Content area
Full text
Contents
- Abstract
- Metamotivation
- Construal Level Theory
- Construal Level and Self-Regulation
- The Present Research
- Sample Size and Exclusionary Criteria
- Experiment 1: Knowing When High-Level Versus Low-Level Construal Is Beneficial for Task Performance
- Method
- Research ethics statement
- Participants
- Materials and procedure
- Metamotivational knowledge assessment
- Demographics and other measures
- Results
- Discussion
- Experiments 2–4: Knowing When and How to Induce High-Level Versus Low-Level Construal
- Method
- Participants
- Experiments 2a and 2b: Materials and procedure
- Metamotivational knowledge assessment
- Perceived task-level difficulty and enjoyment
- Preferences for high-level versus low-level preparatory exercise
- Usefulness of high-level and low-level preparatory exercise
- Perceived strategy-level difficulty and enjoyment
- Performance expectancies
- Experiment 3: Materials and procedure (global vs. local mindsets)
- Experiment 4: Materials and procedure (category vs. example mindsets)
- Demographics and other measures
- Results
- Usefulness of high-level versus low-level preparatory exercises
- Preferences for high-level versus low-level preparatory exercises
- Discussion
- Experiment 5: Recognizing the Role of Construal Level in the Presence of Distractors
- Method
- Participants
- Materials and procedure
- Results
- Usefulness of construal level and distractors
- Usefulness of high-level and low-level construal
- Usefulness of distractors
- Discussion
- Experiment 6: Creating Task-Motivation Fit in Behavioral Choice
- Method
- Participants
- Materials and procedure
- Preview of high-level and low-level regulatory tasks
- Preferences for high-level versus low-level construal
- Motivation, anticipated task difficulty, and anticipated task enjoyment
- Results
- Domain-general metamotivational knowledge
- Behavioral choice
- Using domain-general metamotivational knowledge to predict behavioral choice
- High-level knowledge
- Low-level knowledge
- Discussion
- General Discussion
- Future Directions
- Implementing knowledge to promote performance
- Facilitation versus disruption
- Selecting tasks, given a motivational orientation
- Cross-cultural generalization
- Development of metamotivational knowledge
- Advancing Motivation Science
- Appendix A
- Appendix B
Figures and Tables
Abstract
Metamotivation research suggests that people may be able to modulate their motivational states strategically to secure desired outcomes (Scholer & Miele, 2016). To regulate one’s motivational states effectively, one must at minimum understand (a) which states are more or less beneficial for a given task and (b) how to instantiate these states. In the current article, we examine to what extent people understand the self-regulatory benefits of high-level versus low-level...