Regulatory Focus Questionnaire Research Articles

The effect of parental regulatory focus on the loneliness stigma of college children

BackgroundThe present study aimed to examine the relationship between regulatory focus and loneliness stigma, as well as the intergenerational transmission of the two. Specifically, the study analyzed the effects of fathers’ and mothers’ regulatory focus on their own and their spouses’ stigma of loneliness. In addition, a mediation model was constructed to explore how parents’ regulatory focus influences their children’s stigma of loneliness and the potential mediating mechanisms involved.MethodsQuestionnaires were distributed to 470 college students and their parents, employing the Regulatory Focus Questionnaire (RFQ) and the Stigma of Loneliness Scale (SLS) to collect data.ResultsThe analysis of intergenerational transmission effects revealed that parents’ regulatory focus and loneliness stigma significantly and positively predicted children’s regulatory focus and loneliness stigma, respectively. The Actor-Partner Interdependence Model (APIM) elucidated that both fathers’ and mothers’ promotion focus exerted significant influence on both actor and partner’s loneliness stigma. Furthermore, the mediation model analysis indicated that parents’ loneliness stigma, along with children’s regulatory focus operate as mediators in the influence of parental regulatory focus on loneliness stigma of their college-aged offspring.ConclusionsFrom a familial context, this study, investigated the association between regulatory focus and loneliness stigma, along with the mediating roles within parent-child groups and couples. The findings enhanced our comprehension of the interrelation between regulatory focus and loneliness stigma, underpinned by empirical evidence.

INVESTIGATING PSYCHOLOGICAL FACTORS AS A PREDICTOR OF FEAR OF FALLING AND FALL RISK IN OLDER ADULTS

Abstract Psychological factors related to appetitive and avoidant motivation, perceptions of aging, and regulatory focus (promotion focus on gains versus a prevention focus on non-losses) are likely to play an important role in predicting one’s fear of falling (FOF) and resulting impact on physical activity engagement. This pilot study aimed to investigate the gap in current research related to these psychological factors as predictors of older adults’ Fear of Falling and Fall Risk Appraisal (FRA). The study assessed positive and negative perceptions about aging in regards to control and consequences of aging (Brief Aging Perceptions Questionnaire [B-APQ]), motivation (Behavioral Inhibition System/Behavioral Activation system [BIS/BAS]), regulatory focus in goal achievement (Regulatory Focus Questionnaire [RFQ]), FOF (Fall-Efficacy Scale-International [FES-I]), and static balance levels (BTracks Balance system [BBS]). Participants (n=48) were categorized into four FRA groups: rational (low FOF/normal balance), irrational (high FOF/normal balance), incongruent (low FOF/poor balance), and congruent (high FOF/poor balance). A Spearman Rho correlation found that FOF was positively correlated with two of the BAPQ sub-domains of Control-Positive (ρ = 0.46, p<.001) and Consequences and Control Negative (ρ = 0.43, p =.002),. A Kruskal-Wallis test found the relationship between BAPQ Control Positive and the Irrational and Rational FRA group baselines to be significant. The results suggest that among other psychological factors, perceptions about aging may be predictive of FOF and FRA in aging. These results highlight the importance of clinicians addressing not only the physiological factors of fall risk, but also the psychological factors underlying fall risk in older adults.

Applying Regulatory Focus Theory to Encourage Weight Loss in a Self-directed Intervention.

Regulatory focus theory proposes two self-regulatory systems: promotion focus-related to fulfilling aspirations and maximizing positive outcomes-and prevention focus-related to fulfilling responsibilities and avoiding negative outcomes. Building on research demonstrating associations between regulatory focus and weight outcomes, a proof-of-concept weight control intervention framed intervention procedures in terms of promotion or prevention focus and descriptively examined whether the impact of the intervention conditions depended on dispositional regulatory focus. After random assignment to control (received pamphlet on diet and physical activity), promotion, or prevention conditions (1.5-hour baseline sessions; detailed manuals; 1-hour sessions at 3 months), community participants from a metropolitan area in the United States (N = 57; age M = 40; BMI M = 30.9) completed the Regulatory Focus Questionnaire and were weighed at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. Longitudinal analysis was conducted with SAS Proc Mixed using restricted maximum likelihood estimation. Estimated weight change was -2.99 kg, 95% CI [-4.65, -1.32], in the promotion condition, -1.70 kg, 95% CI [-3.29, -0.12], in the prevention condition, and -0.18 kg, 95% CI [-1.42, 1.05], in the control condition. Exploratory analyses revealed that for relatively more promotion-focused participants, estimated weight change was -1.43 kg, 95% CI [-3.38, 0.51], in the promotion condition, +0.48 kg, 95% CI [-1.01, 1.97], in the prevention condition, and -1.09 kg, 95% CI [-2.32, 0.14], in the control condition. For relatively more prevention-focused participants, estimated weight change was -5.19 kg, 95% CI [-7.14, -3.25], in the promotion condition, -3.35 kg, 95% CI [-4.83, -1.86], in the prevention condition, and +0.42 kg, 95% CI [-0.81, 1.65], in the control condition. Results suggest that self-directed, promotion-focused interventions may be effective and that tailoring to self-regulatory dispositions may not be of additional benefit in initiating weight loss.

