Motivation and Goal Pursuit

Approach And Avoidance ◽

Implicit And Explicit ◽

Theory Research ◽

Do So

This chapter reviews motivation research that integrates person and situation perspectives or has the potential to do so. Personality and social psychologists pursue approaches to the study of human motivation that tend to be complementary, in part because they have had similar reactions to historical influences. Research tends to focus either on general motives or on specific goals and goal pursuit processes. Within each focus, one can distinguish between implicit and explicit motives and goals and approach and avoidance versions of motives and goal constructs. The chapter reviews fundamental motives theories, implicit motive theory, self-determination theory, reinforcement sensitivity theory, regulatory focus theory, research on goal structure, content, appraisal and pursuit, and recent research on implicit/explicit motive congruence.

Motivation and Goal Pursuit

The Oxford Handbook of Personality and Social Psychology ◽

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195398991.013.0012 ◽

2012 ◽

pp. 286-314

Author(s):

Julie K. Norem

Keyword(s):

Implicit Theories ◽

Self Regulation ◽

Goal Pursuit ◽

Situational Factors ◽

Goal Structure ◽

Defensive Pessimism ◽

Approach And Avoidance ◽

Motivational Systems ◽

Regulation Strategies ◽

Implicit And Explicit

This chapter reviews motivation research that integrates person and situation perspectives. Personality and social psychologists pursue approaches to the study of human motivation that tend to be complementary and integrated, because they have had similar reactions to historical influences. Research tends to focus either on general motives, or on specific goals and goal pursuit processes. Within each focus, one can distinguish between implicit and explicit motives and goals, and approach and avoidance versions of motives and goal constructs. The chapter reviews implicit motive theory, self-determination theory, and research on goal structure, content, appraisal and pursuit. Implicit theories, life tasks, and self-regulation strategies (e.g., defensive pessimism) exemplify perspectives on motivation that integrate personal and situational factors using a functional approach. The chapter calls for further research on the relationship between implicit and explicit motivational variables, on congruence versus conflict in motivational systems, and on the integration of self-concept and motivational systems.

Contrasting regulatory focus and reinforcement sensitivity: A daily diary study of goal pursuit and emotion

Personality and Individual Differences ◽

10.1016/j.paid.2012.04.001 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 53 (3) ◽

pp. 335-340 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Kari M. Eddington ◽

Catherine Majestic ◽

Paul J. Silvia

Keyword(s):

Regulatory Focus ◽

Daily Diary ◽

Goal Pursuit ◽

Diary Study ◽

Daily Diary Study ◽

Reinforcement Sensitivity

Are reinforcement sensitivity personality constructs and attentional control important predictors of restrictive disordered eating?

International Journal of Personality Psychology ◽

10.21827/ijpp.7.37818 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 7 ◽

pp. 25-34

Author(s):

Andrew R. Du Rocher ◽

Jessica Barker ◽

Monika I. Chalupka ◽

Anna France ◽

Raisa S. Habib ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Disordered Eating ◽

Attentional Control ◽

Cognitive Architecture ◽

Self Report ◽

Trait Mindfulness ◽

Behavioural Inhibition ◽

Approach And Avoidance ◽

History Of

The revised Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (rRST) perspective on personality suggests that a neuropsychological behavioural inhibition system (BIS), behavioural approach system (BAS), and a fight-flight-freeze system (FFFS) produce the key personality traits involved in approach and avoidance behaviours. This perspective on personality can be used as a framework for understanding psychopathology. Self-report research on rRST suggests that restrictive disordered eating relates to elevated BIS sensitivity, elevated FFFS sensitivity, and possibly dysfunctional BAS sensitivity. Disordered eating can also relate to reduced trait mindfulness, which is a broadly defined construct. Trait mindfulness is positively correlated with attentional control (AC) which is a more specific component of our cognitive architecture that incorporates attentional focusing and attentional shifting processes. It is unknown how BIS and AC interact to predict restrictive disordered eating. We tested how self-reported BIS, BAS, and FFFS sensitivity, AC, and trait mindfulness relate to restrictive disordered eating in 464 healthy participants, and 177 participants with a history of psychiatric disorder. We provide new evidence that elevated restrictive disordered eating relates to reduced self-reported AC abilities (in addition to elevated BIS, and elevated FFFS sensitivity). We illustrate that the combination of high BIS and low AC predicts high levels of restrictive disordered eating (but not in all participants), whereas low BIS and high AC predicts lower levels of restrictive disordered eating (but not in all participants). We discuss how understanding the relationship between personality and attentional control can inform the design of future intervention studies.

