Longitudinal research findings are that
(1) Goal self-concordance predicts goal attainment, mediated by sustained effort;
(2) Time-sampled goal attainment predicts changes in wellbeing, and the effect of attainment on wellbeing depends on the self-concordance of the goals pursued; the effect applies to broader, longer-term goals, i.e., personal strivings, as well as to short-term goals, i.e., personal projects.
Individuals pursuing self-concordant goals put more sustained effort into achieving them and, thus, are more likely to attain them. –> Goal Striving and Follow Through
Controlledness is likely to result in fading volitional control in goal pursuit and does not affect eventual goal attainment.
Self-concordant goal attainment enhances feelings of wellbeing. –> Need Satisfaction and Fulfillment
Guiding principles
Select goals consistent with your values and interests. Check your values and interests are not distorted or skewed and are congruent with deeper needs and organismic conditions; especially check for relatedness needs being met.
Expected Results: The Inception-to-Attainment Process
Individual goals receive more effort and are better attained when self-concordant.
The attainment advantage enjoyed by self-concordant persons lies in their tendency to be more persistent in their strivings.
Self-concordance promotes goal attainment, mediated by effort.
Self-concordance is positively correlated with both (time-period) effort and (time-period) attainment.
In addition, (time-period) effort is associated with (time-period) attainment.
Expected Results: The Attainment-to-Wellbeing Process
Goal-attainment effects occur for personal strivings and personal projects.
Those who do well in achieving their goals experience enhanced wellbeing.
Attaining goals leads to changes in wellbeing, moderated by the self-concordance of goals.
Self-concordance itself does not have a main effect. The interaction between self-concordance and (time-period) attainment is significant. The association between attainment and changes in SWB is stronger for more self-concordant participants.
Initial SWB is an important predictor of later positive outcomes.
Expected Results: Associations Between T1 Need Satisfaction and T1 SWB
Each quality of experience contributes uniquely to ratings of concurrent wellbeing.
Activity-based experiences of competence, autonomy, and relatedness each uniquely predict concurrent wellbeing.
T1 need satisfaction is a predictor of T1 SWB.
Expected Results: Predicting Change in SWB From T1 to T2
Each quality of experience contributes uniquely to enhanced longitudinal SWB.
T1 SWB is a predictor of T2 SWB.
Time-period need satisfaction is a predictor of T2 SWB.
Accumulation of positive experiences during the time-period predicts change in SWB.
Time-period need satisfaction is a significant predictor of enhanced SWB.
Over time, accumulating daily experiences of competence, autonomy, and relatedness promotes enhanced wellbeing.
Accumulated short-term experiences of autonomy, competence, and relatedness are the concrete means by which goal attainment influences wellbeing.
Goal attainment has effects on wellbeing that are not reducible to accumulating small positive experiences that progress engenders. In other words, goal attainment has direct positive effects on wellbeing that are not mediated by need satisfaction.
Need satisfaction is a dynamic variable that may change when (or if) a person adopts a more self-representative goal system.
Concordant goal attainment leads to need-satisfying experiences, an accumulation of positive experiences that, in turn, enhance general wellbeing judgments.
Initial SWB may have its own positive influence on later outcomes.
Other important goal variables and constructs
Self-concordance-to-(time-period)-effort effects are not reducible to the effects of the other motivational constructs of expected efficacy, the number of implementation intentions they have, the number of avoidance goals they have, and their life skills.
Those with stronger expectancies try harder during the time-period, as do those with stronger life skills, those with more implementation intentions, and those with fewer avoidance goals.
Self-concordance is essentially orthogonal to these other concepts of motivation.
Concluding summary
Those who select self-concordant goals are found to be more likely to invest sustained effort into those goals. Sustained effort, in turn, is associated with greater goal attainment, goal attainment is associated with presumed need-satisfying experiences, self-concordance moderates the association between goal attainment and need satisfaction, and finally, need-satisfying experiences are associated with changes in wellbeing.
Protocol for Self-Concordant Goal Striving, Attainment, and Wellbeing
List 10 personal goals you will be pursuing during the next three months.
Rate the reasons you will be pursuing each goal.
Complete measures of your wellbeing during the past month.
Once every month, rate how much effort you are currently putting into each goal.
Also, rate your progress in each goal.
Personal goals: Reasons, Effort, Progress, Attainment
List the things you will be typically or characteristically trying to do in daily life during the upcoming three months.
Examples of responses include “do as well as I can academically,” “avoid conflict with others,” and “keep myself in good physical condition.”
