undestanding self-regulation.pdf

7/27/2019 Undestanding Self-Regulation.pdf

1/5

,'~ . - - - .. .. ' :..

-----------------------.......... - = ; ; . : : = = = : ; : . . . = - = = , ~ - ...... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - ~ - ~ ~ - -

1Understanding Self-Regulation

An IntroductionKATHLEEN D. VOHSROY F. BAUMEISTER

This handbook offers a vast overview of the state of the art of research into eme of themost exciting and challcnging topics in all of human behavior. Self-regulation rcfers tothe many processes by which the human psyche exercises control over its functions,states, and inner processes. lt is an important key ro how the self is put together. Mostbroadly, it is essential for transforming the inner animal nature into a civilized human be-ing.We deliberately cast a very wide net in putting this book rogether. We wanted cognitive processes and motivational ones. We wanted basic research and practica! applications. We ~ a n t e d research on children and adults. We wanted deliberare, conscious processes and automatic, nonconscious ones. Rather than try to promote a particular theoryor approach to the topic, we sought to indude every available perspective. In faC', ouronly regrets about this experience center on the two chapters we failed to obtain, becausethey would have added two more views. As it was, however, we were ihrilld with thepositive response we received: Almost evcry author we invited accepted.

WHAT IS SELF-REGULATION?Our divcrsity of perspectives necessarily entails that thc chapters do not share the samedefinition of self-regulation, but sorne common thcmes have emerged, so that we can define our topic. Sorne definition is ccrtainly neccssary insofar as "sclf-rcguLltion" and"self-control" are used in different ways by diffcrent authors. We use thc terms "sdfcontrol" and "self-regulation" interchangeably, though sorne researchcrs make su'btle distmcnons bctween the two (such as by using "self-n:gulation" more broadly to refcr rogoal-directed bchavior or to feedback loops, whcrcas "self-control" may be associatedspccifically with conscious impulse control).

' 1- ~ \

'


2/5

--;::;...-.. -------2 An lntroduction

Connotations aside, "regulation" carries the meaning of "conirol" with a hint ofregularity. In that sense, self-rcgulation refers to the exercise of control over onesclf, especially with regar d to bringing the self into line with prefc rred (thus, .regular) s t a 1 ~ d a r d s .Such processes can be found deep in nature. For example, the body s homeostatiC processes can be considered a form of sclf-regulation insofar as the human body performsvarious functions to maintain a constan! temperature. If the body gets ovcrheated orchilled, its inner processes seek to return it to its regular tcmperature . . .The term "self-regulation" has in psychology also taken on the connotanon of regulation by the self (thus, not just of he self). Thc psychological self is usual_lr much mvolved in rcgulating body tempcrature, but it may be called into strenuous acnon to res1sttemptation or to overcome anxiety. The importance of regulation by the self has helpedeleva e sclf-regulation to become onc of the central intcrests of researchcrs who study theself (see Carver & Scheier, 1981, 1998).Thus one definition of "sclf-regulation" encompasses any efforts by the human selfto alter of its own inner states or responses. We have previ?usly described sdf-regulation in terms of people regulating their thoughts, emonons, Impulses or appcmes, andtask performances. Based on this volume, we amend that list to include attentwnal processes as another domain of regulated responses.Another definitional issue is whether "self-regulation" sbould be restricted to conscious processes. On this matter, the field has evolvcd from a tcntative answer of "yes" toa firmer "no." There is still an emphasis on conscious, deliherate cfforts at self-rcgubtion, and sorne chaptcrs focus almost exclusively on such processes (e.g., thc inner struggle to resist tcmptation). Bm evidencc has increasingly accumulatcd to show thc unportance of automatic or non((>nscious processes in self-regulation, and somc ofdc chaptcrsin this volume specifically review such contributions. For purposes of dcfinition, therefore, it is importan! to recognize both conscious and nonconscious processes,_ and to appreciate their differences even while recognizing that somc experts w11l connnuc to usethe term "self-regulation" to refcr primarily or evcn exclusively to the conscwus, pro-cesses.Differences of emphasis are also prominent. Research on sclf-regulation wasgreatly influenced by cybernetic theory, which showed how evcn inanimate mcchanismscan regulare themselves by making adjustments according to programmed goals orstandards. Much of this thinking was motivated by the attempt to destgn weapon systems, such as missiles,


3/5

.---------;,.--- ~ - - - - - - - - - .. -- - ...4 An lntroductioncultures require self-regulation and punish its failures, even though they may diffcr as towhat impulses must be regulated and when (ur which) lapses may be permltted.

