‐serving bias in the attribution of collective successes and failures

Lammers

Burgmer

2018

Euro J Social Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three studies test the effect of power on the self‐serving bias in attributing collective outcomes. The first two studies measure (Experiment 1) and manipulate (Experiment 2) power and then measure the internal (vs. external) attribution of past successes and failures. Consistently, those who feel powerful show a stronger self‐serving tendency to selectively attribute successes internally and failures externally than those who feel powerless. Experiment 3 compares the effects of power (control over others) and personal control (over oneself). We find that power increases the self‐serving bias, but a lack of control can limit this effect by reducing the external attribution of failures. Presumably, people who lack control are disinclined to attribute outcomes—including failures—externally because doing so would further aggravate their lack of control. Together, these results suggest that power increases a bias in the attribution of success and failure and thus presents a fundamental challenge to good leadership.

show abstract

Loss of control stimulates approach motivation

Cited by 62 publications

References 66 publications

Different faces of (un)controllability: Control restoration modulates the efficiency of task switching

Different faces of (un)controllability: Control restoration modulates the efficiency of task switching

A Self‐Regulatory Model of Resource Scarcity

Power increases the self‐serving bias in the attribution of collective successes and failures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About