Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate whether hesitant or preoccupied people (state-oriented) have different goal content and motives compared to initiative or disengaged people (action-oriented). People rated the degree of autonomous versus controlled feelings for extrinsic or intrinsic types of goals. Results showed that action-oriented people had a higher autonomous motive than state-oriented people for intrinsic goals, but not for extrinsic goals. Moreover, action-oriented individuals were related to a more internalised goal content (intrinsic goal) than state-oriented individuals. Implications for goal internalisation are discussed.
Highlights
Speaking, self-regulation involves the psychological processes that allow individuals to adjust their thoughts, actions, and feelings to align with their standards, goals, and values (Carver & Scheier, 2001)
The current study aims to explore whether action-state oriented people have different informed introjections that can be directly assessed by intrinsic goal content and goal motive questionnaires
We investigated whether extrinsic versus intrinsic goal contents would differ in the average degree of autonomy (Au-ex vs. Au-in)
Summary
Self-regulation involves the psychological processes that allow individuals to adjust their thoughts, actions, and feelings to align with their standards, goals, and values (Carver & Scheier, 2001). According to Kuhl’s action control theory, action- and state-oriented people may have different goal internalisation processes (Kuhl, 2001; Kuhl & Kazen, 1994; Kuhl, Quirin, & Koole, 2015). 1991; Ryan, 1995; Sheldon & Kasser, 2008; Sheldon, Ryan, Deci, & Kasser, 2004); these values and goals of social expectations are congruent with the heart of self-identity, whereas the informed and misinformed introjections are not. Both informed and misinformed introjections are less concerned with internalisation goals and are less self-determined As they lack autonomy, they may be often not be supported by one’s actual feelings and may even conflict with implicit needs and preferences (Kuhl & Kazen, 1994; Thomsen, Tønnesvang, Schnieber, & Olesen, 2011). Action control theory posits that action-state oriented people have different misinformed and informed introjections, there remains a paucity of empirical evidence on informed introjections
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
