1932
0
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior
  4. Volume 4, 2017
  5. Article

Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior

Volume 4, 2017

Dynamic Self-Regulation and Multiple-Goal Pursuit

Abstract

Self-regulation is the dynamic process by which people manage competing demands on their time and resources as they strive to achieve desired outcomes, while simultaneously preventing or avoiding undesired outcomes. In this article, we review the current state of knowledge regarding the process by which people manage these types of demands. We review studies in the organizational, cognitive, social psychology, and human factors literatures that have examined the process by which people () manage task demands when working on a single task or goal; () select which tasks or goals they work on, and the timing and order in which they work on them; and () make adjustments to the goals that they are pursuing. We review formal theories that have been developed to account for these phenomena and examine the prospects for an integrative account of self-regulation that can explain the broad range of empirical phenomena examined across different subdisciplines within psychology.

Keyword(s): choice, computational modeling, effort, formal theory, goal striving, self-regulation
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113156
2017-03-21
2024-04-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/orgpsych/4/1/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113156.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113156&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Altmann EM, Trafton JG, Hambrick DZ. 2014. Momentary interruptions can derail the train of thought. J. Exp. Psychol.: Gen. 143:215–26 [Google Scholar]
  2. Anderson JR. 1982. Acquisition of cognitive skill. Psychol. Rev. 89:369–406 [Google Scholar]
  3. Austin JT, Vancouver JB. 1996. Goal constructs in psychology: structure, process, and content. Psychol. Bull. 120:338–75 [Google Scholar]
  4. Ballard T, Yeo G, Loft S, Vancouver JB, Neal A. 2016a. An integrative, formal model of motivation and decision making: the MGPM*. J. Appl. Psychol. 101:1240–65 [Google Scholar]
  5. Ballard T, Yeo G, Neal A, Farrell S. 2016b. Departures from optimality when pursuing multiple approach or avoidance goals. J. Appl. Psychol. 101:1056–66 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bandura A. 1997. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control New York: W. H. Freeman
  7. Bandura A. 2012. On the functional properties of perceived self-efficacy revisited. J. Manag. 38:9–44 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bandura A. 2015. On deconstructing commentaries regarding alternative theories of self-regulation. J. Manag. 41:1025–44 [Google Scholar]
  9. Bandura A, Locke EA. 2003. Negative self-efficacy and goal effects revisited. J. Appl. Psychol. 88:87–99 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bauer IM, Baumeister RF. 2011. Self-regulatory strength. Handbook of Self-Regulation: Research, Theory, and Applications KD Vohs, RF Baumeister 64–82 New York: Guilford Press, 2nd ed.. [Google Scholar]
  11. Beattie S, Fakehy M, Woodman T. 2014. Examining the moderating effects of time on task and task complexity on the within person self-efficacy and performance relationship. Psychol. Sport Exerc. 15:605–10 [Google Scholar]
  12. Beattie S, Lief D, Adamoulas M, Oliver E. 2011. Investigating the possible negative effects of self-efficacy upon golf putting performance. Psychol. Sport Exerc. 12:434–41 [Google Scholar]
  13. Beck JW, Schmidt AM. 2015. Negative relationships between self-efficacy and performance can be adaptive: the mediating role of resource allocation. J. Manag. 2015:1–4 [Google Scholar]
  14. Bélanger JJ, K LM-A, Vallerand RJ, Kruglanski AW. 2013. When passion makes the heart grow colder: the role of passion in alternative goal suppression. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 104:126–47 [Google Scholar]
  15. Botvinick M, Braver T. 2015. Motivation and cognitive control: from behavior to neural mechanism. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 66:83–113 [Google Scholar]
