Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM


Top Flashcards (Certified)
All Flashcards

SELF CONTROL > eval > Flashcards

eval Flashcards

(62 cards)

Start Studying
1
Q

prerequisit for control

A

to recruit modulate and disengage control, control processes must have access to control systems and information + be able to adust in accordance to current demands

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

conflict monitoring theory
Botvinick 2001
describe

A

Specific neural pathways act to eval current levels of conflict and emit necessary info to control centres to emcourage adjustment in control strength

reaction to environmental demands - high or low conflict

when less task demand, then less control is engaged

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Kahenman 1973

how is control recruited

A

recruit control processess when engage in a difficult task, not in preparation of it
ie stroop: heightened interference at the beginning of stroop trials before recognise the need to control and improve performance

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

problem with strength model - conflict monitoring

A

focus on the influence of control exertion but do not explain how the control process itself came to be
what activated control recruitment, how is it optimised and modulated and what governs when it is withdrawn?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

conflict monitoring theory
Botvinick 2001
Low conflict/interference

A

act on autopilot

ie stroop: congruent word and colour

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

conflict monitoring theory
Botvinick 2001
high conflict/interference

A

focused attention

ie stroop: incongruent word to colour

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

conflict monitoring theory
Botvinick 2001
neural circuit

A

dACC (conflict monitor: detects conflicts, evaluates control)
– reorients PFC (cog control) = initiates control process, regulates performance

feedback loop

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Carver and Sheier 1992
self reg: cybernetic control theory
model

A

TOTE:
test, operate, test, exit
feedback at each stage

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Carver and Sheier 1992
self reg: cybernetic control theory
step by step process

A
  1. hold a goal
  2. TOT…
  3. monitor progress
  4. aim to reduce discrepancy between current behaviour and outcome state
  5. if success: exit, if not: retest
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Carver and Sheier 1992
self reg: cybernetic control theory
TEST 1

A

stimulus input eval via comparison with reference value/standard (goal)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Carver and Sheier 1992
self reg: cybernetic control theory
OPERATE

A

act on discrepancy to bring beh in line with standard value - output

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Carver and Sheier 1992
self reg: cybernetic control theory
TEST 2

A

re-eval output to check standard has been reached
yes - exit
no - feedback loop

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Carver and Sheier 1992
self reg: cybernetic control theory
GOALS

A

differ in abstraction level
organised hierachially - vary in importance
lower order goals are a means to an end and controlled by overarching higher order goals (“be” goals)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

diff between carver and sheier cyber control + bau strength

vohs and bau 2004

A

theories are complementary
c+S: self reg highlights self monitoring as crucial for acting upon discrepancy between current state and goal
bau - emphasised resources in change and adjustment towards goal state - focused WITHIN c+S operate stage and reduced emphasis on performance monitoring and regulation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

self control on self regulation

bau

A

considers self control synonymous with successful self regulation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

self control on self regulation

c+s

A

percieves positive outcome expectancies to be more important in explaining self reg behaviours

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

control readiness model of self control

kleiman, vogt, trope and fishbach

A

control activated in one domain can facilitate control in another domain - mechanism based on conflict monitoring
conflict between intentions and current response detected by conflict monitoring system
- increases the strength of top down control processes to facilitate the intended responses.

process on a trial by-trial basis i.e. incongruent Stroop
- adjusted so that the response to a subsequent incongruent trial is facilitated.

control in initial trial biases attention toward goal-relevant + away from irrelevant distractors
- activating control aids control via a selective attention
mechanism domain generally

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

control readiness model of self control
kleiman, vogt, trope and fishbach
METHOD

A

sc vs control

sc: generate x4 activities to “try and avoid” this month to pursue study goals
control: generate x4 music genres to avoid listening to (control - make sure not due to primed avoidance effect but because of motivation pursue goal stimuli via assoc avoidance)

DV: m&ms cnsumed in taste test (high and low eating restraint pps)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

control readiness model of self control
kleiman, vogt, trope and fishbach
RESULTS

A

activating study self control reduces m+m consumption ONLY in those motivated to restrain diet

  • transfer of self control in one domain leads to domain general facilitation only when individual is motivated in second sc episode
  • goal of study important - motivates and generalises to goal of restraint
  • goal of music not important - does nto motivate
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

control readiness model of self control
kleiman, vogt, trope and fishbach
VS BAU

A

control readiness is not a direct contradiction of bau
1st goal being pursued not reduce resources as only planning control strategies
- means have resources to control self

