Individual differences that moderate the effectiveness of relational reasons for self-improvement

Abstract

Two studies tested the hypotheses that relationally-autonomous reasons (RARs) for goals predict attainment, and that this relationship is stronger among highly relational and agreeable people than others. Study 1 (n = 134) assessed participants’ self-construal and Agreeableness, and their tendency to pursue subgoals for RARs, relationally-controlled reasons (RCRs), and personally-controlled reasons (PARs). One month later, they indicated the number of subgoals they had attained. RARs were positively correlated with attainment, and this relationship was stronger among highly relational and agreeable people than others. In Study 2 (n = 74), self-construal and Agreeableness were assessed then participants generated possible outcomes of 3 subgoals using a Goal Attainment Scale. They were then randomly assigned to a goal program that either emphasized RARs, RCRs, or PARs. One week later, participants indicated their level of attainment. Highly relational and agreeable people had higher levels of attainment than others in the program emphasizing RARs.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Aron, A., Aron, E. N., Tudor, M., & Nelson, G. (1991). Close relationships as including other in the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 241–253.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Branje, S., Van Aken, M., Van Lieshout, C., & Mathijssen, J. (2003). Personality judgments in adolescents’ families: The perceiver, the target, their relationship, and the family. Journal of Personality, 71, 49–81.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Burton, K. A., Gore, J. S., & Sturgeon, J. L. (2012). The role of self-construal in response to charity advertisements. Self and Identity, 11, 343–359.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chirkov, V., Ryan, R. M., Kim, Y., & Kaplan, U. (2003). Differentiating autonomy from individualism: A self-determination theory perspective on internalization of cultural orientations and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 97–109.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). NEO PI-R Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cross, S. E., Bacon, P. L., & Morris, M. L. (2000). The relational-interdependent self-construal and relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 791–808.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cross, S. E., & Madson, L. (1997). Models of the self: Self-construals and gender. Psychological Bulletin, 122, 5–37.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cross, S., & Morris, M. (2003). Getting to know you: The relational self-construal, relational cognition, and well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 512–523.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cross, S. E., Morris, M. L., & Gore, J. S. (2002). Thinking about oneself and others: The relational-interdependent self-construal and social cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 399–418.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1984). The basis of self-determination: Intrinsic motivation and integrated internalizations. Academic Psychology Bulletin, 5, 21–29.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Downie, M., Koestner, R., Horberg, E., & Haga, S. (2006). Exploring the relation of independent and interdependent self-construals to why and how people pursue personal goals. Journal of Social Psychology, 146, 517–531.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gore, J. S. (2013). The influence of close others in daily goal pursuit (under review).

  15. Gore, J. S., & Cross, S. E. (2006). Pursuing goal for us: Relationally-autonomous reasons in long-term goal pursuit. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 848–861.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Gore, J. S., & Cross, S. E. (2011a). Task framing and perceived fit: The role of personality, task label, and partner involvement. Motivation and Emotion, 35, 368–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gore, J. S., & Cross, S. E. (2011b). Conflicts of interest: Relational self-construal and decision-making in interpersonal contexts. Self and Identity, 10, 185–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Gore, J. S., Cross, S. E., & Kanagawa, C. (2009). Acting in our interests: Relational self and goal motivation across cultures. Motivation and Emotion, 33, 75–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Gore, J. S., & Rogers, M. J. (2010). Why do I study? The moderating role of attachment style on academic motivation. Journal of Social Psychology, 150, 560–578.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Graziano, W. G., Hair, E. C., & Finch, J. F. (1997). Competitiveness mediates the link between personality and group performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1394–1408.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Graziano, W. G., Jensen-Campbell, L. A., & Hair, E. C. (1996). Perceiving interpersonal conflict and reacting to it: The case for agreeableness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 820–835.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Hektner, J. M. (2001). Family, school, and community predictors of adolescent growth-conducive experiences: Global and specific approaches. Applied Developmental Science, 5, 172–183.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Jensen-Campbell, L. A., & Graziano, W. G. (2001). Agreeableness as a moderator of interpersonal conflict. Journal of Personality, 69, 323–361.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  24. John, O. P. (1989). Towards a taxonomy of personality descriptors. In D. M. Buss & N. Cantor (Eds.), Personality psychology: Recent trends and emerging directions (pp. 261–271). New York, NY: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. John, O. J., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The big five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of Personality: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 102–138). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kagitcibasi, C. (2005). Autonomy and relatedness in cultural context: Implications for self and family. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, 403–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kiresuk, T. J., Smith, A., & Cardillo, J. E. (Eds.). (1994). Goal attainment scaling: Applications, theory, and measurement. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Lun, J., Oishi, S., Coan, J. A., Akimoto, S., & Miao, F. F. (2010). Cultural variations in motivational responses to felt misunderstanding. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 986–996.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Miller, J. G., Das, R., & Chakravarthy, S. (2011). Culture and the role of choice in agency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 46–61.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Rodriguez, S., Romero-Canyas, R., Downey, G., Higgins, E. T., & Mangels, J. (2012). Interdependent self and task framing: How fit enhances math performance and use of learning resources. Manuscript under review.

