Prioritizing association strength versus value: the influence of self-regulatory modes on means evaluation in single goal and multigoal contexts.

Means of goal attainment are said to be multifinal when they are capable of attaining more than 1 goal at the same time. Such means have an advantage over unifinal means because they have the potential to attain greater overall value. However, they have the disadvantage (relative to unifinal means) of diluting the association between the means and each of the goals (Zhang, Fishbach, & Kruglanski, 2007). In turn,diluted association strength is often interpreted as reduced means' instrumentality. Given these tradeoffs between value (favoring a multifinal option) and instrumentality (favoring the unifinal option), the question is under what conditions 1 or the other would be selected. Based on regulatory mode theory(Higgins, Kruglanski, & Pierro, 2003; Kruglanski et al., 2000), we predicted and found in 5 experiments that individuals operating in a locomotion self-regulatory mode prefer a unifinal to multifinal means,whereas individuals operating in an assessment mode prefer multifinal to unifinal means. Implications of these findings for self-regulatory phenomena are discussed.

The perfect mix: regulatory complementarity and the speed-accuracy balance in group performance.

In this research, we varied the composition of 4-member groups. One third of the groups consisted exclusively of "locomotors," individuals predominantly oriented toward action. Another third of the groups consisted exclusively of "assessors," individuals predominantly oriented toward evaluation. The final third of the groups consisted of a mix of locomotors and assessors. We found that the groups containing only locomotors were faster than the groups containing only assessors, and the groups containing only assessors were more accurate than the groups containing only locomotors. The groups containing a mix of assessors and locomotors were as fast as the groups containing only locomotors and as accurate as the groups containing only assessors. These results echo findings at the individual level of analysis, and suggest that the testing and action components of operating systems independently contribute to performance both intra- and interpersonally.