The consideration of future consequences (CFC) is a cognitive-motivational construct describing the extent to which individuals consider the future outcomes of behavior during decision-making. The current research examined the extent to which CFC may be a domain-specific, as opposed to global, temporal construct. Across three surveys, adults (n = 498; 66.9% female; 41.2% students) completed the 14-item general CFC scale, five newly adapted domain-specific CFC scales, and self-report measures of behavior in five substantive domains (work, health, the environment, money, and college). Confirmatory factor analyses replicated the two-factor model in the CFC-14, supporting the distinction between CFC-Future and CFC-Immediate in domain-specific CFC-14 scales. Hierarchical regression analyses indicated that domain-specific, and not the general, CFC subscales were most strongly associated with the relevant domain-specific behavior and revealed differential patterns of association between domain-specific CFC subscales and behaviors in particular domains. The applied implications for behavioral interventions are discussed.
AcuffS. F.SoltisK. E.DennhardtA. A.BorsariB.MartensM. P.MurphyJ. G. (2017). Future so bright? Delay discounting and consideration of future consequences predict academic performance among college drinkers. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 25, 412-421. doi:10.1037/pha0000143
2.
AdamsJ. (2009). The role of time perspective in smoking cessation amongst older English adults. Health Psychology, 28, 529-534. doi:10.1037/a0015198
3.
AdamsJ. (2012). Consideration of immediate and future consequences, smoking status, and body mass index. Health Psychology, 31, 260-263. doi:10.1037/a0025790
4.
AdamsJ.NettleD. (2009). Time perspective, personality and smoking, body mass, and physical activity: An empirical study. British Journal of Health Psychology, 14, 83-105. doi:10.1348/135910708X299664
5.
AdamsJ.WhiteM. (2009). Time perspective in socioeconomic inequalities in smoking and body mass index. Health Psychology, 28, 83-90. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.28.1.83
6.
AnongS. T.FisherP. J. (2013). Future orientation and saving for medium-term expenses. Family & Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 41, 393-412. doi:10.1111/fcsr.12026
7.
ArnockyS.MilfontT. L.NicolJ. R. (2014). Time perspective and sustainable behavior: Evidence for the distinction between consideration of immediate and future consequences. Environment and Behavior, 46, 556-582. doi:10.1177/0013916512474987
8.
BatemanT. S.CrantJ. M. (1993). The proactive component of organizational behavior: A measure and correlates. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 14, 103-118. doi:10.1002/job.4030140202
9.
Bruderer EnzlerH. (2015). Consideration of future consequences as a predictor of environmentally responsible behavior: Evidence from a general population study. Environment and Behavior, 47, 618-643. doi:10.1177/0013916513512204
10.
CainM. K.ZhangZ.YuanK. H. (2017). Univariate and multivariate skewness and kurtosis for measuring nonnormality: Prevalence, influence and estimation. Behavior Research Methods, 49, 1716-1735. doi:10.3758/s13428-016-0814-1
ChapmanG. B. (1996). Temporal discounting and utility for health and money. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2, 771-791. doi:10.1037//0278-7393.22.3.771
13.
ChapmanG. B.ElsteinA. S. (1995). Valuing the future: Temporal discounting of health and money. Medical Decision Making, 15, 373-386. doi:10.1177/0272989X9501500408
14.
ColeJ. C.AndrettaJ. R.McKayM. T. (2017). An exploratory examination of the viability and meaningfulness of time attitudes profiles in adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 106, 146-151. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2016.10.046
15.
CrockettR. A.WeinmanJ.HankinsM.MarteauT. (2009). Time orientation and health-related behaviour: Measurement in general population samples. Psychology & Health, 24, 333-350. doi:10.1080/08870440701813030
16.
DassenF. C.HoubenK.JansenA. (2015). Time orientation and eating behavior: Unhealthy eaters consider immediate consequences, while healthy eaters focus on future health. Appetite, 91, 13-19. doi:10.1016/j.appet.2015.03.020
17.
DaughertyJ. R.BraseG. L. (2010). Taking time to be healthy: Predicting health behaviors with delay discounting and time perspective. Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 202-207. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2009.10.007
18.
FaberR. J.O’GuinnT. C. (1992). A clinical screener for compulsive buying. Journal of Consumer Research, 19, 459-469. doi:10.1086/209315
19.
FergusonC. J. (2009). An effect size primer: A guide for clinicians and researchers. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 40, 532-538. doi:10.1037/a0015808
20.
