Some evidence for the usefulness of an optimal foraging theory perspective on goal conflict and goal facilitation.

Abstract

Based on optimal foraging theory, we propose a metric that allows evaluating the goodness of goal systems, i.e., systems comprising multiple goals with facilitative and conflicting interrelations. This optimal foraging theory takes into account expectancy and value, as well as opportunity costs, of foraging. Applying this approach to goal systems provides a single index of goodness of a goal system for goal striving. Three quasi-experimental studies (N = 277, N = 145, and N = 210) provide evidence for the usefulness of this approach for goal systems comprising between three to 10 goals. Results indicate that persons with a more optimized goal-system are more conscientious and open to new experience, are more likely to represent their goals in terms of means (i.e., adopt a process focus), and are more satisfied and engaged with their goals. Persons with a suboptimal goal system tend to switch their goals more often and thereby optimize their goal system. We discuss limitations as well as possible future directions of this approach. AbstractBased on optimal foraging theory, we propose a metric that allows evaluating the goodness of goal systems, i.e., systems comprising multiple goals with facilitative and conflicting interrelations. This optimal foraging theory takes into account expectancy and value, as well as opportunity costs, of foraging. Applying this approach to goal systems provides a single index of goodness of a goal system for goal striving. Three quasi-experimental studies (N = 277, N = 145, and N = 210) provide evidence for the usefulness of this approach for goal systems comprising between three to 10 goals. Results indicate that persons with a more optimized goal-system are more conscientious and open to new experience, are more likely to represent their goals in terms of means (i.e., adopt a process focus), and are more satisfied and engaged with their goals.Persons with a suboptimal goal system tend to switch their goals more often and thereby optimize their goal system. We discuss limitations as well as possible future directions of this approach.Keywords: Disengagement; goal systems; multiple goals; optimal foraging. GOAL CONFLICT AND GOAL FACILITATION 3Some Evidence for an Optimal Foraging Theory Perspective on Goal Conflict and Goal Facilitation Goals, defined as "desired states that people seek to obtain, maintain or avoid" (Emmons, 1996, p. 314), can be considered as "building blocks of personality and development in adulthood" (Freund & Riediger, 2006, p. 353) that provide direction and meaning to a person's life (Freund, 2007; Klinger, 1977;Little, 1989). Goals guide attention and behavior (e.g., Bargh & Ferguson, 2000) and represent a standard for evaluating performance (e.g., Bandura, 1989), which in turn affects subjective well-being (e.g., Brunstein, 1993). Given the importance of goals for adaptation and development, it is not surprising that there are numerous theories that attempt to explain and understand the processes of goal setting (e.g., Austin & Bobko, 1985;L...

On the limits of agency for successful aging at work

“…Second, the perception of control itself, which is a necessary precondition for fit discrepancy "manageability" and the engagement of self-regulatory behaviors, may differ significantly for individuals from vulnerable populations (Thompson & Spacapan, 1991). The same can be said for how (and whether) individuals manage and optimize their goal systems (e.g., as a function of age and personality; Tomasik et al, 2017). Third and finally, if an individual must again and again disengage from unattainable goals (e.g., at the task or job level) to improve their perceived fit at work, there are likely to be broader, negative implications for that individual's higher order goals and/or self-concept (i.e., misfit between work experience and underlying needs, such as being a successful or productive member of society).…”

A Closer Look at Life Goals across Adulthood: Applying A Developmental Perspective to Content, Dynamics, and Outcomes of Goal Importance and Goal Attainability

“…As indicated above, goals vary not only in their importance but also with regard to their perceived attainability (Atkinson, ; Tomasik, Knecht, & Freund, ). Self‐regulation theories of development posit that people strive for control over their lives by balancing the importance and attainability of their goals (Baltes, , ; Brandtstädter & Greve, ; Heckhausen, Schulz, & Wrosch, ).…”

Beyond Self-Control: Mechanisms of Hedonic Goal Pursuit and Its Relevance for Well-Being

“…Given that thoughts about the conflicting alternative goal undermine long-term as well as hedonic goal pursuit (leading to self-control vs. hedonic “failure,” respectively; Becker et al, 2019), and given that the successful pursuit of both goals predicts well-being, future research should identify factors that decrease goal conflict. One determinant of experiencing goal conflict in everyday life could be the organization of an individual’s goal system (Tomasik et al, 2017). Depending on the number and organization of potentially conflicting goals, intrusions should be more or less likely.…”