Rate your reasons for pursuing each striving in terms of each of the four reasons: external, introjected, identified, and intrinsic. These four reasons sample a continuum of perceived locus of causality for behavior, ranging from non-internalized to completely internalized.
The external reason is “you pursue this striving because somebody else wants you to or because the situation demands it.”
The introjected reason is “you pursue this striving because you would feel ashamed, guilty, or anxious if you didn’t.”
The identified reason is “you pursue this striving because you really believe it’s an important goal to have.”
The intrinsic reason is “you pursue this striving because of the fun and enjoyment that it provides you.”
A scale ranging from 1 (not at all for this reason) to 9 (completely for this reason) is used.
Your self-concordance variable is formed by summing the identified and intrinsic scores and subtracting the introjected and external scores.
During each monthly assessment, we ask participants, “How hard are you trying to pursue this striving?”
Use a rating scale ranging from 1 (not at all hard) to 9 (very hard).
Your effort variable (for the three months) is formed by averaging these 30 ratings (10 personal goals rated three times during the period).
Also, for each striving, “How well are you doing?”
Use a rating scale ranging from 1 (not well at all) to 9 (very well).
Your attainment variable is formed by averaging these 30 ratings.
Wellbeing during the past month
To monitor wellbeing, we focus on positive mood, negative mood, and life satisfaction as the three primary components of subjective wellbeing. We use the well-validated 20-item Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson, Tellegen, & Clark, 1988) and the 5-item Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS; Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985).
At the beginning of the three months (Time 1 [T1]), the PANAS is administered with the instruction, “How much have you felt each of these moods during the past month?” Participants rate each adjective using a scale from 1 (not at all) to 7 (very frequently). It is assumed that this wording yields variables midway between state and trait that are not too susceptible to momentary influences but might be expected to change over the three months. The SWLS is administered with similar instructions, using a scale ranging from 1 (no agreement) to 5 (very much agreement).
The PANAS and the SWLS are administered again at the end of the three months (3 months later; Time 2 [T2]), with instructions to consider their moods during the past month.
A T1 subjective-wellbeing (SWB) variable is created by standardizing the T1 positive affect, negative affect, and life-satisfaction scores, then subtracting negative affect from the sum of positive affect and life satisfaction. The same procedure is followed to create a T2 SWB variable.
These composites are unidimensional since findings indicate that a single factor underlies life satisfaction and affective wellbeing (Diener, 1994).
Protocol for Self-Concordant Goal Striving, Need Satisfaction, and Wellbeing
Need Satisfaction
The accumulation of experiences of autonomy, competence, and relatedness is associated with longitudinal change in wellbeing over that period.
Each of these three qualities of experience uniquely predicts wellbeing at a given time.
Need satisfaction is a dynamic, ongoing process that can be affected by other variables, such as personal goals.
Baseline needs satisfaction
Rate the extent to which participants have experiences of competence, autonomy, and relatedness in their daily lives at that time. During the initial assessment, ask participants to rate “the extent to which you are having each of these three types of experience in your life, at present.” A scale ranging from 1 (very little) to 7 (very much) is used.
The competence item is “feeling generally competent and able in what I attempt.”
The autonomy item is “feeling generally autonomous and choiceful in what I do.”
The relatedness item is “feeling generally related and connected to the people I spend time with.”
These ratings constitute the T1 competence, T1 autonomy, and T1 relatedness variables.
Time-period needs satisfaction during the previous 24 hr.
Three times during the ensuing 3-month period (approximately once every month), assess their experiences of competence, autonomy, and relatedness during the past 24 hr.
To sample the quality of participants’ ongoing experiences during the time-period, we ask questions about the 24-hr period preceding each of the three lab sessions.
Participants free list the three activities they have spent the most time performing during the preceding 24 hr, excluding eating or sleeping.
Participants rate how competent they felt doing each activity, using a scale ranging from 1 (not at all competent) to 7 (very competent).
In addition, they rate why they did each activity in terms of four reasons for acting: external, introjected, identified, and intrinsic. These ratings are made using a scale ranging from 1 (not at all for this reason) to 7 (very much for this reason).
In addition, participants freely list their three most time-consuming social contacts during the previous 24 hr. For each of these three contacts, ask, “To what extent did you feel related and connected to the person(s) you were interacting with?” Ratings are made using a scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 7 (very much).
A time-period competence variable is computed by averaging the 9 (3 activities x 3 monthly assessments) activity-based competence ratings. In addition, a time-period autonomy variable is created by averaging the external, introjected, identified, and intrinsic ratings across the nine listed activities, then subtracting the external and introjected ratings from the identified and intrinsic ratings, and a time-period relatedness variable by averaging the nine relatedness ratings.