GuthrieL. C.ButlerS. C.LesslK.OchiO.WardM. M. (2014). Time perspective and exercise, obesity, and smoking: Moderation of associations by age. American Journal of Health Promotion, 29, 9-16. doi:10.4278/ajhp.130122-QUAN-39
21.
HardistyD. J.WeberE. U. (2009). Discounting future green: Money versus the environment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138, 329-340. doi:10.1037/a0016433
22.
HoppmannC. A.GerstorfD.SmithJ.KlumbP. L. (2007). Linking possible selves and behavior: Do domain-specific hopes and fears translate into daily activities in very old age?The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences & Social Sciences, 62, 104-111. doi:10.1093/geronb/62.2.P104
23.
HuL. T.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modelling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1-55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118
24.
Human-VogelS.RabeP. (2015). Measuring self-differentiation and academic commitment in University students: A case study of education and engineering students. South African Journal of Psychology, 45, 60-70. doi:10.1177/0081246314548808
25.
HusmanJ.ShellD. F. (2008). Beliefs and perceptions about the future: A measurement of future time perspective. Learning and Individual Differences, 18, 166-175. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2007.08.001
JoiremanJ.BallietD.SprottD.SpangenbergE.SchultzJ. (2008). Consideration of future consequences, ego-depletion, and self-control: Support for distinguishing between CFC-Immediate and CFC-Future sub-scales. Personality and Individual Differences, 45, 15-21. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.02.011
28.
JoiremanJ.KingS. (2016). Individual differences in the consideration of future and (more) immediate consequences: A review and directions for future research. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10, 313-326. doi:10.1111/spc3.12252
29.
JoiremanJ.LiuR. L. (2014). Future-oriented women will pay to reduce global warming: Mediation via political orientation, environmental values, and belief in global warming. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 40, 391-400. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.09.005
30.
JoiremanJ.ShafferM. J.BallietD.StrathmanA. (2012). Promotion orientation explains why future-oriented people exercise and eat healthy: Evidence from the two-factor Consideration of Future Consequences-14 Scale. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 1272-1287. doi:10.1177/0146167212449362
31.
KrauseK. L.CoatesH. (2008). Students’ engagement in first-year university. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 33, 493-505. doi:10.1080/02602930701698892
32.
MardiaK. V. (1970). Measures of multivariate skewness and kurtosis with applications. Biometrika, 57, 519-530. doi:10.1093/biomet/57.3.519
33.
MarkusH.NuriusP. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41, 954-969.
34.
McKayM. T.MorganG. B.van ExelN. J.WorrellF. C. (2015). Back to “the future”: Evidence of a bifactor solution for scores on the Consideration of Future Consequences Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 97, 395-402. doi:10.1080/00223891.2014.999338
35.
McKayM. T.PerryJ. L.ColeJ. C. (2018). Further evidence for the domain specificity of Consideration of Future Consequences in adolescents and university students. Personality and Individual Differences, 128, 127-132. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2018.02.032
36.
McKayM. T.PerryJ. L.ColeJ. C.MageeJ. (2017). Adolescents consider the future differently depending on the domain in question: Results of an exploratory study in the United Kingdom. Personality and Individual Differences, 104, 448-452. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2016.09.002
37.
McKayM. T.PerryJ. L.PercyA.ColeJ. C. (2016). Evidence for the reliability and validity, and some support for the practical utility of the two-factor Consideration of Future Consequences Scale-14. Personality and Individual Differences, 98, 133-136. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2016.03.097
38.
MurphyL.DockrayS. (2018). The consideration of future consequences and health behaviour: A meta-analysis. Health Psychology Review, 12, 357-381. doi: 10.1080/17437199.2018.1489298
39.
MurphyL.MurphyG. (2018). Time to drive: Present vs. Future orientation and self-reported driving behaviour. Transportation Research Part f: Traffic Psychology & Behaviour, 56, 1-13. doi: 10.1016/j.trf.2018.03.026
40.
NigroG.CosenzaM.CiccarelliM.JoiremanJ. (2016). An Italian translation and validation of the Consideration of Future Consequences-14 Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 101, 333-340. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2016.06.014
41.
OlsenS. O.TuuH. H. (2017). Time perspectives and convenience food consumption among teenagers in Vietnam: The dual role of hedonic and healthy eating values. Food Research International, 99, 98-105. doi:10.1016/j.foodres.2017.05.008
42.
