2012 Presentation - Existential and Psychological Health as Products of Intrinsic Goal Attainment
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

2012 Presentation - Existential and Psychological Health as Products of Intrinsic Goal Attainment

on

  • 383 views

Stauner, N. (2012). Existential and psychological health as products of intrinsic goal attainment. Presented in the Proseminar for Current Research in Personality Psychology, April 19, University of ...

Stauner, N. (2012). Existential and psychological health as products of intrinsic goal attainment. Presented in the Proseminar for Current Research in Personality Psychology, April 19, University of California, Riverside.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
383
Slideshare-icon Views on SlideShare
382
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0

1 Embed 1

http://www.linkedin.com 1

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NoDerivs LicenseCC Attribution-NoDerivs License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Going to be a data-driven talk
  • As with just about anything I research these days, I’ll begin with the meaning in life construct.Meaning in life can be a little hard to define.One way to define meaning is to let the participant do it, as these items do.In fact, the existentialist argument is that this is the only authentic way to approach the matter: subjectively.Participants rate these items, I sum their ratings, and that’s my measure, but I’m really just summarizing what they’ve told me about themselves.Likehappiness, no one can really tell you how meaningful your life is; it’s a psychological state of being you define by your own standards.Like a trait, it’s stable across time, and predictive of health consequences. A deeper sense of meaning leads to… Lowered depression, anxiety, drug abuse, suicidality Higher happiness, life satisfaction, self-esteem, optimismRegardless of how subjective these meaning ratings may be, they’re clearly not trivial.
  • PWB refers to a theory of the structure of well-being above and beyond happinessOnly environmental mastery and self-acceptance relate strongly to happiness and life satisfactionThe other four dimensions are less commonly assessed elements of well-being, but elements nonetheless. Ryff bases this theory on Maslow, Rogers, Jung, Allport, Erikson, Buhler, & Neugarten, so she’s done her homework.Aside from the theories of a bunch of dead white guys, there are other reasons to think these different kinds of well-being might be important…
  • For instance, parents often think their children make their lives happier…But in fact, frequency of positive affect decreases after childbirth.Positive affect is even rated relatively low when with childrenPerhaps the kind of happiness parents feel they’re gaining is different from the kind we usually measure.
  • For another example ofhow meaning might separate from happiness,Baumeister suggests we consider the life of the guerrilla.Guerrilla fighters definitely don’t have the happiest lives, but they definitely have to believe in what they’re doing to get it done right.Those in the room with kids may see other similarities here.Since meaning may be different from well-being, and since it is definitely important,I chose to set my dissertation sights on finding a way to improve meaning…
  • Fortunately, my reading for quals seemed to suggestthat goals are the way to go.Here are some quotes emphasizing the causal connections from goals to meaning, at least in theory.
  • Another reason to look at goals is that they improve happiness, which is related to meaning.A series of studes have shown thisConcurrently and prospectivelyAcross a week and across a semesterMay also increase other aspects of well-beingIncluding psychological well-being as a wholeThese studies also suggest a number of moderators for these effects of goal attainment…
  • One such moderator is the reason for pursuing a given goal,Whether by personal choice or…not so much. (May have heard of this as self-determination, self-concordance, perceived locus of causality, or organismic congruence)Basically, the autonomous reasons are fun, interest, or personal valuesControlled reasons include to avoid feeling like a bad person, or to get something from someone else.Main effect & interaction!
  • Another moderator is in the content of the goals themselves. (Also referred to as intrinsic orientation and vertical intrinsiccoherence)Basically a theory of which goals are directly rewarding and which are more indirect.The directly rewarding or “intrinsic futures” are emotional intimacy, personal growth, & community contributionThe indirectly rewarding or “extrinsic futures” are fame/popularity, attractive image, & financial successMain effect & interaction!!
  • There’s a similar theory about sources of meaning, which are similar to values.Values are somewhat similar to goals, especially when we compare similar themes like religious goals and religious values.So I thought I’d test this theory too, since these themes are just as easily applied to goals as to values or sources of meaning.
  • Here’s a summary of my hypotheses.Once again, here are some of the goal attainment theorists that have my back on this… Just so YOU know that I know what I’m talking about. I read Larry’s autobiography, and he says the phrase changed his life, so there you go… Might as well call this one proven already!