Wellbeing during the past few days
To assess mood, use the PANAS. To assess life satisfaction, use the SWLS.
At the beginning of the three months (T1), ask participants to complete all questions with reference to the past few days.
Again, at the end of the three months (T2), ask participants to complete the PANAS and SWLS with reference to the past few days.
As previously described, create a T1 SWB variable and a T2 SWB variable.
Combined Protocol for Goal Striving, Need Satisfaction, and Wellbeing
Preliminary remarks
Goal variables and need satisfaction variables are never assessed simultaneously.
Goals and needs are measured in different settings, i.e., at home or in the workplace.
The assessment referents are very different, i.e., broad 3-month goals vs. time-consuming activities in the past 24 hr.
Hypotheses
Need satisfaction mediates between goal attainment and increased wellbeing.
Effort is a mediator between self-concordance and attainment.
The self-concordance model is not reducible to the construct effects of having high efficacy beliefs, having many implementation intentions, having few goals framed in avoidance terms, and having strong life skills.
Procedure
Participants Complete an initial take-home packet to identify and rate six personal projects they will be pursuing during the next 3-month period. They Complete the life-skills measure and rate their wellbeing during the past few days.
At eight points during the time-period, approximately once every ten days in their workplace, participants free list three time-consuming activities they have engaged in during the past 24 hr. Participants Rate the degree of competence, autonomy, and relatedness they felt when doing those activities.
Participants Complete a second and third take-home packet (one halfway through the time-period and one near the end of the time-period) in which they rate their effort and attainment regarding their projects since the last packet.
Participants also rate their wellbeing during the past few days in the third packet.
Personal goals: Personal Projects
Personal projects are particularly well-suited for a 3-month study in terms of their time frame.
Projects are “goals that we think about, plan for, carry out, and sometimes (though not always) complete or succeed at.” Examples of actual projects listed by participants include “get a 3.8 this semester,” “go to the gym four times a week,” and “stop procrastinating.”
Initial goal assessment occurs in a take-home questionnaire packet.
After listing projects, participants rate each project on each of the four reasons for acting: external, introjected, identified, and intrinsic. These ratings are made using a scale ranging from 1 (not at all for this reason) to 9 (completely because of this reason).
A self-concordance variable is formed by summing the identified and intrinsic scores and subtracting the introjected and extrinsic scores (and averaging by the number of projects rated, in this case, the six listed projects).
To derive an expected efficacy variable, ask, “How well do you expect to do in each goal?” Use a rating scale ranging from 1 (not at all well) to 7 (very well), and average the six responses.
To compute an implementation intentions variable, ask participants to indicate whether they have already committed themselves to a certain time and place for initiating some specific action toward each project and count the number of “yes” responses.
To derive an avoidance goals variable, code each participant’s projects for avoidance and count the number of avoidance goals listed.
To measure participants’ behavioral competencies, use the 10-item life-skills measure with the two correlated factors of social and self-regulatory skills. Use a scale ranging from 1 (much less than average) to 5 (average) to 9 (much more than average). For each participant, compute a life-skills variable by summing the ten ratings.
In the second and third take-home packets, ask participants to rate how hard they have tried to complete each project since they completed the last packet, using a scale ranging from 1 (not at all hard) to 7 (very hard). Compute a time-period effort variable by averaging the 12 ratings.
In addition, in both packets, ask participants to rate how effective they have felt in each project since they completed the last packet, using a scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 7 (very much). Compute a time-period attainment variable by averaging the 12 ratings.
Time-period needs satisfaction during the previous 24 hr.
To sample the quality of participants’ ongoing experiences during the time-period, we ask questions about the 24-hr period preceding each of the eight lab sessions.
Participants free list the three activities they have spent the most time performing during the preceding 24 hr, excluding eating or sleeping.
Participants rate how competent they felt doing each activity, using a scale ranging from 1 (not at all competent) to 7 (very competent).
In addition, they rate why they did each activity in terms of four reasons for acting: external, introjected, identified, and intrinsic. These ratings are made using a scale ranging from 1 (not at all for this reason) to 7 (very much for this reason).
In addition, participants free-list their three most time-consuming social contacts during the previous 24 hr. For each of these three contacts, ask, “To what extent did you feel related and connected to the person(s) you were interacting with?” Ratings are made using a scale ranging from 1 (not at all) to 7 (very much).