OppenheimerD. M.MeyvisT.DavidenkoN. (2009). Instructional manipulation checks: Detecting satisficing to increase statistical power. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 867-872. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2009.03.009
43.
OrjiR.VassilevaJ.MandrykR. (2012). Towards an effective health interventions design: An extension of the health belief model. Online Journal of Public Health Informatics, 4. doi:10.5210/ojphi.v4i3.4321
44.
OuelletteJ. A.HesslingR.GibbonsF. X.Reis-BerganM.GerrardM. (2005). Using images to increase exercise behavior: Prototypes versus possible selves. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 610-620. doi:10.1177/0146167204271589
45.
PancaniL.RusconiP. (2018). The onset time delaying effect: Smokers vs non-smokers place the adverse consequences of smoking further in the future. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 30, 257-269.
46.
PercyA.McKayM. T.PerryJ. L.ColeJ. C. (2018). Refining the clinical application of the Consideration of Future Consequences Scale-14. Current Psychology, 1-8. doi:10.1007/s12144-018-9819-5
47.
PodsakoffP. M.MacKenzieS. B.MoormanR. H.FetterR. (1990). Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers’ trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly, 1, 107-142. doi:10.1016/1048-9843(90)90009-7
48.
PodsakoffP. M.MacKenzieS. B.PaineJ. B.BachrachD. G. (2000). Organizational citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26, 513-563. doi:10.1016/S0149-2063(00)00047-7
49.
RokeachM. (1968). A theory of organization and change within value-attitude systems. Journal of Social Issues, 24, 13-33. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1968.tb01466.x
50.
RokeachM. (1973). The nature of human values. New York, NY: Free Press. doi:10.1093/sw/19.6.758
51.
RokeachM.McLellanD. D. (1972). Feedback of information about the values and attitudes of self and others as determinants of long-term cognitive and behavioral change. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 3, 236-251. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1972.tb01275.x
52.
RosenstockI. (1966). Why people use health services. The Millbank Memorial Fund Quarterly, 44, 94-127. doi:10.2307/3348967
53.
RStudio Team (2015). RStudio: Integrated Development for RStudio, Inc., Boston, MA. Retrieved from http://www.rstudio.com/
54.
SchwartzS. H. (2007). Value orientations: Measurement, antecedents and consequences across nations. In JowellR.RobertsC.FitzGeraldR.EvaG. (Eds.), Measuring attitudes cross-nationally: Lessons from the European Social Survey (pp. 161-193). London, England: SAGE.
55.
ShippA. J.EdwardsJ. R.Schurer LambertL. (2009). Conceptualization and measurement of temporal focus: The subjective experience of the past, present, and future. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110, 1-22. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2009.05.001
56.
SkinnerE. A.KindermannT. A.FurrerC. J. (2009). A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection: Conceptualization and assessment of children’s behavioral and emotional participation in academic activities in the classroom. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69, 493-525. doi:10.1177/0013164408323233
57.
SteigerJ. H. (2007). Understanding the limitations of global fit assessment in structural equation modelling. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 893-898. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.017
58.
StrathmanA.GleicherF.BoningerD. S.EdwardsC. S. (1994). The consideration of future consequences: Weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 742-752. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.66.4.742
59.
van BeekJ.AntonidesG.HandgraafM. J. (2013). Eat now, exercise later: The relation between consideration of immediate and future consequences and healthy behavior. Personality and Individual Differences, 54, 785-791. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2012.12.015
60.
Vásquez-EcheverríaA.AntinoM.Alvarez-NuñezL.Rodríguez-MuñozA. (2018). Evidence for the reliability and factor solution of the CFCS-14 in Spanish: A multi-method validation in Spain and Uruguay. Personality and Individual Differences, 123, 171-175. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2017.11.021
61.
WiningerS. R.DeSenaT. M. (2012). Comparison of future time perspective and self-determination theory for explaining exercise behavior. Journal of Applied Biobehavioral Research, 17, 109-128. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9861.2012.00081.x
62.
YavetzB.GoldmanD.Pe’erS. (2009). Environmental literacy of pre-service teachers in Israel: A comparison between students at the onset and end of their studies. Environmental Education Research, 15, 393-415. doi:10.1080/13504620902928422
63.
ZhangW.WangH.PearceC. L. (2014). Consideration for future consequences as an antecedent of transformational leadership behavior: The moderating effects of perceived dynamic work environment. The Leadership Quarterly, 25, 329-343. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.09.002
64.
ZimbardoP. G.BoydJ. N. (1999). Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1271-1288. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1271
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
