Behaviour Change & Technology

It is very interesting to see how the perception of the information presented in choice items can influence people’s decisions and actions. The arrangement of choice alternatives can pertain to different underlying goals such as for example food enjoyment and concerns about weight which can elicit different psychological and behavioural consequences.

Together or separate?
Fishbach and Zhang (2008) found that it does actually make a difference if conflicting goals are presented alone (e.g. chocolate cake) or as choice alternatives (e.g. chocolate cake or vegetable soup). When participants were presented with conflicting choice items together, the choice items were perceived to complement each other and participants tended to evaluate the tempting items more positively. When people hold a positive attitude towards an item, they start balancing the conflicting goals as if they were complementary goals (e.g. “If I have the vegetable soup for entrée, I can have the chocolate cake as a treat for dessert”).

Fishbach and Zhang (2008) also found that when items were presented separately, they seemed to compete against each other and participants then tended to evaluate the goal item more positively. This is also the case when being presented to temptations only, as temptations seem to automatically activate the desired goal (Fishbach, Friedman & Kruglanski, 2003). What seems to happen is that the conflicting goals start to compete against each other when presented separately and thus the more important goal is highlighted (e.g. eating healthy).

Highlighting and balancing goals
There is an interesting link between highlighting or balancing goals and the way goals are represented or framed as discussed in the article How to increase motivation to goal adherence. When people highlight a goal they feel very committed to their goal and see their achievements as a result of their past actions or in terms of what has been accomplished to date. In other words, they exhibit a high level of intrinsic motivation or the feeling that the decision to adhere to their goal is fully self-determined. In contrast, people who balance conflicting goals see their actions as part of a progress (i.e. remains to be accomplished). Consequently, they start to balance the conflicting goals as if they were complementary (”If I eat pizza today, I can keep my diet tomorrow”; for example, see Fishbach & Dhar, 2005, Study 3). The problem is simply that today’s calorie intake is not re-set tomorrow. These effects suggests that a focus on commitment or progress promotes subsequent choices of action that either highlights the goal or balances between alternative goals.

Implications
Obviously, helping users or clients decide what goals are important, setting unambiguous goals, strengthening commitment towards change, and avoiding presenting or discussing conflicting goals at the same time seem to highlight important personal goals. However, one important consequence from this discussion is perhaps that we should abandon discussing barriers to treatment altogether as discussing barriers most often involves presenting information about conflicting goals at the same time which according to Fishbach and colleagues’ research results in a balancing of goals (”If I pack my gym bag now, I can go watch TV”). But this may be at odds with both treatment providers and users or clients who often consider addressing barriers very important.

Another very interesting implication of the perception of choice items that have underlying conflicting goals comes from priming studies (see e.g. Stroebe, Mensink, Aarts, Schut & Kruglanski, 2008). Priming refers to the phenomenon of activating concepts by exposing people to objects that increases the accessibility of the mental representation of that object or concept. For example, a website concerning nutritional counseling or weight management may present words or pictures relating to the semantic concept of food enjoyment (e.g. words like tasty or appetizing). At the same page, the website may present words or pictures relating to the semantic concept of eating healthy (e.g. words like slim or nutritious). This seems to trigger psychological processes such as balancing between conflicting goals, creating commitment uncertainty, making short-term goals more salient, etc. - processes that are all related to unsuccessful behaviour change. The implication is that one should avoid triggering a balancing of conflicting goals, but rather focus on food enjoyment or eating healthy separately to activate a highlighting.

Conclusion
It appears to be unproblematic to provide users with for example healthy and nutritious and delicious and tasty recipes or food items separately. The problem is when people are presented with both at the same time which unfortunately often is the case. Just imagine all the choices people have at their local grocery store. It is easy to see how people can end up thinking: “If I buy the low-fat milk, I can have the hot dogs” (i.e. balancing conflicting goals). Furthermore, imagine all the unhealthy products that are presented as healthy under labels such as “natural”, “no added sugar” or “50% less fat”. These products prime people with conflicting goals automatically which provides people excuses for purchasing the salami with 30% fat content because it is promoted as having 50% less fat. Well, it may be healthier relative to salami with 60% fat, but it is still unhealthy.

Key reading(s):

Fishbach, A. & Zhang, Y. (2008). Together or apart: When goals and temptations complement versus compete. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 547-559.

References:

Fishbach, A. & Dhar, R. (2005). Goals as excuses or guides: The liberating effect of perceived goal progress on choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 32, 370-377.