  • Also, to test the other theories I’ve been talking about so far, I’ll consider these moderators.
  • Purpose itemsfocus on the kind of concrete life experiences a person with or without meaning in life might relate toRather than the global sense of meaning as evaluated subjectively
  • Categories are mostly self-explanatory, so I’ll present them with their results.
  • Pretty representative of the UCR subject pool (27% of those working were also full-time students)
  • ($50K was an unfortunate choice for lower bound in my questionnaire design) (Turns out that’s the median income in America.)
  • Here’s how that compares to the national census data from the previous year. Only captured the variation within this box Butat least the data I got is about what I’d expect from a representative sample.
  • A number of people just blazed through in really unreasonable amounts of time, so I cut them out. Anyone mind if I skip the details of the cutoffs I used? (Expected time: time 1 = 75 min.; time 2 = 45 min.) (Too short: time 1 < 20 min. or time 2 < 10 min.) (Too long > 48 hrs. (disrupts measurement context))Data excluded by measure when variance = zeroOnly applied to measures with 10+ items2+ subscales in each; reverse-scored items in most (Range per measure = {0 – 18} (excluding I/E-R))Really no excuse for giving the exact same answer to that many different questionsUnless participants were just gaming the system by getting one of these drinking birds to do their work for them.
  • …so in conclusion…
  • Larry’s strategy works!He’s living proof himself!
  • Even the guerrillas get a boost in the end.And yes, that’s one myth confirmed.
  • Skip? Green are over |.5|; red are under |.3| Negative affect Subscales of psychological well-being Ryff & Keyes say are typically less related
  • Skip? Picture looks a little better at Time 2
  • Parallel analysis
  • Skip? All loadings on first rotatedfactor ≥ |.50| (Negative affect the lowest)
  • Skip? All loadings on first rotatedfactor ≥ |.47| (Negative affect the lowest)
  • One significant difference: material goals are clearly not as beneficial as others. That fits my moderation hypothesisAlso some support for prosocial and personal growth as relatively more beneficial the academic and social relationships goals fit that profileHowever, academic goals may include more extrinsic goals Social may include more hedonistic goalsAffect Control goals might be considered hedonistic, but they seem helpful hereIndependence goals might be considered personal growth-oriented, but they seem relatively unhelpfulMoral and Religious are theoretically most self-transcendent (though there’s room for debate there)Mixed support at best.
  • Also, the beta for this effect was only .02 in the full sample without applying all my exclusion criteria βGoing to skip interpretation of this effect until I can get it to replicate.
  • Again, going to skip interpretation of this effect until I can get it to replicate.
  • This scale’s ends may loop around on itselfKind of like communism and fascism on the political spectrum of left-vs.-right.Some recurring daily goals may be lifestyle valuesE.g., “Stay organized,” “pray for peace,” “relax,” etc.Fortunately, my lab’s goal taxonomy may permit validation analyses* Objective judge coding in progress!
  • Thisinteraction had almost zero effect in the full sample without using my exclusion criteria (p value = . 98)
  • In the absence of extrinsic pressure, this effect really seems to jump out.Goals that people pursue for their own reasons, whatever they are, really do seem to affect well-being.
  • With more extrinsic pressure, the well-being boost from attainment practically disappears.
  • Extrinsic works as predicted by itself…Intrinsic doesn’t go the way it’s supposed to.
  • Extrinsic works as predicted by itself…Intrinsic doesn’t go the way it’s supposed to.