OVERVIEW OF THIS VOLUMEThis volume brings together preeminent social, personality. consumer, dinical, and developmental psychologists who have devoted their carecrs to the study of goal pursu1t, all manner of controlled processes, and thc (primarily unantic1pated) consequences ot selfcontrol failure. We have divided the chapters into six sections, featuring basic processes;cognitivc, physiological, and neural dimensions; developrnent of self-regulation; interpersonal components of self-regulation; individual differcnces and psychopathologies; andconsequences of sclf-regulatory failure. We feel that these sewons mcely dcmonstrate therange of self-rcgulatory effects, while also providing a fundamental framework Withwhich many resean:hers resonare in tt'rms of thcir undcrstandmg of how sdf-rcgulatiOnworks.In Pa n J.we ha ve amassed authors whose work is the bcdrock of self-rcgulation sci-ence. Carver's seminal work on thc cybcrnetic aspccts of self-regulation is revisited inChapter 2. Carver uses his new ideas on action to undcrstand better the role nf affect inself-regulation. He pursues thc idea that affect, in the context of regulatory goals, servesas a signa! as to how well or poorly one is doing at achicving one' s r,oals.. Larscn and Prizmic (Chaptcr 3) also focus on affect m the1r contnbuuon, but theyapproach the topic from a broader perspective, providing a rich and detailed overview ofthe rescarch on affect regulation. They effectively point out the lustory of affect rcgulation research, the differences betwecn downregulating negativc affect and upregulatingpositive affect, various models used to predict : ~ f f e c t regulation styks, and thcy condudeby noting sorne essential paths that future rcsearch in aftect regulanon s h o u l ( ~ take.The basic processes of self-rcgulation are represented m the bram, accordmg ro thcchapter on ncuroscientific propcrtics of self-control by Banfield, Wyland, Macrac,Miinte, anq Heatherton. Their cbaptcr is devoted to outlining thc function and structurcof the prefrontal cortcx in the irontallobes, whicb is thc control center of bram, tbenlinking tlie operations of the prefmntal cortex to regulatory constructs such as attentiOn,dccision making, planning, and inhibition.Turning to a different approach to studying self-regulation, Schmeichel and Baumeister(Chapter 5) givc a thorough overview of thcir research program on sclf-regulauon as alimited resource_ Whereas others pursuc self-regulation in terms of feedback loops(Carver, Chapter 2), patterns of bra in activation (Banfield et al., Cha pter 4), oras a cognitive-affective control system (Mischel & Ayduk, Cbaptcr 6), this chapter concentrares011 the internal processes governing thc action of gctting frorn hcre to thcre. This modelhas led to steady a:lvances in predicting how and when pcoplc are apt to be unsuccessfulin regulating tremselvcs. . . .In Chapter 6, Mischel and Ayduk's account of selt-rcgulation cmphas1zes cffortfulcontrol and willpower. Drawing from a wcalth of data, such as data glcaned from themyriad smdies on dclay of gratification cffects, as well as sophisticatcd modcls of cogni;tion, affcct, and neuroscience, this ch.tptcr encapsulares thc concept of wlilpowcr as hothan individual dificrence andas a sct of interna) processcs. Mischel and Ayduk also call onrc\carchers ro undcrst;tnd bettcr whethcr effortful control ct n be taught, which in thcir .' vicw is a question ot utmnst importance as we head into the 1\cw century.

