فراز و نشیب های تعهد به هدف: رضایت، سرمایه گذاری و جایگزین
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|36625||2013||6 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||4866 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Personality and Individual Differences, Volume 54, Issue 5, April 2013, Pages 663–668
Constructs typically used to understand commitment between individuals were used to elucidate individual differences in goal commitment. In Study 1, 299 college students completed assessments of goal satisfaction, investments, alternatives and commitment regarding an academic goal. Structural equation modeling demonstrated confirmatory evidence for satisfaction’s, investments’, and alternatives’ collective impact on people’s goal commitment. In Study 2, the model components were manipulated by having 236 college students considered the goal to learn a new language and read information suggesting they were high or low in satisfaction, investments, and alternatives. Results demonstrated all three factors had a causal impact on people’s level of goal commitment. Both studies found an individual’s level of goal commitment was strongest when satisfaction and investments were high and the impact of alternatives was low.
Numerous factors impact whether people accomplish their goals; however, one primary component is goal commitment. In accordance with current conceptions of this construct (e.g., Oettingen et al., 2009), we define goal commitment as one’s intention or determination to reach a particular goal. The importance of commitment was well appreciated by William James (1890) in recognizing one of the most notable differences in people is that between those who are committed and those who are not. As such, commitment is thought to have a vital influence on goal pursuit and is seen as a prerequisite for successful goal attainment (e.g., Jostmann and Koole, 2009 and Oettingen et al., 2009). A bevy of work has demonstrated that people high in commitment are more likely to put effort and time toward their goals, are more likely to persist at, and are subsequently more likely to achieve their goals, compared to those low in commitment (e.g., Fishbach and Dhar, 2005, Jostmann and Koole, 2009, Klinger, 1975, Oettingen et al., 2009 and Shah and Higgins, 1997). But less is known about the factors that determine why some people are more committed to their goals than others. As Oettingen and colleagues (2009) state, “although plenty of research examines the beneficial consequences of goal commitment, it is much less clear how goal commitment emerges” (p. 610). The few studies that have examined potential antecedents have focused almost exclusively on expectancy and value (Locke, Latham, & Erez, 1988). These findings suggest that people’s commitment is a function of their expectancy of attaining the goal, the valence of that particular goal, and the interaction between them (Shah & Higgins, 1997). However, it is likely that person-level variables other than expectancy and value influence people’s level of goal commitment (e.g., Klein, Molloy, & Brinsfield, 2012). The aim of the present work was to address this blind spot in the literature. In doing so, we relied on constructs typically used to predict relationship commitment as a general framework to better understand goal commitment.