Department of Psychology, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
University Research Priority Program Dynamics of Healthy Aging, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
PLoS One. 2021 Feb 19;16(2):e0247047. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247047. eCollection 2021.
Three studies tested the role of prioritization in solving conflict between multiple goals in different age groups. Study 1 (N = 185 young, middle-aged, older adults) stressed the importance to solve two competing tasks equally well within a short time. Older adults prioritized more than younger adults. However, contrary to our expectations, prioritization led to higher perceived conflict, more negative affect, and less control. Study 2 (N = 117 younger and older adults) found that, using a more lenient instruction, deemphasizing the importance of performing equally well on both tasks, prioritization was no longer associated with perceived goal conflict. Study 3 (N = 721 young, middle-aged, older adults) was an online study using hypothetical scenarios. This study was run to substantiate the potential mechanism underlying the differences between Study 1 and 2 and supported the hypothesized effect of the instructional strictness of pursuing two goals. Thus, when encountering conflicting goals older adults prioritize more than younger adults, but prioritization might not be optimal for solving short-term goal conflict when both conflicting goals are equally important.
三项研究测试了在不同年龄组中，将多个目标的优先级排序应用于解决冲突的作用。研究 1（N=185 名年轻人、中年人、老年人）强调在短时间内平等地解决两个相互竞争的任务的重要性。老年人比年轻人更倾向于对任务进行优先级排序。然而，与我们的预期相反，优先级排序会导致更高的感知冲突、更多的负面情绪和更少的控制感。研究 2（N=117 名年轻人和老年人）发现，采用更宽松的指令，不强调在两个任务上表现同样出色的重要性，优先级排序与感知到的目标冲突不再相关。研究 3（N=721 名年轻人、中年人、老年人）是一项在线研究，使用了假设情景。这项研究旨在证实研究 1 和 2 之间差异的潜在机制，并支持追求两个目标的指导严格性的假设效应。因此，当遇到冲突的目标时，老年人比年轻人更倾向于对任务进行优先级排序，但当两个冲突目标同等重要时，优先级排序可能不是解决短期目标冲突的最佳选择。