An lntroduction 5Rounding out the first secnon on hasic proccsscs, Chapter 7 on behavioral change is

by Rothman, Baldwin, and Hertd. This chapter provides a unique viewpoint on hehavioral change by specifying that the initiation and maintenance of behavioral change cf-forts are guided by different underlying systems. Rotbman et al. dcmonstrate that although people rnay start their rcgulatory endeavors hecause of the outcomes thcy wish toobtain, thcir continuation of these acts dcpends mainly on their satisfaction with pcrceivcd progress. Data frorn smoking, eating, and other health-relevant studics confirmtheir ideas.Part 11 features chapters on the cognirive, neural, and physiological aspects of sclfregulation. Fitzsimons and Bargh lead the way in Chaptcr 8 by asscrting that sclf-regulation need not be consciously intended or guidcd. This model of nonconscious, automaticsclf-regulation has opened up avenues of research prcviously not imagined by showingthat pcople's behaviors and responses are sometimes aimcd at goals thcy thcmsclvcs didnot rcalize, beca use the goals were activatc.>d outside of awarc.>ness. Thcir studies are pcrfcct exemplars of the idea that the rheory-practice dichotomy can be bridged in one research srream.People can be said to have two different types of goals: nrturancc-rclated andsafcry-related. According to Higgins and Spiegel (Chapter 9), these two types of goalshave vastly different consequcnces in terms of the responses thcy sct into motion, the cuesfor which one is vigilant, and the outcomcs to be achieved. Drawing on the rcgulatory foc.us model, Higgins and Spiegel show how chronically acrivated promotion (nurturancerelated goals) or prevcntion (safety-related goals) mindscts, or situational features thatprime eithcr mindset, influence judgment processes. Their chapter also highlights a newarca of r c s e a r ~ h , the idea of transfer of value from fir. This model, which cmphasizcs amatch bctween people's current means of goal pursuit and their chronic orientation toward goal achievcment, is sure to have a great impact on regulation research for dccadesto come.

The role of expectations in goal pursmt IS addressed by Ccrvonc, Mor, Orom,Shadel, and Scott in Chapter 10 on self-efficacy. Using a social-cognitive-afcct modcl,Cervone and colleagues place self-efficacy il) the context of both enduring goal structuresand dynamically occurring goal pursuits, which ties together disparate types of researchinto one cohesive model.

The idea of expectations is also echoed in the work of Gollwitzer, Fujira, andOettingen (Chapter 11 ), albeit in a slightly different fashioh. Their rc.>search on implementation intentions underscores the need for privately endorsed rules that estahlish a line ofaction to facilitare goal implementation, particularly in the face of obstacles or difficultregulatory tasks. Gollwitzer's research has shown that effective self-regulation is grcatlyenhanced by the use of implcmentation intentions, which set up a series of "i- . . . then"contingc.>ncies to help grapple with situations that may inadvertently alter onc's bchaviorsaway from the intended goal.

The theme of cognitive, physiological, and ncuroscientiic dimensions of self-rcgulation is fully incorporated by the last chapter in this secuon. Ochsncr ami Gross (ChapterI 2) d1scuss a social-cognitive neurosc ience ap proa ch to emotion regulation. This chapter15 m a sense a counterpart to the entry by Banfield and collcagues (Ch.tpter 4), in thathoth draw links betwecn brain activations and self-rcgulatory ahility. Och sner and Gross,howcver, go over in dtt;\1) the reciprocal rclatinns a:rnong ncural activity, emotion rcgulallon strategies, situation.1l features triggcring or impcding aHect rcgulation, and the combmcd psychological 1nd physiological con;cqucnccs of thcse vanous influcnces.