  • Hypothesis 1 confirmedAlthough it’s a little inconclusive with PWB’s subscales for autonomy & purpose(Also, main effects of extrinsic reward, attainability)Hypothesis 2: basic principle supportedModeration by goal content+ Health, Academic, Social Relationships, Affect Control, Organizationns Material WealthModeration by underlying motivationExtrinsic motives nullify the goal attainment boostJust not in the direction they all said it would go…(Also, attainable goals also nullify the attainment boost, but provide their own main effect boost)
  • Demonstrates the relevance of goals to psychologicalhealth While suggesting that not all goals are equally healthy Particularly echoes mounting concerns about the detrimental effects of materialism and extrinsic motivesSupports the theory that goals are sources of meaningSupports the “A” (for attainable) in S.M.A.R.T. goal setting strategyProvides a number of replications Significance attained for overall PWB4 Replicated main effect of attainability1 Has failed to replicate before Effort interaction failed to replicate3Mixed evidence for autonomy/controlledness√ Extrinsic motives only seem to offer extrinsic benefits, if any at least in the short termØ Results of intrinsic motivation contradict theory Might be a fluke? Maybe UCR psych students spend too much time having fun already? Maybe driven by greater costs of failure to attain goals that aren’t just for funMixed evidence for theories about the content of goals and sources of meaning√ Personal growth & prosocial goals yield well-being boosts when they are attained√ extrinsic goals are just bad news in general.Ø Moral and religious goal attainment less beneficial? Religiousness is related to well-being in America Religious goals may be effects of religion, not necessarily causes of well-being
  • LimitationsOnly one quarterI still got my effect! But would it last? The effect on SWB has been shown to last, but I haven’t demonstrated that with meaning or PWBMore effects might emerge over a longer time Then again, effects might also be obscured by other life influences over longer periodsHard to distinguish between existential well-being and affective well-beingCorrelation was a little strong in this sampleParticipants’ goal ratings and categorizations may not be very accurateMany causes for concern about bias given population & method but I have some plans for getting around this I could talk about after I’m done.Need more to test across goal content & religious affiliationsGreat taxonomy for comparing goals, but some types are very rare, so subsamples are too smallSame problem with religious affiliations: diverse sample, but some affiliations are too rare for comparisons There’s reason to think religious affiliation could make a difference I’ve found that links between meaning and values are moderated by religionRecommendationsWould help establish causality if experimental interventions that boost goal attainment indirectly benefit well-beingWould be good to gather more objective evidence of well-being increasing through goal attainment Objective measures of attainment could include behavioral logs or setting milestones for achievement On the well-being side, plenty of health outcomes could be tracked Might need a little grant money for thatFinally, just a general recommendation for anyone who has a goal…
  • Other theories about good and bad goals I haven’t tested yet but can value concordance and goal coherence vs. conflictSome reason to think certain goals will be more impactful for certain personalitiesAssertion goals for introvertsReligious goals for religious peopleSocial relationship goals for people who value friendship & loveCan test dependent variables at the goal level using multilevel modelingMeaning, attainment, & self-determinationAre religious goals as attainable? How extrinsic are academic goals?Interesting questions about person-level differences that need to be separated from goal-level differencesWho has all the fun goals?How much of that variation is just due to response bias?
  • Defined at the level of global life evaluationCompletely subjective
  • More focus on concrete plans and activities, and future orientationNot necessarily how everyone would experience meaning in lifeBut it’s definitely a more concrete concept than the subjective sense of meaning in life.

