Conservation of Resources Theory and the ‘Strength’ Model of Self-Control: Conceptual Overlap and Commonalities: Editorial

Abstract

I am pleased to introduce the current issue of Stress and Health which contains a seminal conceptual review by Chen, Westman, and Hobfoll (2015). In the review, the authors examine the application of Hobfoll's (1989, 2001, 2002) conservation of resources (COR) theory to explain resilience and stress in organizational contexts. The article is a landmark publication that fits well with the mission of Stress and Health (Probst & Hagger, 2014) as it integrates one of the leading theories of stress with current theoretical approaches to resilience, provides an evidence-base for the integration, moves thinking forward by proposing some clear testable hypotheses in the field and sets out an agenda for future research. As a researcher interested in the role of self-regulation (Hagger, 2010a) within models of motivation (e.g., Chatzisarantis, Hagger, & Brickell, 2008; Hagger & Chatzisarantis, 2011) and social cognition (e.g., Chatzisarantis, Hagger, & Smith, 2007; Hagger, Anderson, Kyriakaki, & Darkings, 2007; Hagger & Chatzisarantis, 2006; Hagger, Chatzisarantis, et al., 2007; Hagger & Luszczynska, 2014; Head & Noar, 2014; Noar & Head, 2014; Sniehotta, Presseau, & Araújo-Soares, 2014), and its effects on promoting good health and minimizing ill health (Hagger, 2013a, 2014a), including the maladaptive effects of stress-related health outcomes (Hagger, 2010b, 2014b), I saw important parallels in the theoretical tenets of COR theory outlined in Chen et al.'s (2015) review and current theoretical models of self-regulation. In this editorial, I will take the opportunity to briefly outline the conceptual overlaps and commonalities between COR theory and a leading model of self-regulation that has received a lot of attention in the social psychological, health and stress literature: the strength or limited-resource model of self-control (Baumeister, Bratslavsky, Muraven, & Tice, 1998; Baumeister, Vohs, & Tice, 2007; Hagger, Wood, Stiff, & Chatzisarantis, 2009, 2010a, 2010b). Given the central unifying premise of resources across these two theoretical approaches, I will examine how they could be integrated, a process that I have considered important for theory in the field of social and health psychology to move forward (Chan & Hagger, 2012; Hagger, 2009b; Hagger & Chatzisarantis, 2009a, 2009b, 2014a), and how they may be applied to provide parsimonious but comprehensive explanations of health behaviour, particularly stress responses. I will also suggest how the integrated approach incorporates resilience as a key moderator of the process of behavioural regulation in health contexts.