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

control readiness model of self control
kleiman, vogt, trope and fishbach
problems

A

stud goal only relevant in those motivated to study - ignores hierachy of importance and how that might influence ability to generalise control/motivation to control

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

desribe parallel activation of inhibition

desribe

A

activation of motivational/beh tendencies facilitates similar motivating behaviours and hampers dissimilar behaviours

  • activation of inhibition spillover in inhibitory ability across domains
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Parallel activation of inhibition
Tuk, Trampe + Worlorp 2011
network

A

inhibitor network for cognitive/motor/affective responses
involve ACC: faciliate general self control, not specific to one task domain - allows spillover

conflict monitoring does not contend the nature of ACC conflict adjustment across domains

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Parallel activation of inhibition
Tuk, Trampe + Worlorp 2011
to what extend does the hypothesis extend **questions

A 
is it across sensory modes and systems
ie visceral (bladder) and cognitive (health beh)

does it work vise versa? - disinhibition of one domain lead to release of control in another? - can you maintain/switch

is there a tipping point?/threshold? - at what point does spillover lead to depletion?

how long can the spillover last? days/weeks/months? - regular sc in one domain faciliate regular sc in others long term?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Parallel activation of inhibition tuk, zhang and sweldens 2015 successful sc
parallel activation makes sense: choice between acting on impulse or controlling against: a lot of diff inhibitory decisions must be made to pursue ones goal thought to involve lPFC, vmPFC and ACC "inhibitory network"
26
Parallel activation of inhibition berkham, berklund and lieberman 2009 go no go spillover
inhibitory network = inhibits beh from one singular area go no go motor inhibition facilitates consequtive emotional inhibition of the amygdala
27
Parallel activation of inhibition berman et al 2009 internal meta analysis METHOD
control limited to temporal window or else deplete method: simultaneous or sequential control tasks: attention, affect, thought suppression, food control, impulsive decision making and stroop
28
Parallel activation of inhibition berman et al 2009 internal meta analysis RESULTs
spillover increase in unrelated control domains when simultaneous > sequential depletion effect when sequential
29
beliefs on self control ability | job et al 2015
whether depletion occurs or not is dependent on ones belief of willpower as a limited resource belief = motivation: influence what you believe and what you can subsequently achieve
30
belief | bandura et al 1973
belief in ability to achieve/perform a task (self efficacy) - is strong determinant on how likely one is to actually achieving it - determines belief in self and amount try
31
belief | non limited theory
do not belief willpower is 'limitless' or that one is immune to depletion effects during long and strenuous tasks but reject that willpower is easily depleted by self control processes
32
belief | job et al 2010
assess limited/non limted theory via Q | ego depletion perform worse following sc task, non limited present no such impairment
33
job et al 2010 | belief and glucose
glucose (lemonade and sugar) restores those with limited theory but has no effect on performance in those with a nonlimited theory
34
vohs et al 2012 bleief and strength task demands
implicit theories temporarily compendate for lack of resources in mild/moderate demand but deplete when demands are severe control, mild or severe depletion (no sc, 2 sc tasks and 4 sc tasks) - non lmited improve>limited in mild but not when severe - non lmited may undermine conservation of resources in highly demanding sc tasks and therefore limited perform better in severe
35
vohs et al 2012 bleief and strength task demands problems
lab study - factors beyond the impact of self control may have impacted ones willingnes to continue - nonlimited may be better as engage in every task regardless of value, whereas limited do worse in second to account for third because percieve as more important + low ecological validity - need to look at sc performance in everyday
36
job et al 2010 | belief and study
college students with nonlimited theory superior in everyday self reg in week before finals - when high demand for control procrastinate less, eat healthier, less excessive spending - exhibited across grades attained throughout the year only when sc demand low did non limited theory "waste" resources and relax control efforts
37
is incorrect, why is bau strength model so widespread?
theory need not be functional to be popular it only needs to be simple and appealing ie IQ
38
potential problem with nonlimited theory
ironic encourage people to engage in situations of control when illequipped need effective self reg trategies ie plans and means to avoid and engage in control in the face of temptation
39
what factors are thought to counteract the effects of ego depletion
cash incentives social goals tv/praying self affirmation
40
how does bau explain factors that counteract effects of ego depletion
resources fluctuate over the course of a day | factors are moderators
41
problem with bau and factors that counteract ego depletion
doesnt completely explain how self affirmation or watching tv would regain resources - may be more likely that a switch in attention/a switch in motivation