A time-period competence variable is computed by averaging the 24 (3 activities x 8 assessments) activity-based competence ratings. In addition, a time-period autonomy variable is created by averaging the external, introjected, identified, and intrinsic ratings across the 24 listed activities, then subtracting the external and introjected ratings from the identified and intrinsic ratings, and a time-period relatedness variable by averaging the 24 relatedness ratings.
A time-period need satisfaction variable can be computed by averaging the competence, autonomy, and relatedness variables together to simplify later analysis.
Wellbeing during the past few days
To monitor wellbeing, we focus on positive mood, negative mood, and life satisfaction as the three primary components of subjective wellbeing. We use the well-validated 20-item Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson, Tellegen, & Clark, 1988) and the 5-item Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS; Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985).
At the beginning of the three months (Time 1 [T1]), the PANAS is administered with the instruction, “How much have you felt each of these moods during the past few days?” Participants rate each adjective using a scale from 1 (not at all) to 7 (very frequently).
The SWLS is administered with similar instructions, using a scale ranging from 1 (no agreement) to 5 (very much agreement).
The PANAS and the SWLS are administered again at the end of the three months (3 months later; Time 2 [T2]), with instructions to consider their moods during the past few days.
A T1 subjective-wellbeing (SWB) variable is created by standardizing the T1 positive affect, negative affect, and life-satisfaction scores, then subtracting negative affect from the sum of positive affect and life satisfaction.
The same procedure is followed to create a T2 SWB variable.
These composites are unidimensional since findings indicate that a single factor underlies life satisfaction and affective wellbeing (Diener, 1994).
Self-Assessments
We are interested in what you are typically or characteristically trying to do in your everyday behavior. Think about the objectives you are typically trying to accomplish or attain. These are called personal strivings.
Instruction: List eight personal strivings of your own.
Next, rate the extent to which you pursue each striving for external, introjected, identified, and intrinsic reasons, using a scale ranging from 1 (not at all for this reason) to 7 (completely for this reason).
Clarification: Item Wordings for the Four Motivation Dimensions
External (non-concordant)
You are pursuing this striving because someone else wants you to or because your situation seems to demand it. You wouldn’t have this striving if you didn’t get some kind of reward, praise, or approval for it (or avoid some kind of punishment, criticism, or disapproval). For example, you might try to “go to church more regularly” because others might criticize you if you didn’t or because you need to be seen at church for your job.
Introjected (non-concordant)
You are pursuing this striving because you would feel ashamed, guilty, or anxious if you didn’t. Rather than having this striving just because someone else thinks you should, you feel that you “ought” to strive for that something. For example, you might try to “go to church more regularly” because you would feel bad about yourself if you didn’t.
Identified (concordant)
You are pursuing this striving because you believe it’s an important goal. Although others may have urged you to pursue this striving in the past, now you endorse it freely and value it for personal reasons. For example, you might try to “go to church more regularly” because you genuinely feel this is the right thing to do, even if you don’t really enjoy it.
Intrinsic (concordant)
You are pursuing this striving because of the fun and enjoyment which the striving provides you. While there may be many good reasons for striving, the primary “reason” is your interest in the experience. For example, you might try to “go to church more regularly” because attending church is inherently interesting and enjoyable.
Your self-concordance score is computed by summing the eight identified and the eight intrinsic ratings and then subtracting the eight external and the eight introjected ratings.
In addition, rate the extent to which your goals are self-focused versus other-focused. Use a scale rating from 1= primarily group needs, 3= represents both equally, and 5= primarily personal needs.
Clarification: Goals can be adopted primarily to serve the needs and preferences of the self (“self-focused” goals) or to serve the needs and preferences of social groups, such as family, team, club, or friends (“group-focused” goals). For example, one might pursue the goal “get very high grades” because this is what one wants for oneself or because this is what one’s family deems important. As another example, one might pursue the goal of “get into good physical condition” because this is what one wants for oneself or because of what one’s sports team needs. Of course, a goal may also represent both at the same time. Please rate the extent to which each goal represents your own needs and preferences or the needs and preferences of important social groups.
Subjective wellbeing
Instruction: Rate the 20 mood adjectives of the Positive Affect Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson, Tellegen, & Clark, 1988), indicating how much you felt each emotion in the past month or so. Use a scale ranging from 1 (very slightly or not at all) to 5 (extremely).
Your positive and negative affect scores are derived by averaging the appropriate items.
Also, complete the five items of the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS; Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985), also with reference to the past month or so, using a scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
Your life satisfaction score is derived by averaging these items.
Your standardized subjective wellbeing (SWB) score is computed by first standardizing all scores and then subtracting negative affect from the sum of positive affect and life satisfaction.