Bridging Classical and Revised Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory Research: A Longitudinal Analysis of a Large Population Study

Frontiers in Psychology ◽

10.3389/fpsyg.2021.737117 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 12 ◽

Author(s):

Daniela A. Espinoza Oyarce ◽

Richard Burns ◽

Peter Butterworth ◽

Nicolas Cherbuin

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Large Population ◽

Community Survey ◽

Behavioural Inhibition ◽

Physical And Mental Health ◽

Health Measures ◽

Sensitivity Theory ◽

Theory Research

The reinforcement sensitivity theory (RST) proposes that neurobiological systems mediate protective and appetitive behaviours and the functioning of these systems is associated to personality traits. In this manner, the RST is a link between neuroscience, behaviour, and personality. The theory evolved to the present revised version describing three systems: fight-flight-freezing, behavioural approach/activation (BAS), and behavioural inhibition (BIS). However, the most widely available measure of the theory, the BIS/BAS scales, only investigates two systems. Using a large longitudinal community survey, we found that the BIS/BAS scales can be re-structured to investigate the three systems of the theory with a BIS scale, three BAS scales, and a separate fight-flight-freezing system (FFFS) scale. The re-structured scales were age, sex, and longitudinally invariant, and associations with personality and mental health measures followed theoretical expectations and previously published associations. The proposed framework can be used to investigate behavioural choices influencing physical and mental health and bridge historical with contemporary research.

Impulsivity and Behaviour Problems in Dogs: A Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory Perspective

10.31234/osf.io/sutdv ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Patrizia Piotti ◽

Liam Satchell ◽

Tom Lockhart

Keyword(s):

Behaviour Problems ◽

Approach And Avoidance ◽

Personality Research ◽

Sensitivity Theory ◽

Trait Impulsivity ◽

Relevant Topic ◽

Personality Models ◽

Neuropsychological Theory

Trait impulsivity is an increasingly relevant topic for human and non-human animal personality research. There are similarities in dog and human manifestations of trait impulsivity at the behavioural, genetic, and neurobiological level. We investigated a well-validated measure of dog impulsivity and responsivity (the Dog Impulsivity Assessment Scale, DIAS) and a neuropsychological theory of human trait approach and avoidance (the Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory of personality, RST). Owners reported their dogs’ dispositional behaviour on the DIAS, an RST scale modified to describe dogs’ behaviour, and a list of common dog behaviour problems. In a sample of 730 dogs, we observed convergence between the RST and the DIAS. There was a negative correlation between RST ‘Behaviour Inhibition System’ and DIAS impulsivity factor (‘Behavioural Regulation’). RST ‘Behavioural Approach System’ correlated positively with DIAS ‘Responsiveness’. The RST ‘Fight-Flight-Freeze System’ (FFFS) and the DIAS ‘Aggression and response to novelty factor were both distinct from other factors. However, the DIAS ‘Aggression and response to novelty’ factor and the RST FFFS explained different aspects of dog behaviour problems. Importantly, whilst the DIAS factors indicated tendencies towards avoidant behaviours, the FFFS discriminated between active and passive avoidance. The findings suggest a partial overlapping between the DIAS and RST scales, and highlights the utility of personality models in investigating behaviour problems in dogs.