42
resource model LIMITATIONS vague
glucose: do not directly observe a resource - infer its presence based on task performance metaphorical - no true nature of willpower needs more specification on what it is, what initiates it and how it implements control - not comprehensive enough against - madden, job goals: doesnt explain relation between goals to behaviour, or how engage in goal pursuit once impulse is inhibited implementation intents? how implement, optimise and detract control? - conflict monitoring and cybernetic control - not whole story
43
resource model LIMITATIONS glucose madden
glucose mediator - research not reliably supportive of this ignores other energy releases and how they may effect ie protein slow release doesnt explain how mediators impact control ie beliefs on glucose? madden - gurgle glusose not consuming still increases resources
44
resource model LIMITATIONS sc success
cant explain why some people do achieve successful self reg long term - more concerned with what hinders>promotes control - no suggestion of how to counter depletion and what situations facilitate control what about strategies: habitual, exposure, reconstrual?
45
resource model LIMITATIONS sc=self reg? hofmann et al 2012
ignores other important aspects of self reg ie strategies - avoiding exposure, habit, reconstrual hoffman - succesful controlers found to experience less conflicts - avoid?
46
resource model LIMITATIONS experiments
carter: publication bias in literature (smaller es than reported) lacks ecological validity measures not obective or standardised (hagger - anagram, researcher involvement bias)
47
resource model LIMITATIONS experiments - anagrams
unsolvable anagrams difficult to generalise cross-culturally may induce problems as relativel novel to some - harder to some than others changes across language - cant standardise
48
resource model LIMITATIONS experiments - licensing
cant be certain that reduced efforts are because of depletion or because cant be bothered/no longer motivated to continue may induce self licensing - "ive done m part" so allow self to not try as hard compensation for study undervalued so following hard, incentive not great enough to continue
49
motivational model of ego depletion inzlicht, schmeichel and macrae 2014 proximate explanatin (how)
T1 self control leads to a shift in motivational orientation and attentional focus - in tandem motivation: away from supression/inhibition of immediate desires ("have to tasks") towards approach/gratificatino of them ("want to tasks" attention: shift away from cues which signal need t exert control shift towards cues of gratification - shift monitoring of conflict - less likely to recognise discrepancy with goal when conflict arises
50
motivational model of ego depletion carver + herman jones 2009 agg
heightened aggression at time 2 not resource depeletion = lack of self control = increases impulsive strength/motivation towards gratification of emotion/approach to emotional expression
51
motivational model of ego depletion wegner 1984 cybernetic models and attentional shifts
in line with c+S | emphasises the importance of monitoring/attentional components in determining beh outcome and adjustment
52
motivational model of ego depletion inzlicht and gutsell 2007 ERN - attentional shifts
acc increase in amplitude during conflict and error detection tasks depressed ern amplitude at time 2 - weakened monitoring of sc conflict - blunted goal attention and neglect of goal pusuit
53
motivational model of ego depletion and beliefs
personal theories of sc effect motivations limited - sensitive to internal signs of depletion/fatigue nonlimited - identify fatigue as needing to reinforce control
54
motivational model of ego depletion and self affirmation | schmeichel and vohs 2009
SA heightens degree people attend and react to sc failures buffers approach motivations 'kick start' monitoring sstem and dampen approach system - amplifies ACC cm system
55
``` motivational model of ego depletion ultimate account (why) ```
organisms prefer exploration-exploitation trade offs pitt the value of exploiting the value of a reward in the moment against the utility of exploring a new environment motivational/attentional shifts regulate the extent to which the control system favours task enagagement to disengagement and sampling of alt opportunities
56
motivational model of ego depletion | immediate account
balancing exploitation and exploration is adaptive time is limited - need to balance external reward of labour with the internal reward of leisure to maximised outcomes external labour is gratifying but aversive and therefore counteract with internal leisure activities
57
applications of self control: | limited theory
take breaks relax balancing frame pre plan
58
applications of self control: | spillover
engage at all things at once | highlight
59
applications of self control: | muscle strength
brain training/sc freq engaged in
60
self control and conflict identification
cn initiate self control in immedaite situation if dont identify conflict width consistency ease of monitoring diagnosticity
61
hagger multilab 2012
23 labs - e crossing task and multisource inference task (MSIT) ES close to zero - not a sig effect reported e crossing effortful
62
bau and vohs against hagger
e task not sufficiently tax self regulation - effort does not constitute depletion but is a moderator - despite earlier contestings that this was a good task

SELF CONTROL (7 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions