Self-regulation of goal-setting: turning free fantasies about the future into binding goals
Abstract
Fantasy realization theory states that when people contrast their fantasies about a desired future with reflections on present reality, a necessity to act is induced that leads to the activation and use of relevant expectations. Strong goal commitment arises in light of favorable expectations, and weak goal commitment arises in light of unfavorable expectations. To the contrary, when people only fantasize about a desired future or only reflect on present reality, expectancy-independent moderate goal commitment emerges. Four experiments pertaining to various life domains supported these hypotheses. Strength of goal commitment was assessed in cognitive (e.g., making plans), affective (e.g., felt attachment), and behavioral terms (e.g., effort expenditure, quality of performance). Implications for theories on goal setting and goal striving are discussed.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Expectations of success moderate the effect of mental contrasting on goal pursuit.
“Expectations of success, perceived likelihood of attaining the desired outcome (i.e., general expectations, usually measured by 'how likely do you think it is that you will attain your goal?') moderate the effect of mental contrasting on goal pursuit (Oettingen, 2000; Oettingen et al., 2001).”
From A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Mental Contrasting With Implementation Intentions on Goal Attainment (2021) · cites this paper as Oettingen et al., 2001
Mental contrasting is a strategy designed to enhance goal commitment when expectations of success are high.
“a strategy designed to enhance goal commitment when expectations of success are high (Oettingen et al., 2001).”
From The effectiveness of implementation intentions in children: A systematic review and meta‐analysis (2026) · cites this paper as Oettingen et al., 2001
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 106 · Cited by 619
- Authors
- Oettingen, G., Pak, H.-J., & Schnetter, K.
- Affiliations
- New York University (US)
- University of Konstanz (DE)
- Freie Universität Berlin (DE)
- ORCID
- Oettingen, Gabriele
- Venue
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
- Published
- 2001
- Volume
- 80
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 736-753
- ISSN
- 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1315
- OpenAlex
- W1983554876
- Cited by
- 619
- References
- 106
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 35 · 2018: 35 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 44 · 2013: 32 · 2012: 35
- FWCI
- 18.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (submittedVersion)
- Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion)
- MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Grit, Self-Efficacy, and Motivation
- Keywords
- goal commitment, goal setting, self-regulation, goal pursuit, expectations, effort expenditure, performance quality, planning
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Aspirations, Psychological, Fantasy, Female, Goals, Humans, Male, Motivation, Self-Assessment, Social Control, Informal
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