  32. Rudy, D., Sheldon, K. M., Awong, T., & Tan, H. H. (2007). Autonomy, culture, and well-being: The benefits of inclusive autonomy. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 983–1007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Sheldon, K. M., Abad, N., Ferguson, Y., Gunz, A., Houser-Marko, L., Nichols, C. P., et al. (2010). Persistent pursuit of need-satisfying goals leads to increased happiness: A 6-month experimental longitudinal study. Motivation and Emotion, 34, 39–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Sheldon, K. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1998). Not all personal goals are personal: Comparing autonomous and controlled reasons for goals as predictors of effort and attainment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 546–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sheldon, K. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1999). Goal striving, need satisfaction, and longitudinal well-being: The self-concordance model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 482–497.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Sheldon, K. M., Elliot, A. J., Ryan, R. M., Chirkov, V., Kim, Y., Wu, C., et al. (2004). Self-concordance and subjective well-being in four cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35, 209–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Sheldon, K. M., & Filak, V. (2008). Manipulating autonomy, competence, and relatedness support in a game-learning context: New evidence that all three needs matter. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47, 267–283.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Sheldon, K. M., & Houser-Marko, L. (2001). Self-concordance, goal attainment, and the pursuit of happiness: Can there be an upward spiral? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 152–165.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Sheldon, K. M., & Niemiec, C. (2006). It’s not just the amount that counts: Balanced need-satisfaction also affects well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 331–341.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Sheldon, K. M., Ryan, R., & Reis, H. T. (1996). What makes for a good day? Competence and autonomy in the day and in the person. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 1270–1279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Sheldon, K. M., & Schüler, J. (2011). Wanting, having, and needing: Integrating motive disposition theory and self-determination theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,. doi:10.1037/a0024952.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Tobin, R. M., Graziano, W. G., Vanman, E. J., & Tassinary, L. G. (2000). Personality, emotional experience, and efforts to control emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 656–669.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Wang, C. L., Bristol, T., Mowen, J. C., & Chakraborty, G. (2000). Alternative modes of self-construal: Dimensions of connectedness-separateness and advertising appeals to the cultural and gender-specific self. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 9, 107–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Wentzel, K. R. (1998). Social relationships and motivation in middle school: The role of parents, teachers, and peers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 202–209.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Yi, L., & Gore, J. S. (2012). Relational motivation and well-being: A cross-cultural comparison. Manuscript under review.

  46. Zaleski, Z. (1988). Close relationships and acting for self-set goals. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 191–194.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonathan S. Gore.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gore, J.S. Individual differences that moderate the effectiveness of relational reasons for self-improvement. Motiv Emot 37, 639–652 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-013-9344-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Relational self-construal
  • Agreeableness
  • Relationally-autonomous reasons
  • Personally-autonomous reasons
  • Goals