In the present research, we conducted two studies designed to examine the joint influence of avoidance temperament and avoidance-based achievement goals on the experience of flow on a creativity task. In both a laboratory study (N = 101; M(age)  = 22.61, SD(age)  = 4.03; 74.3% female) and a naturalistic study (N = 102; M(age)  = 16.23, SD(age)  = 1.13; 48% female), participants high in avoidance temperament were shown to experience greater flow when performance-avoidance goals were induced; no differences were found in any of the other three achievement goal conditions from the 2 × 2 achievement goal framework. These findings reveal a short-term benefit for a disposition-goal match grounded in avoidance motivation, and point to the need for more research on both avoidance-based matches and the short-term versus long-term implications of such matches.

Previous research agrees that approach goals have positive effects whereas avoidance goals have negative effects on performance. By contrast, the present chapter looks at the conditions under which even avoidance goals may have positive effects on performance. We will first review the previous research that supports the positive consequences of avoidance goals. Then we will argue that the positive and negative consequences of approach and avoidance goals on performance depend on an individual‘s neuroticism level and the time frame of their goal striving. Because neuroticism is positively related to avoidance goals, we assume that individuals with high levels of neuroticism may derive some benefits from avoidance goals. We have specified this assumption by hypothesizing that the fit between an individual‘s level of neuroticism and their avoidance goals leads to favorable consequences in the short term – but to negative outcomes in the long run. A short-term, experimental study with employees and a long-term correlative field study with undergraduate students were conducted to test whether neuroticism moderates the short- and long-term effects of avoidance versus approach goals on performance. Experimental study 1 showed that individuals with a high level of neuroticism performed best in the short term when they were assigned to avoidance goals, whereas individuals with a low level of neuroticism performed best when pursuing approach goals. However, study 2 indicated that in the long run individuals with a high level of neuroticism performed worse when striving for avoidance goals, whereas individuals with a low level of neuroticism were not impaired at all by avoidance goals. In summary, the pattern of results supports the hypothesis that a fit between a high level of neuroticism and avoidance goals has positive consequences in the short term, but leads to negative outcomes in the long run. We strongly encourage further research to investigate short- and long-term effects of approach and avoidance goals on performance in conjunction with an individual‘s personality, which may moderate these effects.

OBJECTIVE:Research on the strength model of self-regulation is burgeoning, but little empirical work has focused on the link between distinct types of daily goal pursuit and the depletion of self-regulatory resources. The authors conducted two studies on the link between avoidance goals and resource depletion.METHOD:Study 1 (283 [228 female] Caucasians, ages 18-51) investigated the concurrent and longitudinal relations between avoidance goals and resource depletion over a 1-month period. Study 2 (132 [93 female] Caucasians, ages 18-49) investigated the concurrent and longitudinal relations between avoidance goals and resource depletion over a 1-month period and explored resource depletion as a mediator of the avoidance goal to subjective well-being relation.RESULTS:Studies 1 and 2 documented both a concurrent and a longitudinal negative relationship between avoidance goals and self-regulatory resources, and Study 2 additionally showed that self-regulatory resources mediate the negative link between avoidance goals and subjective well-being. Ancillary analyses demonstrated that the results observed in the two studies were independent of neuroticism.CONCLUSIONS:These findings advance knowledge in both the resource depletion and avoidance goal literatures, and bolster the view that avoidance goal pursuit over time represents a self-regulatory vulnerability.

Many people change their eating behavior as a consequence of stress. One source of stress is intrapersonal psychological conflict as caused by discrepancies between implicit and explicit motives. In the present research, we examined whether eating behavior is related to this form of stress. Study 1 (N=53), a quasi-experimental study in the lab, showed that the interaction between the implicit achievement motive disposition and explicit commitment toward an achievement task significantly predicts the number of snacks consumed in a consecutive taste test. In cross-sectional Study 2 (N=100), with a sample of middle-aged women, overall motive discrepancy was significantly related to diverse indices of unsettled eating. Regression analyses revealed interaction effects specifically for power and achievement motivation and not for affiliation. Emotional distress further partially mediated the relationship between the overall motive discrepancy and eating behavior.