Development of the Japanese Version of the Regulatory Focus Questionnaire

Development of the Japanese Version of the Regulatory Focus Questionnaire

Motivation and Second Language Pragmatics: A Regulatory Focus Perspective.

This study investigates how learners’ chronic motivational characteristics, that is their regulatory focus (Higgins, 1997), can account for differences in L2 pragmatic production in general and across situations with different levels of power, social distance, and imposition. One-hundred-twenty-one L1-Mandarin learners of English as a second language completed a regulatory focus questionnaire and a discourse completion task focusing on two types of speech acts: request and opinion. Multiple regression results showed that learners’ promotion focus, concerned with advancement, growth, accomplishments, positively predicted their pragmatic production in general, and especially in situations where the learner is subject to a higher degree of imposition, has lower power and is socially distant from the interlocutor. On the other hand, the prevention focus, which is concerned with safety, security, and calmness, negatively predicted pragmatic production, especially in those situations. The findings provide support for the role of motivational dispositions in the level of learners’ L2 pragmatic competence. Theoretical and instructional implications are discussed.

Regulatory Focus, Motivation, and Their Relationship With Creativity Among Adolescents.

Due to the close relationship among intrinsic/extrinsic motivation, regulatory focus, and creativity revealed by previous literature, intrinsic/extrinsic motivation may play a mediating role between regulatory focus and creativity. Therefore, the present study aimed to investigate the relationship between regulatory focus and creativity by combining intrinsic/extrinsic motivation. In this study, senior high school students (n = 418) completed the Regulatory Focus Questionnaire, the Working Preference Inventory, the Williams Creativity Assessment Packet, and the Kirton Adaption–Innovation Inventory. The correlation analysis showed that both promotion and prevention focus positively correlated with intrinsic motivation; intrinsic motivation and promotion focus positively correlated with creativity personality and innovative-adaptive cognitive style; and extrinsic motivation and prevention focus negatively correlated with innovative–adaptive cognitive style. Furthermore, a path model showed that promotion focus positively predicted creativity through the mediation of intrinsic motivation. In general, our study suggests that intrinsic motivation plays a mediating role between promotion focus and creativity. Our results complement those of previous studies and serve as inspiration for the cultivation of creativity in classroom or enterprise settings.

Does a Patient's Approach to Achieving Goals Influence His or Her Recovery Trajectory After Musculoskeletal Illness?

The regulatory focus theory posits that, in general, people tend to be predominantly "promotion focused" or "prevention focused", and each individual's values and motivations influence which approach he or she may use when pursuing personal goals. People who are primarily promotion focused mostly see goals as opportunities to gain or advance (that is, play to win); people who are prevention focused mostly see goals as opportunities to stay safe (that is, play not to lose). Understanding the role of regulatory focus in the recovery of patients with orthopaedic conditions could provide novel insight into how surgeons can best communicate with patients to improve how they recover from illness or injury. Are improvements in pain intensity and disability over 6 months associated with a patient's levels of promotion focus or prevention focus? In this longitudinal observational study, we enrolled 144 patients with an upper extremity orthopaedic illness at a tertiary teaching hospital and followed them for 6 months. At baseline, patients completed validated self-reported measures of regulatory focus (Regulatory Focus Questionnaire), pain (Numerical Rating Scale), disability (the QuickDASH), and demographics. Assessments were repeated 6 months later, with 76% (110 of 144) of patients completing follow-up assessments. We examined whether regulatory focus was associated with recovery outcomes (level of pain and disability at 6 months). The patient's regulatory focus was graded as two numerical scores on separate promotion-focus and prevention-focus continuums. Each individual received a score on promotion focus and one on prevention focus.. An individual's level of promotion (ΔR = 0.021; p = 0.03; small effect size), but not his or her level of prevention (ΔR = 0.003; p = 0.35; negligible effect size), was associated with improvement in disability over a 6-month period (R = 0.61; p < 0.001). Patients with high promotion (n = 20, b = 0.284; p = 0.001) had the greatest improvements in disability after 6 months compared with patients with moderate (n = 73, b = 0.422; p < 0.001) or low (n = 17, b = 0.561; p < 0.001) promotion. The levels of promotion (b = -0.22; p = 0.09) and prevention (b = -0.04; p = 0.65) were not associated with pain over time. To support improvements in disability for patients with upper extremity orthopaedic conditions, surgeons' communication strategies, including explanations of diagnoses and recovery trajectories, should focus on increasing patients' level of promotion (for example, by emphasizing gains and promoting positive thinking), rather than prevention (for example, by providing reassurance and problem-solving what might go wrong). Level II, prognostic study.