Fishbach, A., Friedman, R. S. & Kruglanski, A. W. (2003). Leading us not unto temptation: Momentary allurements elicit overriding goal activation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 296-309.

Stroebe, W., Mensink, W., Aarts, H., Schut, H. & Kruglanski, A. W. (2008). Why dieters fail: Testing the goal conflict model of eating. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 26-36.

Send article as PDF to

People are most often quite capable of achieving personal goals such as getting good grades, dieting, or donating money to charities when they are able and motivated. However, goals can often be associated with uncertainty which can reduce motivation to goal adherence. Fishbach and colleagues have recently begun to discover how we can increase motivation to goal achievement by focusing on either what people have accomplished to date or what they have yet to accomplish.

What determines action?
In a series of studies in several domains such as education, consumer behaviour, charitable fundraising, and dieting, Fishbach and colleagues have found that representing a goal in terms of commitment (i.e. achieved to date) or progress (i.e. left to go) makes people focus on different aspects of that goal that can increase or decrease motivation to pursue the goal (e.g. Koo & Fishbach, 2008). However, the effect of representing goals as commitment- or progress-based is determined by commitment certainty (for review, see Fishbach, 2008).

When commitment is uncertain, low, or when people are unsure about their level of goal commitment, they are primarily concerned about evaluating whether a goal is worth pursuing. But how can people evaluate whether a goal is worth pursuing? One place to look for an answer is to look at prior accomplishments or what has been achieved to date. Consequently, focusing on accomplishments to date should be more motivating than focusing on what is left to accomplish.

In contrast, it appears that if a goal is unambiguously important, people are certain about their goals (Brunstein & Gollwitzer, 1996). And people who are highly committed to a goal are interested in knowing what remains to be accomplished. But how can people evaluate whether they are progressing towards a goal? The answer is to look at lack of progress, what remains, or what is yet to be accomplished. As a result, focusing on what is yet to be accomplished should be more motivating than focusing on what is accomplished to date.

Determining commitment certainty
The implications from this line of research seem clear. When communicating to people either one-on-one or via technology, the way we represent goals (commitment vs. progress) should take into consideration commitment certainty to increase motivation towards goals and advance performance. But when do we know when commitment is high or low?

One possible way of determining commitment certainty is to look at the presence of incentives or rewards. People should ideally feel that what they do, such as studying, is their own decision and that they are doing it without any obvious external incentives present (Ryan & Deci, 2000). In such cases, we can assume that commitment certainty is high and that goals are unambiguously important. According to Fishbach’s research, we should thus focus on what is yet to be accomplished to increase motivation to goal adherence. This would most likely be the case for most students in compulsory courses required to attain their degree.

But, in many cases, communication one-on-one or via technology relies on extrinsic persuasive strategies which can make people who are uncertain or low in motivation to just roll with the persuader. That is, students’ motivation for committing to a course and fulfilling the course requirements are determined by external demands such as money for good grades, praise by the lecturer, or threat of punishment such as fail on the exam. This would most likely be the case for students in elective courses where commitment certainty usually is high (”Is this the right course for me?”). According to Fishbach’s research, we should thus focus on what is accomplished to enhance commitment and build intrinsic motivation. Help students increase their motivation by assessing the amount of time and effort invested in studying or completing an academic task to date.

Conclusion
So why bother with commitment certainty and goal representations? After all, are not incentives or extrinsic motivation suitable strategies for making people purchase products, donate to charity, or do some studying? When there is no need for a long-term user or customer relationship or commitment, then probably yes. However, few would argue that they do not need long-term users or customers that are committed and loyal. Thus, the long-term effects of commitment uncertainty and lack of intrinsic motivation are such that users and customers will most likely purchase fewer items, discontinue charitable contributions, and give lower priority to or drop out of class (for review, see Deci, Koestner & Ryan, 1999).

Key reading(s):

Koo, M. & Fishbach, A. (2008). Dynamics of self-regulation: How (un)accomplished goal actions affect motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 183-195.

References:

Brunstein, J. C., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (1996). Effects of failure on subsequent performance: The importance of self-defining goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 395-407.

Deci, E. L., Koestner, R. & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 627-688.

Fishbach, A. (2008). The dynamics of self-regulation. In Forgas, J., Baumeister, R. F. & Tice, D. M. (Eds.): The psychology of self-regulation. New York: Psychology Press.

Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68-78.

Relevant links

Ayelet Fishbach

Send article as PDF to