Fernández Itziar, Caballero Amparo, Muñoz Dolores, Aguilar Pilar, Carrera Pilar
Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia (Spain).
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (Spain).
Span J Psychol. 2018 Oct 25;21:E47. doi: 10.1017/sjp.2018.43.
From a dispositional perspective, we extend the action identification theory (Vallacher & Wegner, 1987) and construal level theory (Trope & Liberman, 2003) to cross-situational consistency of self and self-control. Two studies examined the relationships among the abstract mindset (Vallacher & Wegner, 1989), cross-situational consistency in self-concept (Vignoles et al., 2016), and self-control (Tangney, Baumeister, and Boone 2004). In Study 1, participants (N = 725) characterized by high cross-situational consistency showed more abstraction in their thinking (p < .001, ηp2 = .17). In Study 2 (N = 244) cross-situational consistency and self-control explained 10% of construal level, with self-control being a significant predictor (p < .001). Construal level and cross-situational consistency explained 17% of self-control; both were significant predictors (p < .001). Self-control explained 8% of cross-situational consistency (p < .001). Study 2 showed that participants with higher levels of abstraction, cross-situational consistency, and self-control reported a greater intention to control their future sugar intake (p < .001). Data supported relationships among abstract construal level, cross-situational consistency and self-control.
从倾向性角度出发，我们将行动识别理论（瓦拉赫和韦格纳，1987年）和解释水平理论（特罗普和利伯曼，2003年）扩展到自我与自我控制的跨情境一致性。两项研究考察了抽象思维模式（瓦拉赫和韦格纳，1989年）、自我概念的跨情境一致性（维尼奥尔斯等人，2016年）和自我控制（唐尼、鲍迈斯特和布恩，2004年）之间的关系。在研究1中，具有高跨情境一致性的参与者（N = 725）在思维上表现出更多的抽象性（p <.001，ηp2 =.17）。在研究2（N = 244）中，跨情境一致性和自我控制解释了10%的解释水平，自我控制是一个显著的预测因素（p <.001）。解释水平和跨情境一致性解释了17%的自我控制；两者都是显著的预测因素（p <.001）。自我控制解释了8%的跨情境一致性（p <.001）。研究2表明，具有较高抽象水平、跨情境一致性和自我控制水平的参与者报告了更强的控制未来糖分摄入的意愿（p <.001）。数据支持了抽象解释水平、跨情境一致性和自我控制之间的关系。