2012 Presentation - Existential and Psychological Health as Products of Intrinsic Goal Attainment 2012 Presentation - Existential and Psychological Health as Products of Intrinsic Goal Attainment Presentation Transcript

  • Existential and Psychological Health as Products of Intrinsic Goal Attainment Nick Stauner Personality Assessment Lab University of California, Riverside 1
  • 2
  • OutlineIntro: existential & psychological well-being (WB)Hypothesis: goal attainment boosts all kinds of WBMethod: two-part self-report internet surveyResults: multiple regression (IV=attainment; DV=∆WB) A. Exclusion criteria B. Main effects of attainment on well-being C. Other main effects, interactions, and moderatorsRecap summary 3
  • Existential well-beingMeaning in life* • Subjective clarity & significance of one’s own life 1. “I understand my life’s meaning.” 2. “My life has a clear sense of purpose.” 3. “I have a good sense of what makes my life meaningful.” 4. “I have discovered a satisfying life purpose.” 5. “My life has no clear purpose.”*Steger, Frazier, Oishi, & Kaler, 2006 4
  • Psychological well-beingMeaning in life* • Subjective clarity & significance of one’s own lifePsychological well-being (PWB)† • Multidimensional theory of well-being 1. Environmental mastery 4. Autonomy 2. Self-acceptance 5. Positive relations 3. Purpose 6. Personal growth*Steger et al., 2006 †Ryff, 1989; Ryff & Keyes, 1995 5
  • Meaning vs. subjective well-being*• Parenthood paradox† ◦ Decreases positive affect ◦ Changes life’s meaning (?)*Baumeister, 1991 †Lyubomirsky & Boehm, 2010 6
  • Meaning vs. subjective well-being*• Parenthood paradox† ◦ Decreases positive affect ◦ Changes life’s meaning (?)• Guerrilla warfare! ◦ Not the most pleasant lifestyle one could choose… ◦ Not for the weak of conviction!*Baumeister, 1991 †Lyubomirsky & Boehm, 2010 7
  • Goals as sources of meaning“The degree and kind of meaning a person finds in life derives from the emotionally compelling qualities of the person’s goal pursuits.”*“Goals appear to be prime constituents of the meaning-making process…Goals are an important source of personal meaning…Goals are used to construct meaning.”†*Klinger, 1998 †Emmons, 1999 8
  • Effect of goal attainment on SWBAttainment increases subjective well-being* • Predicts concurrent and future changes • Short and long-termProgress increases vitality, self-actualization† • May increase psychological well-being! (p < .10)*Brunstein, 1993; Sheldon & Kasser, 1998; Sheldon & Elliot, 1999†Sheldon, Kasser, Smith, & Share, 2002 9
  • Autonomy vs. controlledness*Self-rated reasons for pursuing a goal +2 Intrinsic ◦ Fun, enjoyment, and interest in the experience +1 Identified ◦ Belief in value and importance of the goal -1 Introjected ◦ “Ought” feeling to avoid shame, guilt, or anxiety -2 Extrinsic ◦ Reward, praise, or approval from othersMain effect on SWB & attainment interaction*Sheldon & Kasser, 1995, 1998, 2001; Sheldon, Ryan, Deci, & Kasser, 2004 10
  • Intrinsic vs. extrinsic content*Goal’s self-rated help toward “possible futures” Intrinsic + Having many close and caring relationships + Being fulfilled and having a very meaningful life + Helping to make the world a better place Extrinsic - Being known and/or admired by many people - Looking good and appearing attractive to others - Getting a lucrative job and lots of nice possessionsMain effect on SWB & attainment interaction*Sheldon & Kasser, 1995, 1998, 2001; Sheldon, Ryan, Deci, & Kasser, 2004 11
  • Depth of meaning*Ordinal categorization of sources of meaning1. Hedonistic pleasure & comfort2. Personal potential, growth, creativity, & self-actualization3. Service to others and commitment to a larger societal or political cause4. Transcend individuality and encompass cosmic meaning and ultimate purpose*Reker & Wong, 1988; Reker, 2000 12
  • Hypotheses1. Goal attainment boosts psychological well- being and meaning in life. 13
  • Hypotheses1. Goal attainment boosts psychological well- being and meaning in life.2. Effects are stronger from goals that are: A. Autonomously motivated ◦ More enjoyable, important, & meaningful ◦ Less obligatory or extrinsically rewarded B. Intrinsically oriented and deeply meaningful ◦ More prosocial & self-transcendent ◦ Less materialistic or self-indulgent 14