  16. Brehm JW, Self EA. 1989. The intensity of motivation. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 40:109–31 [Google Scholar]
  17. Brown SD, Heathcote A. 2008. The simplest complete model of choice response time: linear ballistic accumulation. Cogn. Psychol. 57:153–78 [Google Scholar]
  18. Busemeyer JR, Townsend JT. 1993. Decision field theory: a dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. Psychol. Rev. 100:432–59 [Google Scholar]
  19. Camerer CF, Babcock L, Loewenstein G, Thaler R. 1997. Labor supply of New York City cabdrivers: one day at a time. Q. J. Econ. 112:407–41 [Google Scholar]
  20. Carver CS, Scheier MF. 1998. On the Self-Regulation of Behavior Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
  21. Chun WY, Kruglanski AW, Sleeth-Keppler D, Friedman RS. 2011. Multifinality in implicit choice. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 101:1124–37 [Google Scholar]
  22. Day DV, Sin H-P. 2011. Longitudinal tests of an integrative model of leader development: charting and understanding developmental trajectories. Leadersh. Q. 22:545–60 [Google Scholar]
  23. DeShon RP, Kozlowski SW, Schmidt AM, Milner KR, Wiechmann D. 2004. A multiple-goal, multilevel model of feedback effects on the regulation of individual and team performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 89:1035–56 [Google Scholar]
  24. Donovan JJ, Williams KJ. 2003. Missing the mark: effects of time and causal attributions on goal revision in response to goal-performance discrepancies. J. Appl. Psychol. 88:379–90 [Google Scholar]
  25. Eden D, Aviram A. 1993. Self-efficacy training to speed reemployment: helping people to help themselves. J. Appl. Psychol. 78:352–60 [Google Scholar]
  26. Elliot AJ, Thrash TM. 2002. Approach-avoidance motivation in personality: approach and avoidance temperaments and goals. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 82:804–18 [Google Scholar]
  27. Eubanks L, Wright RA, Williams BJ. 2002. Reward influence on the heart: cardiovascular response as a function of incentive value at five levels of task demand. Motiv. Emot. 26:139–52 [Google Scholar]
  28. Frank JD. 1935. Some psychological determinants of the level of aspiration. Am. J. Psychol. 47:285–93 [Google Scholar]
  29. Gigerenzer G, Gaissmaier W. 2011. Heuristic decision making. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 62:451–82 [Google Scholar]
  30. Gonzales VM, Mark G. 2004. Constant, constant, multi-tasking craziness: managing multiple working spheres. CHI 2004: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Vienna, Austria, April 24–29 113–20 New York: ACM [Google Scholar]
  31. Grimm KJ, An Y, McArdle JJ, Zonderman AB, Resnick SM. 2012. Recent changes leading to subsequent changes: extensions of multivariate latent difference score models. Struct. Equation Model.: A Multidiscip. J. 19:268–92 [Google Scholar]
  32. Haggar MS, Chatzisarantis NLD, Alberts H, Anggono CO, Batailler C. et al. 2016. A multi-lab pre-registered replication of the ego depletion effect. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 11:546–73 [Google Scholar]
  33. Hannah SD, Neal A. 2014. On-the-fly scheduling as a manifestation of partial-order planning and dynamic task values. Hum. Factors 56:1093–112 [Google Scholar]
  34. Hayes‐Roth B, Hayes‐Roth F. 1979. A cognitive model of planning. Cogn. Sci. 3:275–310 [Google Scholar]
  35. Hendy KC, Liao J, Milgram P. 1997. Combining time and intensity effects in assessing operator information-processing load. Hum. Factors 39:30–47 [Google Scholar]
  36. Higgins ET. 1997. Beyond pleasure and pain. Am. Psychol. 52:1280–300 [Google Scholar]
  37. Hockey GRJ. 1997. Compensatory control in the regulation of human performance under stress and high workload: a cognitive energetical framework. Biol. Psychol. 45:73–93 [Google Scholar]
  38. Hockey GRJ. 2013. The Psychology of Fatigue: Work, Effort and Control New York: Cambridge Univ. Press
  39. Humphreys MS, Revelle W. 1984. Personality, motivation and performance: a theory of the relationship between individual differences and information processing. Psychol. Rev. 91:153–84 [Google Scholar]
  40. Jagacinski RJ, Flach J. 2003. Control Theory for Humans: Quantitative Approaches to Modeling Performance Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Assoc.
