{"title":"是暂时放手,还是永远放手?成年期的目标搁置和目标脱离。","authors":"Zita Mayer, Alexandra M Freund","doi":"10.1037/pag0000892","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>People shape their development through selecting, maintaining, and ending personal goal pursuits. To manage multiple goals in a reality of limited resources, people may opt to <i>temporarily</i> shelve some goals with the intention to reengage (<i>goal shelving</i>) or to permanently give up on some goals for good (<i>goal disengagement</i>). Do preferences for goal shelving and disengagement change across adulthood? This cross-sectional study provides first evidence on age-related similarities and differences in the prevalence and antecedents of goal shelving and disengagement, and in characteristics of shelved and abandoned goals. The sample (<i>N</i> = 973) comprised 317 young (18-25 years), 327 middle-aged (36-64), and 329 older (65+) adults and was stratified by gender (50% women). Contrary to our expectation, there was no evidence for age-related differences in the number of shelved and abandoned goals, and little evidence for age-related differences in antecedents of shelving and disengagement or characteristics of shelved and abandoned goals. Young, middle-aged, and older adults most often shelved and abandoned leisure goals oriented toward gains, and most often shelved and abandoned goals to prioritize different goals and to manage resource-related restrictions, with health-related restrictions growing more relevant with age. Across all age groups, shelved goals had greater motivational value and salience than abandoned goals. Goal value, goal salience, and expected future goal-related opportunities predicted how sure people felt about <i>readopting</i> shelved goals and how sure they felt about <i>not</i> readopting abandoned goals, respectively. Implications are discussed in light of lifespan developmental theory. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48426,"journal":{"name":"Psychology and Aging","volume":" ","pages":"391-412"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"To let go for now or for good? Goal shelving and goal disengagement across adulthood.\",\"authors\":\"Zita Mayer, Alexandra M Freund\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/pag0000892\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>People shape their development through selecting, maintaining, and ending personal goal pursuits. To manage multiple goals in a reality of limited resources, people may opt to <i>temporarily</i> shelve some goals with the intention to reengage (<i>goal shelving</i>) or to permanently give up on some goals for good (<i>goal disengagement</i>). Do preferences for goal shelving and disengagement change across adulthood? This cross-sectional study provides first evidence on age-related similarities and differences in the prevalence and antecedents of goal shelving and disengagement, and in characteristics of shelved and abandoned goals. The sample (<i>N</i> = 973) comprised 317 young (18-25 years), 327 middle-aged (36-64), and 329 older (65+) adults and was stratified by gender (50% women). Contrary to our expectation, there was no evidence for age-related differences in the number of shelved and abandoned goals, and little evidence for age-related differences in antecedents of shelving and disengagement or characteristics of shelved and abandoned goals. Young, middle-aged, and older adults most often shelved and abandoned leisure goals oriented toward gains, and most often shelved and abandoned goals to prioritize different goals and to manage resource-related restrictions, with health-related restrictions growing more relevant with age. Across all age groups, shelved goals had greater motivational value and salience than abandoned goals. Goal value, goal salience, and expected future goal-related opportunities predicted how sure people felt about <i>readopting</i> shelved goals and how sure they felt about <i>not</i> readopting abandoned goals, respectively. Implications are discussed in light of lifespan developmental theory. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48426,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychology and Aging\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"391-412\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychology and Aging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000892\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/5/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology and Aging","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000892","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
人们通过选择、维持和结束个人目标追求来塑造自己的发展。为了在资源有限的情况下管理多个目标,人们可能会选择暂时搁置一些目标,以便重新投入(目标搁置),或者永久放弃一些目标(目标脱离)。在成年期,人们对搁置目标和脱离的偏好会发生变化吗?这项横断面研究提供了第一个证据,证明了目标搁置和脱离的患病率和前因,以及搁置和放弃目标的特征与年龄相关的相似性和差异性。样本(N = 973)包括317名年轻人(18-25岁)、327名中年人(36-64岁)和329名老年人(65岁以上),并按性别分层(50%为女性)。与我们的预期相反,没有证据表明搁置和放弃目标的数量与年龄有关,并且很少有证据表明搁置和脱离的前因或搁置和放弃目标的特征与年龄有关。年轻人、中年人和老年人最常搁置和放弃以收益为导向的休闲目标,最常搁置和放弃目标是为了优先考虑不同的目标和管理与资源相关的限制,与健康相关的限制与年龄的关系越来越密切。在所有年龄组中,搁置的目标比放弃的目标具有更大的激励价值和显著性。目标价值、目标突出性和预期的未来目标相关机会分别预测了人们对重新选择搁置目标的确定程度和对不重新选择放弃目标的确定程度。本文从生命发展理论的角度讨论了其影响。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
To let go for now or for good? Goal shelving and goal disengagement across adulthood.
People shape their development through selecting, maintaining, and ending personal goal pursuits. To manage multiple goals in a reality of limited resources, people may opt to temporarily shelve some goals with the intention to reengage (goal shelving) or to permanently give up on some goals for good (goal disengagement). Do preferences for goal shelving and disengagement change across adulthood? This cross-sectional study provides first evidence on age-related similarities and differences in the prevalence and antecedents of goal shelving and disengagement, and in characteristics of shelved and abandoned goals. The sample (N = 973) comprised 317 young (18-25 years), 327 middle-aged (36-64), and 329 older (65+) adults and was stratified by gender (50% women). Contrary to our expectation, there was no evidence for age-related differences in the number of shelved and abandoned goals, and little evidence for age-related differences in antecedents of shelving and disengagement or characteristics of shelved and abandoned goals. Young, middle-aged, and older adults most often shelved and abandoned leisure goals oriented toward gains, and most often shelved and abandoned goals to prioritize different goals and to manage resource-related restrictions, with health-related restrictions growing more relevant with age. Across all age groups, shelved goals had greater motivational value and salience than abandoned goals. Goal value, goal salience, and expected future goal-related opportunities predicted how sure people felt about readopting shelved goals and how sure they felt about not readopting abandoned goals, respectively. Implications are discussed in light of lifespan developmental theory. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
期刊介绍:
Psychology and Aging publishes original articles on adult development and aging. Such original articles include reports of research that may be applied, biobehavioral, clinical, educational, experimental (laboratory, field, or naturalistic studies), methodological, or psychosocial. Although the emphasis is on original research investigations, occasional theoretical analyses of research issues, practical clinical problems, or policy may appear, as well as critical reviews of a content area in adult development and aging. Clinical case studies that have theoretical significance are also appropriate. Brief reports are acceptable with the author"s agreement not to submit a full report to another journal.