Alignment of Personality Is Associated With Increased Intraoperative Entrustment.

To determine the association between intraoperative entrustment and personality alignment. For surgical residents, achieving operative autonomy has become increasingly difficult. The impact of faculty-resident operative interactions in accomplishing this goal is not well understood. We hypothesized that if operative dyads (faculty and resident) had personality alignment or congruency, then resident entrustment in the operating room would increase. We completed a retrospective analysis of 63 operations performed from September 2015 to August 2016. Operations were scored using OpTrust, a validated tool that assesses progressive entrustment of responsibility to surgical residents in the operating room. All dyads were classified as having congruent or incongruent personality alignment as measured by promotion or prevention orientation using the regulatory focus questionnaire. The association between personality congruence and OpTrust scores was identified using multivariable linear regression. A total of 35 congruent dyads and 28 incongruent dyads were identified. Congruent dyads had a higher percentage of "very difficult" cases (33.3 vs. 7.4%, P = 0.017), female residents (37.1 vs. 14.3%, P = 0.042) and faculty with fewer years of experience (10.4 vs. 14.8%, P = 0.028) than incongruent dyads. In addition to post-graduate year level, dyad congruency was independently associated with a 0.88 increase (95% CI [0.27-1.49], P = 0.006) in OpTrust scores (overall range 2-8), after adjusting for case difficulty, faculty experience, and post-graduate year. Congruent operative dyads are associated with increased operative entrustment as demonstrated by increased OpTrust scores. Developing awareness and strategies for addressing incongruence in personality in the operative dyad is needed.

Reliability and Validity of Regulatory Focus Questionnaire for Japanese

Reliability and Validity of Regulatory Focus Questionnaire for Japanese

Role of regulatory focus in the asymmetric perception of gains versus nonlosses and of losses versus nongains

We tested the effects of regulatory focus on the asymmetric perception of losses versus nongains and of gains versus nonlosses. In Experiment 1, situational regulatory focus was manipulated by a priming task and then participants evaluated the outcome fairness of different distribution scenarios. In Experiment 2, participants completed the Regulatory Focus Questionnaire and then evaluated the outcome fairness of various distribution scenarios. Results showed that: (a) The gains versus nonlosses asymmetry in perceived fairness was stronger with a situational promotion focus, and the losses versus nongains asymmetry in perceived unfairness was stronger with a situational prevention focus; (b) The losses versus nongains asymmetry in perceived unfairness was stronger with a chronic prevention focus, whereas the gains versus nonlosses asymmetry in perceived fairness was positive with both a chronic promotion focus and chronic prevention focus. Taken together, the findings demonstrate that a situational regulatory focus has more extensive effects than does a chronic regulatory focus on asymmetric perceptions of outcomes. These results offer insights for understanding the differences between chronic and situational regulatory focus.

Followers' Perception of Leadership Style, Organizational Commitment and Regulatory Focus, Moderated by Organizational Types

Research hypotheses assumed that a positive connection would be found between transformational leadership, on one hand, and affective commitment and focus on promotion, on the other. It was also assumed that this connection would be stronger in coercive organizations. Furthermore, the research hypotheses assumed there would be positive connections between transactional leadership, on one hand, and continuance commitment and focus on prevention, on the other; stronger in utilitarian organizations. 82 employees of coercive organizations and 80 employees of utilitarian organizations participated in this study using the MLQ questionnaire, an organizational commitment questionnaire, and a regulatory focus questionnaire. It was found that the more a leader is perceived by followers as having a transformational style, the more followers will feel affective commitment toward the organization and the more they will focus on promotion and successes. Moreover, the more a leader is perceived as a transactional leader followers will feel more continuance commitment and be more focused on preventing failures. The moderation model by type of organization was confirmed. Difference between the connections noted above in coercive organizations as compared to utilitarian organizations was found.