  • Subjective Well-Being & MeaningPositive and Negative Affect Schedule* • Amount of 20 emotions in past few weeks ◦ E.g., “Strong,” “Afraid,” rated 1 – 5Satisfaction with Life Scale† • 5 cognitive evaluations of global life satisfaction ◦ E.g., “I am satisfied with my life,” rated 1 – 7Meaning in Life Questionnaire‡ – Presence • 5 cognitive evaluations of global life meaning ◦ E.g., “My life has no clear purpose,” rated 1 – 7*Watson, Tellegen, & Clark, 1988†Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985; ‡Steger et al., 2006 15
  • Subjective Well-Being & MeaningPositive and Negative Affect Schedule* • Amount of 20 emotions in past few weeks ◦ E.g., “Strong,” “Afraid,” rated 1 – 5Satisfaction with Life Scale† • 5 cognitive evaluations of global life satisfaction ◦ E.g., “I am satisfied with my life,” rated 1 – 7Meaning in Life Questionnaire‡ – Presence • 5 cognitive evaluations of global life meaning ◦ E.g., “My life has no clear purpose,” rated 1 – 7*Watson, Tellegen, & Clark, 1988†Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985; ‡Steger et al., 2006 16
  • Psychological Well-Being*6 subscales of 9 items each, rated 1 – 6 (forced) 1. Environmental mastery (-) “I often feel overwhelmed by my responsibilities.” 2. Self-acceptance (+) “In general, I feel confident and positive about myself.” 3. Purpose (-) “My daily activities often seem trivial and unimportant to me.” 4. Autonomy (-) “I tend to be influenced by people with strong opinions.” 5. Positive relations (+) “I know I can trust my friends, and they know they can trust me.” 6. Personal growth (-) “I am not interested in activities that will expand my horizons.”*Springer & Hauser, 2006; Ryff, 1989; Ryff & Keyes, 1995 17
  • ProcedureTime 1: 75-min. survey at quarter’s beginning • Well-being measured • Goals listed and rated • Lots of other personality measures…*Time 2: 45-min. follow-up at quarter’s end Well-being measured again Time 1 goals embedded & rated retrospectively*Stay tuned for many more results in the future! 18
  • Goal assessmentList 10 goals and why they’re being pursued • E.g., “Save money for a conference.” ◦ Why? “Because the hotel is expensive!”“Categorize your goals” task (8 categories)Goal ratings* (mostly scaled 1 – 4) Time 1: intrinsic, identified, introjected, extrinsic pressure, extrinsic reward, etc…. Time 2: progress + success = “attainment”*List is not comprehensive; excludes those without hypotheses. 19
  • Participants407 undergraduates at UC Riverside• Young adults (M = 19.6 | SD = 2.3 | range = {17 – 44} )• 69% female (282 females, 125 males)• Ethnically diverse & representative of UCR population 42% East Asian 27% Hispanic or Latino 14% European 6% African 5% Western or South Asian 5% multiracial• Religion: mostly Christian, unaffiliated, or unknown 51% Christian 22% atheist/agnostic/no affiliation 15% missing 8% Buddhist 2% Muslim 1% Hindu 2% other• 43% freshmen, 24% sophomores, 24% juniors, 8% seniors, 6 others• 89% full-timers (Mean credits = 13 | SD = 4)• 58% single (238 singles | 159 spoken for | 12 it’s-complicateds)• 29% working: mean hrs. = 15, SD = 9 20
  • Family income bracket frequencies200 185160120 7980 49 51 4040 0 <$50K <$75K <$100K <$125K >$125K 21
  • 22
  • Exclusion criteriaAttrition • 11.5% (47 didn’t return for time 2)Completion time • 12.5% (45 excluded)Inter-item invariance: • 20% (63 partially excluded)Applied before performing any other analyses 23
  • Main effects of goal attainment*Multiple regression to predict well-being change • Predictors = time 1 well-being & time 2 attainment • Dependent = time 2 well-beingSubjective well-being (SWB) SWB = Life Satisfaction + Positive Affect - Negative Affect Predictor β p Time 1 SWB .64 < 2 x 10-16 Attainment .17 < .0002 • Successful replication of the goal attainment boost†*All df = {266 – 276} †Sheldon & Elliot, 1999 24
  • Main effects of goal attainment*Multiple regression to predict well-being change • Predictors = time 1 well-being & time 2 attainment • Dependent = time 2 well-beingSubjective well-being: Attainment β = .17, p < .001 **Whitney, 2006 25
  • Main effects of goal attainment*Multiple regression to predict well-being change • Predictors = time 1 well-being & time 2 attainment • Dependent = time 2 well-beingSubjective well-being: Attainment β = .17, p < .001Psychological well-being (PWB) Predictor β p Time 1 PWB .80 < 2 x 10-16 Attainment .10 < .004*All df = {266 – 276} 26
  • Main effects of goal attainment*Multiple regression to predict well-being change • Predictors = time 1 well-being & time 2 attainment • Dependent = time 2 well-beingSubjective well-being: Attainment β = .17, p < .001Psychological well-being: Attain. β = .10, p < .004Meaning in life Predictor β p Time 1 Meaning .69 < 2 x 10-16 Attainment .10 < .03*All df = {266 – 276} 27
