Mühlberger Christina, Endrejat Paul, Möller Julius, Herrmann Daniel, Kauffeld Simone, Jonas Eva
Department of Psychology, Social Psychology, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria.
Faculty of Psychology and Human Movement Science, Industrial and Organizational Psychology, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
Front Psychol. 2022 Aug 30;13:807875. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.807875. eCollection 2022.
According to Regulatory Focus Theory, two systems determine our strategies to pursue goals - the promotion and the prevention system. Individuals with a dominant promotion system focus on achieving gains, i.e., promoters, and individuals with a dominant prevention system focus on avoiding losses, i.e., preventers. Regulatory Fit Theory suggests that a fit between this focus and the situation causes superior performance and makes individuals feel right. We transfer the fit idea to the interaction of dominant regulatory focus (promotion vs. prevention) with motivational direction (approach vs. avoidance motivation). We investigated these interaction effects on individuals' performance and their experience within creativity workshops. In Study 1 ( = 172), using multi-level analyses, we found that a promotion focus was associated with fluency and a prevention focus with elaborated ideas. This effect was stronger, when preventers also scored high on avoidance motivation. Further, preventers experienced more autonomy support and were more satisfied when they scored high on avoidance. Promoters high on approach motivation reported more autonomy support and more satisfaction than preventers high on approach motivation. For Study 2 ( = 112), we used an experimental design: After measuring regulatory focus, we manipulated approach vs. avoidance motivation in creativity workshops. Using multi-level analyses, we did not find main or interaction effects on fluency or elaboration but we found interaction effects on participants' experience of the creativity workshop. Preventers were more satisfied when they received the avoidance condition. Promoters reported less autonomy support, lower satisfaction, and more perceived conflicts within their teams in the avoidance condition.
根据调节焦点理论，两种系统决定我们追求目标的策略——促进系统和预防系统。具有主导促进系统的个体专注于实现收益，即促进者，而具有主导预防系统的个体专注于避免损失，即预防者。调节匹配理论表明，这种焦点与情境之间的匹配会带来卓越的表现，并使个体感觉良好。我们将匹配的概念应用于主导调节焦点（促进与预防）与动机方向（趋近与回避动机）的相互作用。我们研究了这些相互作用对个体在创意工作坊中的表现及其体验的影响。在研究1（N = 172）中，我们使用多层次分析发现，促进焦点与流畅性相关，预防焦点与详尽的想法相关。当预防者在回避动机上得分也很高时，这种效应更强。此外，预防者在回避得分高时体验到更多的自主支持且更满意。在趋近动机上得分高的促进者比在趋近动机上得分高的预防者报告了更多的自主支持和更高的满意度。对于研究2（N = 112），我们采用了实验设计：在测量调节焦点后，我们在创意工作坊中操纵了趋近与回避动机。使用多层次分析，我们没有发现对流畅性或详尽性的主效应或交互效应，但我们发现了对参与者在创意工作坊体验的交互效应。当预防者处于回避条件时，他们更满意。在回避条件下，促进者报告的自主支持较少、满意度较低，且在团队中感受到更多的冲突。