4/5

,~ - - . .-------------- - - - - ~ ------- '--

6 An JntroductiunPart 111 is one of rhe strongest and most integra red among the approaches and domains in which these authors place their work. Chaptcr 13 by Eisenherg, Smith,

Sadovsky, and Spinrad fearures their rescarch on effortful control in the contcxt uf ageand environment. This model has been particularly useful in portraying children seffortful control abilities as having mcaningful consequcnces for their social devclopment.Rueda, Posner, and Rothbart's devclopmental approach (Chapter 14) is to focus onanothcr domain of self-control among young people: attentional control. Their chapter,a ong with a few others in this vol u me, b rought to our attention (no pun intended) the vi-tal importance of allocating attention in the pursuit of intentions. Rueda and colleagues'contribution gives hope to the qucstion of whether self-regulation c an be assisted in development (see Mischcl & Ayduk, Chapter 6).The developmental implications of self-regulation failure are excmplified in C h ~ p t e r15 hy Barkley on attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Barklcy's thesis ahoutexecutive functioning and metacognition in the role of ADHD revolves around the notionrhat these processes aid in the formation of bonds with other members of one's socialgroup. This social-evolutionary approach takes the concept of ADHD and links it withhroader, higher order constructs such as attention and social control.Social bonds are also highlighted in the work by Calkins (Chapter 16), who underscores the operation of attachment-related processes in development. Calkins posits thatattachment processes, which are outgrowths oi early interactions with parents, serveemotion regulation functions. Attachmcnt security in Calkins's model is 5hown to haveautonomic and physiological implications, as well as rcpercussions for emotion regulatino, and is particularly importan! in dyadic rclationships.In Chapter 17, McCabe, Cunnington, and Brooks-Gunn also focus on young children's developmcnt, this time from the perspcctive of a bioecological moJel. In this approach, sclf-regulation is seen as resulting from the person x environmcnt interaction,which is examined from macro- and microlevel contexts. On the lattcr, MeCa he ancl colleagucs note some cultural differences in self-regulation development (e.g., bctwcen Chinese and U.S. children) and include this aspect of investigation as heing on thc forcfrontof future ehild regulation research.Rothbart, Ellis, and Posner (Chapter 18) conclude our section on 9evclopment.Their thcsis involves the idea of temperament as a personality construct that is bascd inreactivity '(or,set, intensity, and duration of emotional, motor, and attentional reactions)and is intimately connectcd with self-regulation. Self-regulation is dcfined by Rothbgical difficulties. Thcirideas about speciiic mechanisms suggest avenues for futurc rescarch.

Eating may perhaps he one of the most commonplacc-yet ltast well-understoodself-regulated domains; at last count, over 50% of Americans are ovcrwcight (whichprornptcd comedian Jay Leno to note that it is now "normal" to he overweight). Thcrcfore, understanding the self-regulation of eating is increasingly impcrative, and it is atop1c that Herman and Polivy (Chapter 25) have tackled for their entirc careers Re-viewingevidence on dieting, social norms, the effects of othcrs on food intakc, and c ~ t i n gas emot1on control, these eminent researchers show that although the self-rcgulationof eatmg may be complex, tt need not be convoluted. Herman and Polivy's e l e g o ~ n t experimental des1gns reveal the how far we have come in understanding this pcrnicious regulatlon prohlcm._ Personal spending is another domain in which people have grcat difficulty trying tocurb the1r tmpulses. In Chapter 26, Fahcr and Vohs under take thc issue of financia! control and examine threc basic patterns of (mis)regulated spcnding: self-gifting, impulsivcspendmg, and compulsive spending. Thc thrce concepts are rci.Jtcd to one anothcr v i o ~ prohkms with self-control, but each al so rcfb:ts the influcnce of other factors that are revealed by othcr theories of psychology and cconomics. fo r instance, Fabcr anJ VohsPOsJt that compulsive spending results from proccsses rclatcd to self-regulation failurc, aswell as escape from the self. Their review shcds light on the idea of fin.wciJI self-rcgulaton as. a conscquential arena in which to examine rcgulatory proccsscs.

WJcdcrman's chapte r on sexuality is an cyc-opcner, pcrh.1ps mostiY hecausc it illuminates a massive gap in the study of self-regul.uion. Wicdcrman (Chaptcr 27) astutely


5/5

.-;:;-. ....

