바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

메뉴

The Effect of Diet Goal Levels on Goal Attainability: The Moderating Role of Goal Distance and Implementation Intentions

Abstract

This study investigated which motivation factors influenced on diet goal attainability. Different from previous studies, we focused on the effect of goal levels(high vs. low) rather than goal progress levels. Also, we postulate that the goal distance and implementation intentions play an essential moderating role in relationship between goal level and goal attainability. We conducted two studies to support our hypothesis. First, participants rated high goal attainability when the goal level was low(vs. high), the goal distance was far(vs. near) and the implementation intentions were low(vs. high). Also, according to the results of two-way interactions, study 1 revealed that as goal level decreases, consumers tend to evaluate in more positive manner to the goal attainability regardless of goal distance. On the other hand, when goal level was high(vs. low), participants rated high goal attainability of diet when was goal distance was far(vs. near)(H1). In Study 2, we found that the effect of goal level was differed by implementation intentions. According to the result of study 2, even if dieters had high(vs. low) level for diet goal, they rate high goal attainability of diet when implementation intentions were high(vs. low)(H2). Finally, we found that the certainty plays an essential mediating role in relationship between goal level and goal attainability(H3). We may draw several theoretical and practical contributions. Theoretically, we developed a step further in research in goal level and its related studies.

keywords
Goal Setting, Goal Level, Goal Distance, Implementation Intentions, Goal Attainability

Reference

1.

김재휘, 설하린 (2014), “자기조절자원의 소진이 자기통제에 미치는 효과: 심적 계정의조절 효과를 중심으로,” 한국심리학회지:소비자․광고, 15(1), 157-170.

2.

세계일보 (2013), “전 세계 비만․영양실조 年손실 3조5000억弗”, 2013년 06월 5일자.

3.

Achtziger Anja, Peter M. Gollwitzer, and Paschal Sheeran (2008). “Implementation Intentions and Shielding Goal Striving From Unwanted Thoughts and Feelings,” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(3), 381-393.

4.

Barney, Jay B., and Ricky W. Griffin. The Management of Organizations. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1992.

5.

Carlson Kurt A., Margaret G. Meloy, and Elizabeth G. Miller (2013). “Goal Reversion in Consumer Choice,” Journal of Consumer Research, 39(February), 918-930.

6.

Feather, Norman T. (1990). “Bridging the Gap Between Values and Actions: Recent Applications of the Expectancy-Value Model,”in Handbook of Motivation and Cognition:Foundations of Social Behavior, Vol. 2, ed. E. Tory Higgins and Richard M. Sorrentino, 151-192.

7.

Fishbach Ayelet and Ravi Dharn (2005). “Goals as Excuses or Guides: The Liberating Effect of Perceived Goal Progress on Choice,” Journal of Consumer Research, 32(December), 370-377.

8.

Fishbach Ayelet and Ronald S. Friedman (2003). “Leading Us Not Unto Temptation:Momentary Allurements Elicit Overriding Goal Activation,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(2), 296-309.

9.

Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). “Implementation Intentions: Strong Effects of Simple Plants,”American Psychology, 54, 493-503.

10.

Huang Szu-Chi and Ying Zhang (2011). “Motivational Consequences of Perceived Velocity in Consumer Goal Pursuit,” Journal of Marketing Research, 48(December), 1045-1056.

11.

Koo Minjung and Ayelet Fishbach (2008). “Dynamics of Self-Regulation: How (Un)Accomplished Goal Actions Affect Motivation,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(2), 183-195.

12.

Koo Minjung and Ayelet Fishbach (2012). “The Small-Area Hypothesis: Effects of Progress Monitoring on Goal Adherence,” Journal of Consumer Research, 39(October), 493-509.

13.

Locke, Edwin A. and Gary P. Latham (1990). A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

14.

Locke, Edwin A. and Gary P. Latham (2006). “New Directions in Goal-Setting Theory,”Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15(5), 265- 268.

15.

Mukhopadhyay, Anirban (2009). “Indulgence as Self-Reward for Prior Shopping Restraint: A Justification-Based Mechanism,” Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(July), 334-345.

16.

Nunes Joseph C. and Xavier Drėze (2006). “The Endowed Progress Effect: How Artificial Advancement Increases Effort,” Journal of Consumer Research, 32(March), 504-512.

17.

Shah, James Y. and Ron Friedman, and Arie W. Kruglanski (2002). “Forgetting All Else: On the Antecedents and Consequences of Goal Shielding,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1261-1280.

18.

Soman, Dilip and Amar Cheema (2004). “When Goals Are Counterproductive: The Effects of Violation of a Behavioral Goal on Subsequent Performance,” Journal of Consumer Research, 31(June), 52-62.

19.

Wilcox Keith, Beth Vallen, Lauren Block, and Gavan J. Fitzsimons (2009). “Vicarious Goal Fulfillment: When the Mere Presence of a Health Option Leads to an Ironically Indulgent Decision,” Journal of Consumer Research, 36(October), 380-393.

20.

Zhang Ying, Szu-Chi Huang, and Susan M. Broniarczyk (2010). “Counteractive Construal in Consumer Goal Pursuit,” Journal of Consumer Research, 37(June), 129-142.

21.

Zhang Ying, Ayelet Fishbach, and Ravi Dhar (2007). “When Thinking Beats Doing: The Role of Optimistic Expectations in Goal-Based Choice,” Journal of Consumer Research, 34(December), 567-578.

22.

Zhang Ying and Szu-Chi Huang (2010). “How Endowed versus Earned Progress Affects Consumer Goal Commitment and Motivation,”Journal of Consumer Research, 37(December), 641-654.

logo