Mental Contrasting Effects on Goal Commitment Mediated by Perceptual Change of RealityAndreas Kappes1, Henrik Singmann1 & Gabriele Oettingen1,2

1 University of Hamburg 2 New York University

Poster presented at the Inaugural Meeting of the Society for the Study of Motivation in Chicago, IL, May 2008

SummaryMental contrasting, rather than reverse contrasting or dwelling leads high-expectancy participants to perceive the reality as standing in the way of the positive future. Importantly, this perceptual change of the negative reality mediated the expectancy-commitment relation in the mental contrasting condition.

Mental Contrasting: A Self-Regulatory Strategy forSuccessful Goal SettingA long tradition of research suggests that people commit to goals that are desirable and feasible. Fantasy Realization Theory (Oettingen, 2000) spells out the self-regulatory strategy that translates feasibility (i.e., expectations of success) into goal commitment: Mental contrasting of a positive future with the negative reality that stands in the way of realizing the positive future. When people have high expectations of success, they form strong goal commitments; when people have low expectations of success, they form weak commitments (e.g., Oettingen, Pak, & Schnetter, 2001). To the contrary, when people contrast the negative reality with the positive future (i.e., reverse contrasting), expectations of success are not translated into goal commitment.The Present ResearchInvestigating how mental contrasting achieves its commitment-inducing effects, we hypothesize that mental contrasting produces an expectancy-dependent perceptual change of the negative reality. When expectations of success are high, people assured to be able to realize the positive future, should perceived the negative reality as an obstacles that needs to be overcome in order to realize the positive reality. This perceptual change should then foster their goal commitment. In contrast, when expectations of success are low, people assured not to be able to realize the positive future, should not perceive the negative reality as an obstacle anymore. This perceptual change should then weaken their goal commitment.

1.Positive Future

2. Negative Reality 2. Positive Future

1. Negative Reality 1. Negative Reality

2. Negative Reality

Mental Contrasting Reverse Contrasting Dwelling

Induction of the Experimental Conditions Participants elaborated:

Perceptual Change IndicatorPerceived pleasantness of the impeding reality: Please rate the pleasantness of you impeding reality aspect, using the provided scale. (7-point semantic differential scale, ranging from pleasant to unpleasant)

Goal Commitment Indicators (7-point scales)Time 1: Anticipated DisappointmentHow disappointed would you be if you do not achieve the wished-for grade? Time 2 (14 days later): Persistence in Goal Striving How intensely did you study this week for this particular final exam?How much effort did you invest in studying this week for this particular final exam?How focused were you on studying this week for this particular final exam?

MethodsParticipants: 121 New York University students

Wished-For Grade: Which grade do you wish to receive on the final exam of this class?Expectations of Success: How likely do you think it is that you will get the wished-for grade? (7-point scale)Importance of the wished-for grade: How important is it for you to receive the wished-for grade?Desired Future: Please list two positive aspects that you associate with achieving the wished-for gradeImpeding Reality: Now, please list tow negative aspects that stand in the way of achieving the wished for grade.

Mediation in the Mental Contrasting Condition

ResultsPerceptual ChangeParticipants in the mental contrasting evaluated the impeding reality in line with their expectations of success Participants in the reverse contrasting and in the dwelling condition did not.

ReferencesOettingen, G. (2000). Expectancy effects on behavior depend on self-

regulatorythought. Social Cognition, 18, 101-129Oettingen, G., Pak, H., & Schnetter, K. (2001). Self-regulation of goal-setting: Turning

free fantasies about the future into binding goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 736-753.

Oettingen, G., & Thorpe, J. (2006). Fantasy realization and the bridging of time. In L. J. Sanna & E. C. Chang (Eds.), Judgments over time: The interplay of thoughts, feelings, and behaviors (pp. 120-142). New York: Oxford University Press

Expectation

Perceptual Change

Disappointment

β = .62** β = .-65**

β = .13

(β = .50**)

Expectation

Perceptual Change

Persistence

β = .62** β = .42*

β = .17

(β = .38*)

Goal CommitmentParticipants in the mental contrasting reported expectancy-dependent effects on anticipated disappointment and persistence in goal striving. Participants in the reverse contrasting and in the dwelling condition did not.

AbstractThe self-regulatory strategy of mentally contrasting a positive future with negative reality produces expectancy-dependent goal commitments; elaborating reality only, or reality and then future does not. Investigating underlying processes, we found that the expectancy-dependent effects of mental contrasting on goal commitment (measured via anticipated disappointment and persistence in goal striving two weeks later) are mediated by the perceptual change of the reality as standing in the way of the desired future (measured via pleasantness ratings of the reality).