How decision reversibility affects motivation.

The present research examined how decision reversibility can affect motivation. On the basis of extant findings, it was suggested that 1 way it could affect motivation would be to strengthen different regulatory foci, with reversible decision making, compared to irreversible decision making, strengthening prevention-related motivation relatively more than promotion-related motivation. If so, then decision reversibility should have effects associated with the relative differences between prevention and promotion motivation. In 5 studies, we manipulated the reversibility of a decision and used different indicators of regulatory focus motivation to test these predictions. Specifically, Study 1 tested for differences in participants' preference for approach versus avoidance strategies toward a desired end state. In Study 2, we used speed and accuracy performance as indicators of participants' regulatory motivation, and in Study 3, we measured global versus local reaction time performance. In Study 4, we approached the research question in a different way, making use of the value-from-fit hypothesis (Higgins, 2000, 2002). We tested whether a fit between chronic regulatory focus and focus induced by the reversibility of the decision increased participants' subjective positive feelings about the decision outcome. Finally, in Study 5, we tested whether regulatory motivation, induced by decision reversibility, also influenced participants' preference in specific product features. The results generally support our hypothesis showing that, compared to irreversible decisions, reversible decisions strengthen a prevention focus more than a promotion focus. Implications for research on decision making are discussed.

Regulatory mode preferences for autonomy supporting versus controlling instructional styles.

BACKGROUND: Three studies carried out in educational settings examined determinants of teacher's instructional styles and students' degree of satisfaction with the learning climates created by such styles. AIMS: Based upon regulatory mode theory, Studies 1 and 2 tested the hypotheses that teachers' locomotion orientation will be positively related, and their assessment orientation will be negatively related, to autonomy supportive (vs. controlling) instructional styles. Study 3 tested the hypothesis that students' regulatory mode will exhibit a fit effect with the prevalent learning climate in their school. SAMPLES: Participants for Study 1 were 378 teachers (278 females); for Study 2 were 96 teachers (65 females); and for Study 3 were 190 students (all males). METHOD: Participants completed questionnaires that included measures of teaching styles (Studies 1 and 2), perceived learning climate and satisfaction (Study 3), and regulatory mode orientations (Studies 1 and 3). In Study 2 regulatory mode orientations were experimentally induced. RESULTS: Results confirmed that teachers' autonomy supportive versus controlling styles were positively related to their locomotion orientations and negatively related to their assessment orientation, and that students with a stronger locomotion (vs. assessment) orientation reported a higher level of satisfaction when the learning climate was perceived as autonomy supportive (vs. controlling). CONCLUSIONS: The present studies show that teachers' preference for adopting an instructional style is influenced by their regulatory mode orientations, and that the effects of a learning climate on students' satisfaction are contingent on a fit between type of learning climate and students' regulatory mode orientations.