  • Main effects of goal attainment*Multiple regression to predict well-being change • Predictors = time 1 well-being & time 2 attainment • Dependent = time 2 well-beingSubjective well-being: Attainment β = .17, p < .001Psychological well-being: Attain. β = .10, p < .004Meaning in life: Attainment β = .10, p < .03 Hypothesis 1:*All df = {266 – 276} 28
  • Main effects of goal attainment*Predictor β pPsychological well-being .10 < .004 Environmental mastery .18 < .000008 Self-acceptance .15 < .0002 Positive relations .08 < .04 Personal growth .10 < .04 Autonomy .06 .11 Purpose .05 .22*All df = {266 – 276} 29
  • Well-being compositeWell-being unidimensional at the subscale level ◦ Most subscale correlations > .50 in magnitude 30
  • Correlations of well-being indices*Time 1 index NA SWLS ML-P EM SA Purp. PR PG Auto.Positive Affect -.15 .52 .55 .50 .60 .61 .47 .44 .37Negative Affect (NA) -.29 -.24 -.54 -.44 -.29 -.40 -.21 -.31Life Satisfaction (SWLS) .57 .59 .71 .46 .56 .23 .34Meaning in Life (ML-P) .51 .61 .64 .46 .34 .46Environmental Mastery (EM) .76 .60 .62 .42 .52Self-Acceptance (SA) .62 .64 .40 .51Purpose (Purp.) .47 .62 .49Positive Relations (PR) .40 .36Personal growth (PG) .46Autonomy (Auto.) *N = 290. All ps < .02. Time 1 only. |r| > .50 = green; |r| < .30 = red 31
  • Correlations of well-being indices*Time 2 index NA SWLS ML-P EM SA Purp. PR PG Auto.Positive Affect -.14 .42 .47 .53 .55 .51 .45 .38 .36Negative Affect (NA) -.29 -.21 -.46 -.39 -.31 -.40 -.22 -.27Life Satisfaction (SWLS) .47 .61 .68 .44 .55 .31 .37Meaning in Life (ML-P) .52 .55 .62 .45 .45 .42Environmental Mastery (EM) .77 .62 .66 .51 .56Self-Acceptance (SA) .68 .69 .49 .56Purpose (Purp.) .54 .67 .59Positive Relations (PR) .53 .46Personal growth (PG) .54Autonomy (Auto.) *N = 270. All ps < .03. Time 2 only. |r| > .50 = green; |r| < .30 = red 32
  • Well-being compositeWell-being unidimensional at the subscale level ◦ Most subscale correlations > .50 in magnitude ◦ Parallel analysis and scree plot indicate one factor 33
  • Time 1 parallel analysis scree plot* Eigenvalues*N = 290 Factors 34
  • Time 2 parallel analysis scree plot* Eigenvalues*N = 270 Factors 35
  • Well-being compositeWell-being unidimensional at the subscale level ◦ Most subscale correlations > .50 in magnitude ◦ Parallel analysis and scree plot indicate one factor • Standardized and summed 3 types of well-being: 1. Subjective well-being (SWLS + PA - NA) 2. Psychological well-being (sum of 6 subscales) 3. Presence of meaning in life • T2 composite well-being from T1 & attainment: ◦ Attainment β = .12, p < .002 • Used in all results presented henceforth 36
  • Moderation by goal content Self-categorized type* Attainment β p df1. Health .15 <.001 1972. Academic .11 <.004 2723. Social Relationships .10 <.01 2694. Affect Control .11 <.02 1635. Organization .13 <.03 996. Moral and Religious .06 .21 1367. Independence .05 .26 1868. Material Wealth -.03 .57 172*Objective judge coding in progress for validation purposes. 37
  • Main effects of goal characteristicsPredicting T2 well-being from T1 well-being and…Extrinsic reward: β = -.09, p < .02 ◦ “Are you pursuing this goal because you hope to gain some material possession or reward (e.g., a car, money, a high-paying job, a better place to live, etc.), or to avoid losing a material possession?”Probability of success: β = .11, p < .02 ◦ “What are your chances of succeeding in this goal?”Importance*: β = .09, p < .05 ◦ “Do you pursue this goal because you really believe it’s an important goal to have?”Investment*: β = .09, p < .05 ◦ “How willing are you to invest time, money, or effort to achieve this goal?”*Distributions of importance & investment are negatively skewed. 38
  • Effect of self-rated goal importance on well-being change Change in well-being Importance (β = .09, p = .04, n = 183) 39
  • Effect of self-rated goal investment on well-being change Change in well-being Investment (β = .09, p = .04, n = 202) 40
  • Main effect of time frameβ = .08, p < .03 • “What is your time frame for accomplishing this goal?” 5 4 3 2 1Enduring life goal Next few Next few Short term Day-to-day or guiding value years months goal (e.g., “make the (more than 1 (less than 1 (less than 1 (e.g., “take out most of life”) year) year) month) the trash”)Interpret cautiously • Some extreme goals may fit both extremes! 41