MOTIVATION AS QUALITY

AbstractThe study examined the predictions of regulatory fit theory (Higgins, 2000) in relation to task-based incidental vocabulary learning. A total of 189 English as a second language learners completed a vocabulary pretest, a regulatory focus questionnaire, an integrated reading/writing task, and finally an unannounced vocabulary posttest. The participants were randomly assigned to two task conditions. In the gain condition, they started the task with zero points and had to gain 75 points to enter a drawing to win one of three $100 gift cards; in the loss condition, they started with 100 points and had to avoid losing more than 25 points. Multiple regression results partly supported the regulatory fit predictions. Prevention individuals learned significantly more vocabulary items in the loss condition than in the gain condition; but promotion individuals did not learn significantly more vocabulary items in the gain condition than in the loss condition. Theoretical and pedagogical implications, and future research directions are discussed.

Followers' Perception of Leadership Style, Organizational Commitment and Regulatory Focus, Moderated by Organizational Types

Research hypotheses assumed that a positive connection would be found between transformational leadership, on one hand, and affective commitment and focus on promotion, on the other. It was also assumed that this connection would be stronger in coercive organizations. Furthermore, the research hypotheses assumed there would be positive connections between transactional leadership, on one hand, and continuance commitment and focus on prevention, on the other; stronger in utilitarian organizations. 82 employees of coercive organizations and 80 employees of utilitarian organizations participated in this study using the MLQ questionnaire, an organizational commitment questionnaire, and a regulatory focus questionnaire. It was found that the more a leader is perceived by followers as having a transformational style, the more followers will feel affective commitment toward the organization and the more they will focus on promotion and successes. Moreover, the more a leader is perceived as a transactional leader followers will feel more continuance commitment and be more focused on preventing failures. The moderation model by type of organization was confirmed. Difference between the connections noted above in coercive organizations as compared to utilitarian organizations was found.

Gain +1 or Avoid \u22121: Validation of the German Regulatory Focus Questionnaire (RFQ)

BackgroundThe Regulatory Focus Questionnaire (RFQ) assesses regulatory promotion and prevention focus, which represent orientations towards gains or losses. The main objective of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the newly translated German version.MethodsA sample of 1024 participants answered the questionnaire and several related instruments. We used an online survey tool to collect this data. Data analysis was conducted using methods of exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis in SPSS and AMOS.ResultsThe RFQ displayed acceptable reliability, while its correlations with other, related psychological constructs indicated good validity. Factor analysis showed good fit for a two-dimensional model. Tests of measurement invariance revealed clear evidence for metric invariance while scalar invariance remained uncertain. Differences in regulatory focus based on sociodemographic characteristics are reported and discussed.ConclusionsOverall, the RFQ can be recommended for application in fields dealing with motivation and goal attainment in a broad sense.

Measuring chronic regulatory focus with proverbs: The developmental and psychometric properties of a French scale

The purpose of the present research is to design a new self-report questionnaire to assess individuals' orientations toward their goals based on the regulatory focus theory. This theory distinguishes self-regulation with a promotion focus from self-regulation with a prevention focus. Our questionnaire is different from the existing Regulatory Focus Questionnaire (RFQ) in that our questionnaire enables participants to self-report their actions with items that are proverbs and sayings. Three studies were conducted to examine the reliability and validity of the Regulatory Focus Questionnaire – Proverbs Form (RFQ-PF). The first study involved creating a list of items leading to a preliminary version of the RFQ-PF. In the second study, 343 French participants were surveyed to test the factor structure of the RFQ-PF and to select the final items leading to an 18-item inventory.This tool comprises two reliable subscales: (a) Prevention and (b) Promotion, with adequate internal consistency. Using confirmatory factor analysis, this two-factor structure was discussed in the third study (n=277). The RFQ-PF's convergent validity was also confirmed. These findings suggest that the RFQ-PF may be useful as a measure of dispositional regulatory focus in self-report models.

The reliability of psychological instruments in community samples: A cautionary note.

Although researchers norm and validate measures of psychological constructs largely on educated samples, they often use these instruments more broadly, assuming generalizability. We examined whether the assumption of generalizability is warranted. We administered three commonly used psychological measures-the Behavioral Activation/Behavioral Inhibition Scale, the Regulatory Focus Questionnaire, and the Need for Cognition Scale-to a community sample (N = 332) with limited education. For the three instruments, five of seven scales/subscales had unsatisfactory reliabilities. Internal consistency was lowest among participants with less education. The results suggest that instruments normed on educated samples may not generalize to uneducated samples.