Distinguishing between Need Support and Regulatory Focus with LIWC

10.31234/osf.io/a6f7u ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Leigh Ann Vaughn

Keyword(s):

Social Relationships ◽

Regulatory Focus ◽

Self Determination Theory ◽

Self Determination ◽

Regulatory Focus Theory ◽

Research Support ◽

Need Support ◽

Theory Research ◽

Focus Theory ◽

Support Model

The need-support model bridges regulatory focus theory and self-determination theory. Research on this model has shown that support of needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness (key constructs in self-determination theory) is higher in experiences of pursuing hopes versus duties (key constructs in regulatory focus theory). The current research used LIWC 2015’s standard dictionary to examine differences between descriptions of high and low support of these needs (N = 941), descriptions of pursuing hopes and duties (N = 1,047), high need support and hopes, and low need support and duties. As expected, descriptions of high need support and hopes were more emotionally positive than low need support and duties, whereas high need support and duties showed more attention to social relationships than low need support and hopes. These and additional findings of this research support the need-support model’s proposal that regulatory focus and need support do not reduce to each other.

Interdependent Neural Correlates of Reward and Punishment Sensitivity During Rewarded Action and Inhibition of Action

Cerebral Cortex ◽

10.1093/cercor/bhz194 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 30 (3) ◽

pp. 1662-1676 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Thang M Le ◽

Wuyi Wang ◽

Simon Zhornitsky ◽

Isha Dhingra ◽

Sheng Zhang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Theoretical Work ◽

Neural Substrates ◽

Neural Correlates ◽

Anterior Cingulate ◽

Behavioral Approach ◽

Approach And Avoidance ◽

Sensitivity To Reward ◽

Brain Correlates

Abstract Imaging studies have distinguished the brain correlates of approach and avoidance behaviors and suggested the influence of individual differences in trait sensitivity to reward (SR) and punishment (SP) on these neural processes. Theoretical work of reinforcement sensitivity postulates that SR and SP may interdependently regulate behavior. Here, we examined the distinct and interrelated neural substrates underlying rewarded action versus inhibition of action in relation to SR and SP as evaluated by the Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire. Forty-nine healthy adults performed a reward go/no-go task with approximately 2/3 go and 1/3 no-go trials. Correct go and no-go responses were rewarded and incorrect responses were penalized. The results showed that SR and SP modulated rewarded go and no-go, respectively, both by recruiting the rostral anterior cingulate cortex and left middle frontal gyrus (rACC/left MFG). Importantly, SR and SP influenced these regional activations in opposite directions, thus exhibiting an antagonistic relationship as suggested by the reinforcement sensitivity theory. Furthermore, mediation analysis revealed that heightened SR contributed to higher rewarded go success rate via enhanced rACC/left MFG activity. The findings demonstrate interrelated neural correlates of SR and SP to support the diametric processes of behavioral approach and avoidance.

At Long Last – A Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory Explanation of Procrastination

Journal of Individual Differences ◽

10.1027/1614-0001/a000296 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 40 (4) ◽

pp. 234-241

Author(s):

Catherine Bennett ◽

Alison M. Bacon

Keyword(s):

Academic Procrastination ◽

Behavioral Inhibition System ◽

Approach And Avoidance ◽

Avoidance Motivation ◽

Sensitivity Theory ◽

High Reward ◽

Approach And Avoidance Motivation ◽

And Performance

Abstract. Procrastination can result in poor wellbeing and performance in academia and the workplace. The present study combined personality and motivational explanations by examining procrastination through the lens of Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST), which assumes that personality traits are underpinned by basic systems of approach and avoidance motivation. Students ( N = 336; Mage = 21.34) and non-students ( N = 187; Mage = 37.98) completed the Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory of Personality Questionnaire (RST-PQ), measures of unintentional and general procrastination and, for students only, a measure of academic procrastination. In both samples, high impulsivity and high Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS) activation was associated with reports of general procrastination. In students, high Reward Reactivity (RR) was additionally associated with Unintentional Procrastination (UP), while low Goal-drive Persistence was associated with all forms of procrastination. These data suggest a role for both approach and avoidance motivations in procrastination. Results are discussed in terms of RST and implications for intervention.