  41. Kahneman D. 1973. Attention and Effort Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall
  42. Kanfer R, Ackerman PL. 1989. Motivation and cognitive abilities: an integrative/aptitude-treatment approach to skill acquisition. J. Appl. Psychol. 74:657–90 [Google Scholar]
  43. Karoly P. 1993. Mechanisms of self-regulation: a systems view. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 44:23–52 [Google Scholar]
  44. Katidioti I, Borst JP, Taatgen NA. 2014. What happens when we switch tasks: pupil dilation in multitasking. J. Exp. Psychol.: Appl. 20:380–96 [Google Scholar]
  45. Klein GA. 1993. A recognition-primed decision (RPD) model of rapid decision making. Decision Making in Action: Models and Methods GA Klein, J Orasanu 138–47 Westport, CT: Ablex Publ. [Google Scholar]
  46. Klein HJ, Austin JT, Cooper JT. 2008. Goal choice and decision processes. Work Motivation: Past, Present, and Future R Kanfer, G Chen, RD Pritchard 101–50 New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  47. Kool W, Botvinick M. 2014. A labor/leisure tradeoff in cognitive control. J. Exp. Psychol. 143:131 [Google Scholar]
  48. Kool W, McGuire JT, Rosen ZB, Botvinick MM. 2010. Decision making and the avoidance of cognitive demand. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 139:665–82 [Google Scholar]
  49. Köpetz C, Faber T, Fishbach A, Kruglanski AW. 2011. The multifinality constraints effect: how goal multiplicity narrows the means set to a focal end. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 100:810–26 [Google Scholar]
  50. Kozlowski SWJ, Chao GT, Grand JA, Braun MT, Kuljanin G. 2013. Advancing multilevel research design: capturing the dynamics of emergence. Organ. Res. Methods 16:581–615 [Google Scholar]
  51. Kruglanski AW, Bélanger JJ, Chen X, Köpetz C, Pierro A, Mannetti L. 2012. The energetics of motivated cognition: a force-field analysis. Psychol. Rev. 119:1–20 [Google Scholar]
  52. Kruglanski AW, Köpetz C, Bélanger JJ, Chun WY, Orehek E, Fishbach A. 2013. Features of multifinality. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 17:22–39 [Google Scholar]
  53. Lewandowsky S, Farrell S. 2011. Computational Modeling in Cognition: Principles and Practice Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publ.
  54. Lewin K, Dembo T, Festinger L, Sears P. 1944. Levels of aspiration. Personality and the Behavior Disorders J Hunt 333–78 New York: Ronald Press [Google Scholar]
  55. Liu Y, Mo S, Song Y, Wang M. 2015. Longitudinal analysis in occupational health psychology: a review and tutorial of three longitudinal modeling techniques. Appl. Psychol.: Int. Rev. 65:379–411 [Google Scholar]
  56. Locke EA. 1997. The motivation to work: what we know. Adv. Motiv. Achiev. 10:375–412 [Google Scholar]
  57. Locke EA, Latham GP. 1990. A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall
  58. Locke EA, Latham GP. 2004. What should we do about motivation theory? Six recommendations for the twenty-first century. Acad. Manag. Rev. 29:388–403 [Google Scholar]
  59. Loft S, Sadler A, Braithwaite J, Huf S. 2015. The chronic detrimental impact of interruptions in a simulated submarine track management task. Hum. Factors 57:1417–26 [Google Scholar]
  60. Logan GD. 1988. Toward an instance theory or automatization. Psychol. Rev. 95:492–527 [Google Scholar]
  61. Lord RG, Diefendorff JM, Schmidt AM, Hall RJ. 2010. Self-regulation at work. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 61:543–68 [Google Scholar]
  62. Louro MJ, Pieters R, Zeelenberg M. 2007. Dynamics of multiple-goal pursuit. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 93:174–93 [Google Scholar]
  63. Matthews G, Desmond PA. 2002. Task-induced fatigue states and simulated driving performance. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 55A:659–86 [Google Scholar]
  64. Muraven M, Baumeister RF. 2000. Self-regulation and depletion of limited resources: Does self-control resemble a muscle. Psychol. Bull. 126:247–59 [Google Scholar]
  65. Neal A, Hannah S, Sanderson P, Bolland S, Mooij M, Murphy S. 2014. Development and validation of multilevel model for predicting workload under routine and non-routine conditions in an air traffic management center. Hum. Factors 56:287–305 [Google Scholar]
  66. Northcraft GB, Schmidt AM, Ashford SJ. 2011. Feedback and the rationing of time and effort among competing tasks. J. Appl. Psychol. 96:1076–86 [Google Scholar]