  • Interactions with goal characteristics*Extrinsic pressure x attainment: β = -.09, p < .05 • “Do you pursue this goal because someone else wants you to, or because the situation demands it?”*All df = {183 – 265} 42
  • Standardized effects of goal attainment & extrinsic motivation on well-being change Change in well-being Attainment (df = 183) 43
  • Standardized effects of goal attainment & extrinsic motivation on well-being change Change in well-being Attainment (df = 183) 44
  • Standardized effects of goal attainment & extrinsic motivation on well-being change Change in well-being Attainment (df = 183) 45
  • Interactions with goal characteristics*Extrinsic pressure x attainment: β = -.09, p < .05 • “Do you pursue this goal because someone else wants you to, or because the situation demands it?”Intrinsic x attainment: β = -.06, p < .06 • “Do you pursue this goal for the fun and enjoyment that it provides you?”*All df = {183 – 265} 46
  • Standardized effects of goal attainment & intrinsic motivation on well-being change Change in well-being Attainment (df = 265) 47
  • Standardized effects of goal attainment & intrinsic motivation on well-being change Change in well-being Attainment (df = 265) 48
  • Standardized effects of goal attainment & intrinsic motivation on well-being change Change in well-being Attainment (df = 265) 49
  • Interactions with goal characteristics*Extrinsic pressure x attainment: β = -.09, p < .05 • “Do you pursue this goal because someone else wants you to, or because the situation demands it?”Intrinsic x attainment: β = -.06, p < .06 • “Do you pursue this goal for the fun and enjoyment that it provides you?”Attainability x attainment: β = -.07, p < .05 • “What are your chances of succeeding in this goal?”*All df = {183 – 265} 50
  • Standardized effects of goal attainment & attainability on well-being change Change in well-being Attainment (df = 220) 51
  • Standardized effects of goal attainment & attainability on well-being change Change in well-being Attainment (df = 220) 52
  • Standardized effects of goal attainment & attainability on well-being change Change in well-being Attainment (df = 220) 53
  • ConclusionsGoal attainment boosts meaning & PWB • Hypothesis 1 confirmed!Goal attainment effect on well-being is moderated by goal content and motivation • Hypothesis 2 partially supported 54
  • Theoretical implicationsThe goal attainment process builds and links positive, existential, and motive psychologyMixed evidence for/against moderator theories • Autonomy/controlledness of motivation* • Intrinsic/extrinsic goal orientation* • Depth of meaning†*Sheldon & Kasser, 1995, 1998, 2001; Sheldon, Ryan, Deci, & Kasser, 2004†Reker & Wong, 1988; Reker, 2000 55
  • Limitations & recommendationsLimitations • Short time span • Difficulty distinguishing existential from affective well-being • Subjectivity of goal ratings & categorizations • N too small to split by goal content or religious affiliationsRecommendations • Experimental goal interventions* to reinforce causal claims • Behavioral logs & health outcomes to assess effect objectively*E.g., Sheldon, Kasser, Smith, & Share, 2002 56
  • PHIN 57
  • Planned analysesObjective criteria of goal categories, depth of meaning, value concordance, coherence & conflictAttainment interactions with goal content & personality traitsExploration of quadratic effectsMultilevel modeling of differences among goals • Meaning, attainment, & self-determination at the goal level • Person-level differences in ratings as dependent variable 58
  • Meaning vs. PWB-Purpose1. I understand my life’s meaning2. My life has a clear sense of purpose3. I have a good sense of what makes my life meaningful4. I have discovered a satisfying life purpose5. My life has no clear purpose 59
  • Meaning vs. PWB-Purpose1. I enjoy making plans for the future and working to make them a reality2. My daily activities often seem trivial and unimportant to me3. I am an active person in carrying out the plans I set for myself4. I tend to focus on the present, because the future nearly always brings me problems5. I don’t have a good sense of what it is I am trying to accomplish in life6. I sometimes feel as if I’ve done all there is to do in life7. I used to set goals for myself, but that now seems like a waste of time8. Some people wander aimlessly through life but I am not one of them9. I live life one day at a time and don’t really think about the future 60