Assessing Motivation of Secondary School Students: An Analysis of Promotion and Prevention Orientations as Measured by the Regulatory Focus Questionnaire

Measuring human motivation requires understanding the outcomes individuals value and the strategies they prefer to employ to attain them. Knowledge of promotion and prevention, two pivotal motivation orientations, provide key information regarding these aspects. The Regulatory Focus Questionnaire, which measures these two independent constructs, was validated using data provided by university students and alumni of an elite U.S. university. Thus, little is known whether this instrument provides reliable and valid measures of promotion and prevention in a population of younger respondents from a different culture. To bridge this gap, the study employed data collected from three independent large samples of New Zealand secondary school students and used the jigsaw piecewise technique in combination with confirmatory factor analyses. Findings show that, in this population, items in the Regulatory Focus Questionnaire measure promotion and prevention as theoretically distinct constructs.

The relationship between self-construal and creativity — Regulatory focus as moderator

This study attempted to examine the influence of self-construal and regulatory focus on individuals' creativity (Experiment 1 focused on chronic regulatory focus, while Experiment 2 focused on situational regulatory focus). In Experiment 1, participants completed a Self-Construal Scale (SCS), a Regulatory Focus Questionnaire (RFQ) and a Williams Creativity Assessment Packet (WCAP). In Experiment 2, participants initially completed the SCS and then were placed in a promotion or prevention focus group through the use of a paper-and-pen maze task, and they finally completed a task from the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Both experiments suggested the following: 1) independent self-construal is more beneficial to creativity than is interdependent self-construal; 2) promotion focus is more beneficial to creativity than is prevention focus; and 3) regulatory focus has a moderator effect between self-construal and creativity. Most notably, creativity may be enhanced by a match between self-construal and regulatory focus (i.e., interdependent self-construal matches with prevention focus, and independent self-construal matches with promotion focus) and may be decreased by a mismatch between self-construal and regulatory focus.

Uloga orijentacije ka socijalnoj dominaciji, efekata kolektivne traume i regulatornog fokusa u predikciji izraženosti nacionalnog identiteta

Osnovni cilj ovog rada bio je ispitati odnos orijentacije ka socijalnoj dominaciji, efekata kolektivne traume, regulatornog fokusa i identifikacije sa nacionalnom grupom. Istraživanje je sprovedeno na uzorku od 201 ispitanika srpske etničke pripadnosti. Za potrebe ovog rada korišćeno je nekoliko skala: Skala identifikacije sa grupom (dve subskale: Solidarnost sa grupom i Centralnost nacionalnog identiteta), Predstava o sopstvenoj grupi kao ugroženoj, Strah od viktimiziranja, Skala orijentacije ka socijalnoj dominaciji, Upitnik regulatornog fokusa (dve subskale: Orijentacija ka promociji i Orijentacija ka prevenciji) i Upitnik opaženog regulatornog fokusa grupe (dve subskale: Orijentacija ka promociji i Orijentacija ka prevenciji). Rezultati dobijeni primenom višestruke regresione analize ukazuju da varijable Predstava o sopstvenoj grupi kao ugroženoj, Strah od viktimiziranja, Percepcija orijentisanosti sopstvene nacionalne grupe ka promociji i Orijentacija ka socijalnoj dominaciji objašnjavaju 24.7% varijanse identifikacije sa nacionalnom grupom. Dobijeni rezultati ukazuju na značaj opažanja istorijskog konteksta i potrebe za održavanjem pozitivne distinktivnosti sopstvene grupe za identifikaciju sa nacionalnom grupom.

Evaluating tablet computers as a survey tool in rural communities.

Although tablet computers offer advantages in data collection over traditional paper-and-pencil methods, little research has examined whether the 2 formats yield similar responses, especially with underserved populations. We compared the 2 survey formats and tested whether participants' responses to common health questionnaires or perceptions of usability differed by survey format. We also tested whether we could replicate established paper-and-pencil findings via tablet computer. We recruited a sample of low-income community members living in the rural southern United States. Participants were 170 residents (black = 49%; white = 36%; other races and missing data = 15%) drawn from 2 counties meeting Florida's state statutory definition of rural with 100 persons or fewer per square mile. We randomly assigned participants to complete scales (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Inventory and Regulatory Focus Questionnaire) along with survey format usability ratings via paper-and-pencil or tablet computer. All participants rated a series of previously validated posters using a tablet computer. Finally, participants completed comparisons of the survey formats and reported survey format preferences. Participants preferred using the tablet computer and showed no significant differences between formats in mean responses, scale reliabilities, or in participants' usability ratings. Overall, participants reported similar scales responses and usability ratings between formats. However, participants reported both preferring and enjoying responding via tablet computer more. Collectively, these findings are among the first data to show that tablet computers represent a suitable substitute among an underrepresented rural sample for paper-and-pencil methodology in survey research.