  67. Orehek E, Mauro R, Kruglanski AW, van der Bles AM. 2012. Prioritizing association strength versus value: the influence of self-regulatory modes on means evaluation in single goal and multigoal contexts. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 102:22–31 [Google Scholar]
  68. Orehek E, Vazeou-Nieuwenhuis A. 2013. Sequential and concurrent strategies of multiple goal pursuit. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 17:339–49 [Google Scholar]
  69. Palada H, Neal A, Vuckovic A, Martin R, Samuels K, Heathcote A. 2016. Evidence accumulation in a complex task: making choices about concurrent multi-attribute stimuli under time pressure. J. Exp. Psychol.: Appl. 22:1–23 [Google Scholar]
  70. Ployhart RE, Vandenberg RJ. 2009. Longitudinal research: the theory, design, and analysis of change. J. Manag. 36:94–120 [Google Scholar]
  71. Powers WT. 1973. Behavior: The Control of Perception Chicago: Aldine
  72. Raby M, Wickens CD. 1994. Strategic workload management and decision biases in aviation. Int. J. Aviat. Psychol. 4:211–40 [Google Scholar]
  73. Rae B, Heathcote A, Donkin C, Averell L, Brown S. 2014. The hare and the tortoise: emphasizing speed can change the evidence used to make decisions. J. Exp. Psychol.: Learn. Mem. Cogn. 40:1226–43 [Google Scholar]
  74. Randall JG, Oswald FL, Beier ME. 2014. Mind-wandering, cognition, and performance: a theory-driven meta-analysis of attention regulation. Psychol. Bull. 140:1411–31 [Google Scholar]
  75. Ratcliff R, Van Zandt T, McKoon G. 1999. Connectionist and diffusion models of reaction time. Psychol. Rev. 106:261–300 [Google Scholar]
  76. Roe RM, Busemeyer JR, Townsend JT. 2001. Multialternative decision field theory: a dynamic connectionist model of decision making. Psychol. Rev. 108:370–92 [Google Scholar]
  77. Ryan RM, Deci EL. 2000. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am. Psychol. 55:68–78 [Google Scholar]
  78. Sanderson PM. 1989. The human planning and scheduling role in advanced manufacturing systems: an emerging human factors domain. Hum. Factors 31:635–66 [Google Scholar]
  79. Scherbaum CA, Vancouver JB. 2010. If we produce discrepancies, then how? Testing a computational process model of positive goal revision. J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 40:2201–31 [Google Scholar]
  80. Schmidt AM, DeShon RP. 2007. What to do? The effects of discrepancies, incentives, and time on dynamic goal prioritization. J. Appl. Psychol. 92:928–41 [Google Scholar]
  81. Schmidt AM, DeShon RP. 2009. Prior performance and goal progress as moderators of the relationship between self-efficacy and performance. Hum. Perform. 22:191–203 [Google Scholar]
  82. Schmidt AM, DeShon RP. 2010. The moderating effects of performance ambiguity on the relationship between self-efficacy and performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 95:572–81 [Google Scholar]
  83. Schmidt AM, Dolis CM. 2009. Something's got to give: the effects of dual-goal difficulty, goal progress, and expectancies on resource allocation. J. Appl. Psychol. 94:678–91 [Google Scholar]
  84. Schmidt AM, Dolis CM, Tolli AP. 2009. A matter of time: individual differences, contextual dynamics, and goal progress effects on multiple-goal self-regulation. J. Appl. Psychol. 94:692–709 [Google Scholar]
  85. Seo M-G, Ilies R. 2009. The role of self-efficacy, goal, and affect in dynamic motivational self-regulation. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 109:120–33 [Google Scholar]
  86. Shah JY, Friedman R, Kruglanski AW. 2002. Forgetting all else: on the antecedents and consequences of goal shielding. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 83:1261–80 [Google Scholar]
  87. Shiffrin RM, Schneider W. 1977. Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending, and a general theory. Psychol. Rev. 84:127–90 [Google Scholar]
  88. Sitzmann T, Ely K. 2011. A meta-analysis of self-regulated learning in work-related training and educational attainment: what we know and where we need to go. Psychol. Bull. 137:421–42 [Google Scholar]
  89. Sitzmann T, Yeo G. 2013. A meta-analytic investigation of the within-person self-efficacy domain: Is self-efficacy a product of past performance or a driver of future performance. Pers. Psychol. 66:531–68 [Google Scholar]
  90. Sonnentag S, Zijlstra FRH. 2006. Job characteristics and off-job activities as predictors of need for recovery, well-being and fatigue. J. Appl. Psychol. 91:330–50 [Google Scholar]
  91. Starbuck WH. 1963. Level of aspiration. Psychol. Rev. 70:51–60 [Google Scholar]