8 An Introductionnotes rhar alrhough socieries throughour rhe world and across eras have attempred rocontrol rheir peoples' sexualiry, research on rhe influencc of personal seli-regulation standards has been l

No f surprisingly, most models of self-regulation have focused on what happens inside rhc individual psyche. The past few years have, however, seen a rising recognirion

An Introduction 9that interpersonal relarions affecr, and are affecred by, self-regulation. Thc interpersonaldimension of self-regulation is srill underapprcciared and seems likely to att;acr furrherstudy in thc coming years.

The 1990s was rhe "decade of rhe hrain" and in fact was a grear stimulus for rhestudy of phrsiological and ncurological processcs. Researchers bave scan:cly bcgun tomap out the brain processes and other physiolo;ical detcrminants of self-rcgulatory processcs. Ir seems a safe ber rhar rhe growing ficld of social-cognitive neuroscience will devote increasing effort to understanding rhese aspects of self-regulation .

M f ,, / } n ~ t h ~ r ) ~ s c i n a r i n g devclopmenr is rhc bcginning recognirion rhar peoplc must ofren]ugglc tnt.fuple goals and other sclf-regulatory proJccts samulraneously. A givcn S;nurdayafrcrnoon can be devored ro work, repairing relarionship damagc, or excrcising, all ofwhich involve self-regulation, yet cannot all be done simultaneously. Morcovcr, if rhe capaciry for self-regularion is limited, rhen pcople must operare with a shifring systcm ofprioriries as ro whar behaviors are mosr urgent ro regulare.lntegration across subdisciplines is an irnportant, promising arca, alrhough rhe structures of acadcm;c life make such integration difficult and uncertain. Developmental psychologists believe rhar rhey were the firsr to recognize rhc importancc of sclf-regularion,in their srudies o how children bccome sociahzed amllearn ro control rhcmselves for rhesake of social participation. Neuroscientisrs similarly believc that they lcd rhc way in theirstudies of executive function. Clinical psychologisrs, espccially those who deal with addicrion and earing disorders, recognized ~ r , e , ~ e n t r a l i m p o r t a ~ c e of self-regulation long befo re laborarory rescarchcrs had any mklang of how ro study a . Socaal psychologasrs, especial! y tbose imercsred in rhe self, claim p riority insofar as rhcy alone have rhc generalunderstanding of how self-regulation fits into rhe operarion of rhe self. Personality psychologists also poinr out rhar rhey have long recognized indiv;dual diffcrences in egostrengrh and conscientiousness. Finally, cognitive p s y c h o l 1 ~ i s r s have for dtc,adcs examined how limited resources in attcntion are allocated and, indeed, how processes of meracognition regula e cognitive performance.All rhese claims are valid, and all areas have somerhing ro offer. lt is our hope rharthis volume contribures ro such inregrative understanding and cross-fcrtilization of ideas.In any case, the next decade promises ro be an exciting and productive one in the understanding of self-regulation!

REFERENCES8arkley, R. A. (1997). ADHD and the nature of self-control. New York: Guilford Press.8aumeister, R. F. (in press). The cultural animal: Human nuture, meaning, anJ sorial/ife. NewYork: Oxford Un'versity Press.8aumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Muraven, M., & Tice, D. M. ( 1998). Ego deplction: Js the activesclf a limited resource? Journal o( Persmrality and Social Psyclwlo:y, 74, 1252-1265.Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. E (1981 ). Attentirm ,wd self-rcgulaticm: A c ontrol th eory ,rptnoach tohuman behavior. New York: Springer-Veri.Jg.Carvcr, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1998). 11 the self-re:ulatron o( behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press.Gottfredson, M., & Hirschi, T (1990). A :enerul theory of crime. Stanford, CA: St,mford University Press.Vohs, K. D., & Schmeichel, B. J. (2003). S e l f - r c ~ u b t i n n and the extended now: Controlling the selfalters the subjective experience of time. Joumal of l'ersonality ,mJ Sual Psychology SS217-230. ' '

undestanding self-regulation.pdf

Documents