Regulatory Mode Profiles and the Organization of the Flow of Time

Danilo Garcia, Erik Lindskär
{"title":"Regulatory Mode Profiles and the Organization of the Flow of Time","authors":"Danilo Garcia, Erik Lindskär","doi":"10.4172/2469-9837.1000184","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Individuals strive after goals through regulatory modes of assessment and locomotion. The \n independent inter-relationship between these two modes implies four profiles: assessor (i.e. high in assessment/low \n in locomotion), low regulator (i.e. low assessment/low locomotion), high regulator (i.e. high assessment/high \n locomotion), and locomotor (i.e. low assessment/high locomotion). We investigated the way individuals with different \n profiles organize the flow of time (i.e. past, present, and future) in order to explore how the outlook on time might be \n associated to changes in regulatory mode. \nMethod: High school pupils and university Students (N=522) answered to the Self-regulatory Mode \n Questionnaire and Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory. \nResults: The regulatory mode profiles had a significant effect on the five time perspective dimensions (F(15, \n 1548)=14.66, p<0.001, Pillias´Trace=0.37). Comparisons between individuals who differed in one regulatory mode \n but where similar in the other suggested that high levels of past positive and low levels of past negative were \n associated to low assessment when locomotion was high and to high locomotion when assessment was low. High \n levels in the future time perspective dimension were related to high levels of locomotion when assessment was high, \n while low levels of past negative were related to low assessment when locomotion was low. \nConclusion: The results illustrate the complexity of a dynamic system of regulation in which the same \n antecedents can lead to different outcomes (i.e. multi-finality) and different antecedents can lead to the same \n outcome (i.e. equifinality). Although only theoretical, this gives an idea of how some leaps might be abrupt as a \n quantum leap (i.e. extremely different profiles), while others might be serial (i.e. from one profile to another profile \n that shares the same level in one regulatory mode but that differs in the other).","PeriodicalId":439866,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of School and Cognitive Psychology","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of School and Cognitive Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4172/2469-9837.1000184","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Background: Individuals strive after goals through regulatory modes of assessment and locomotion. The independent inter-relationship between these two modes implies four profiles: assessor (i.e. high in assessment/low in locomotion), low regulator (i.e. low assessment/low locomotion), high regulator (i.e. high assessment/high locomotion), and locomotor (i.e. low assessment/high locomotion). We investigated the way individuals with different profiles organize the flow of time (i.e. past, present, and future) in order to explore how the outlook on time might be associated to changes in regulatory mode. Method: High school pupils and university Students (N=522) answered to the Self-regulatory Mode Questionnaire and Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory. Results: The regulatory mode profiles had a significant effect on the five time perspective dimensions (F(15, 1548)=14.66, p<0.001, Pillias´Trace=0.37). Comparisons between individuals who differed in one regulatory mode but where similar in the other suggested that high levels of past positive and low levels of past negative were associated to low assessment when locomotion was high and to high locomotion when assessment was low. High levels in the future time perspective dimension were related to high levels of locomotion when assessment was high, while low levels of past negative were related to low assessment when locomotion was low. Conclusion: The results illustrate the complexity of a dynamic system of regulation in which the same antecedents can lead to different outcomes (i.e. multi-finality) and different antecedents can lead to the same outcome (i.e. equifinality). Although only theoretical, this gives an idea of how some leaps might be abrupt as a quantum leap (i.e. extremely different profiles), while others might be serial (i.e. from one profile to another profile that shares the same level in one regulatory mode but that differs in the other).
监管模式简介与时间流动的组织
背景:个体通过评估和运动的调节模式来追求目标。这两种模式之间的独立相互关系意味着四种特征:评估者(即高评估/低运动),低调节者(即低评估/低运动),高调节者(即高评估/高运动)和运动者(即低评估/高运动)。我们调查了不同个体组织时间流(即过去、现在和未来)的方式,以探索时间观如何与监管模式的变化相关联。方法:高中生和大学生共522名,分别填写自我调节模式问卷和津巴多时间视角量表。结果:调节模式对5个时间视角维度有显著影响(F(15,1548)=14.66, p<0.001, Pillias´Trace=0.37)。在一种调节模式不同而另一种调节模式相似的个体之间的比较表明,高水平的过去阳性和低水平的过去阴性与运动高时的低评估和低评估时的高运动相关。未来时间展望维度的高水平与高运动水平相关,而过去消极维度的低水平与低运动水平相关。结论:研究结果说明了一个动态调节系统的复杂性,在这个系统中,相同的先行词可以导致不同的结果(即多重终局性),而不同的先行词可以导致相同的结果(即等终局性)。虽然这只是理论上的,但这给了一个想法,即一些飞跃可能是突然的量子飞跃(即极端不同的概况),而另一些可能是连续的(即从一个概况到另一个概况,在一个监管模式中共享相同的水平,但在另一个不同)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信