  92. Steel P, König CJ. 2006. Integrating theories of motivation. Acad. Manag. Rev. 31:889–913 [Google Scholar]
  93. Stokes DE. 1997. Pasteur's Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation Washington, DC: Brookings Inst. Press
  94. Sun S, Vancouver JB, Weinhardt JM. 2014. Goal choices and planning: distinct expectancy and value effects in two goal processes. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 125:220–33 [Google Scholar]
  95. van der Linden D, Frese M, Meijman TF. 2003a. Mental fatigue and the control of cognitive processes: effects on perseveration and planning. Acta Psychol 113:45–65 [Google Scholar]
  96. van der Linden D, Frese M, Sonnentag S. 2003b. The impact of mental fatigue on exploration in a complex computer task: rigidity and loss of systematic strategies. Hum. Factors: J. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. 45:483–94 [Google Scholar]
  97. Vancouver JB. 2012. Rhetorical reckoning: a response to bandura. J. Manag. 38:465–74 [Google Scholar]
  98. Vancouver JB, Gullekson NL, Morse BJ, Warren MA. 2014a. Finding a between-person negative effect of self-efficacy on performance: not just a within-person effect anymore. Hum. Perform. 27:243–61 [Google Scholar]
  99. Vancouver JB, More KM, Yoder RJ. 2008. Self-efficacy and resource allocation: support for a nonmonotonic, discontinuous model. J. Appl. Psychol. 93:35–47 [Google Scholar]
  100. Vancouver JB, Purl J. 2016. A computational model of self-efficacy's various effects on performance: Moving the debate forward. J. of Appl. Psychol. In press
  101. Vancouver JB, Thompson CM, Williams AA. 2001. The changing signs in the relationships among self-efficacy, personal goals, and performance. J. Appl. Psychol. 86:605–20 [Google Scholar]
  102. Vancouver JB, Wang M. 2016. Simulating integrated work motivation models: developing and evaluating the dynamic features Work. Pap., Coll. Arts. Sci., Ohio Univ., Athens, OH
  103. Vancouver JB, Weinhardt JM, Schmidt AM. 2010. A formal, computational theory of multiple-goal pursuit: integrating goal-choice and goal-striving processes. J. Appl. Psychol. 95:985–1008 [Google Scholar]
  104. Vancouver JB, Weinhardt JM, Vigo R. 2014b. Change one can believe in: adding learning to computational models of self-regulation. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 124:56–74 [Google Scholar]
  105. Vuckovic A, Kwantes PJ, Humphreys M, Neal A. 2014. A sequential sampling account of response bias and speed-accuracy tradeoffs in a conflict detection task. J. Exp. Psychol.: Appl. 20:55–68 [Google Scholar]
  106. Vuckovic A, Kwantes PJ, Neal A. 2013. Adaptive decision making in a dynamic environment: a test of a sequential sampling model of relative judgment. J. Exp. Psychol.: Appl. 19:266–84 [Google Scholar]
  107. Warm JS, Parasuraman R, Matthews G. 2008. Vigilance requires hard mental work and is stressful. Hum. Factors: J. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. 50:433–41 [Google Scholar]
  108. Westbrook A, Kester D, Braver TS. 2013. What is the subjective cost of cognitive effort? Load, trait, and aging effects revealed by economic preference. PLOS ONE 8:e68210 [Google Scholar]
  109. Wright RA. 2008. Refining the prediction of effort: Brehm's distinction between potential motivation and motivation intensity. Soc. Pers. Psychol. Compass 2:682–701 [Google Scholar]
  110. Yeo G, Neal A. 2008. Subjective cognitive effort: a model of states, traits, and time. J. Appl. Psychol. 93:617–31 [Google Scholar]
  111. Yeo GB, Neal A. 2006. An examination of the dynamic relationship between self-efficacy and performance across levels of analysis and levels of specificity. J. Appl. Psychol. 91:1088–101 [Google Scholar]
  112. Zhang Y, Fishbach A, Kruglanski AW. 2007. The dilution model: how additional goals undermine the perceived instrumentality of a shared path. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 92:389–401 [Google Scholar]
  113. Zohar D, Tzischinski O, Epstein R. 2003. Effects of energy availability on immediate and delayed emotional reactions to work events. J. Appl. Psychol. 88:1082–93 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113156
Loading
Dynamic Self-Regulation and Multiple-Goal Pursuit
Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior 4, 401 (2017); https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113156
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113156
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113156
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error