This article considers the notion of regulatory fit from a goal-systemic perspective. It is suggested that regulatory fit, as Avnet and Higgins (2006) define it, corresponds to a match between a person's activity and his or her (background) process goal of pursuing an (focal) attainment goal in a desired manner. The author considers prior regulatory fit data from this perspective and raises additional issues for further research and theoretical elucidation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AvnetTamar, and Tory HigginsE. (2006), “How Regulatory Fit Affects Value in Consumer Choice and Opinions,”Journal of Marketing Research, 43(February), 1–10.
2.
CesarioJosephGrantHeidi, and Tory HigginsE. (2004), “Regulatory Fit and Persuasion: Transfer from ‘Feeling Right,’”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(3), 388–404.
3.
ChunW.Y.KruglanskiA.W.Sleeth-KepplerD., and FriedmanR. (2005), “The Multifinality Principle in Choice Without Awareness,” manuscript submitted for publication.
4.
HigginsE. ToryIdsonLorraine C.FreitasAntonio L.SpiegelScott, and MoldenDaniel C. (2003), “Transfer of Value from Fit,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 1140–53.
5.
KruglanskiA.W., and FreundT. (1983), “The Freezing and Unfreezing of Lay Inferences: Effects on Impressional Primacy, Ethnic Stereotyping, and Numerical Anchoring,”Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 448–68.
6.
KruglanskiA.W.RavivA.Bar-TalD.RavivA.SharvitK.EllisS.BarR.PierroA., and MannettiL. (2005), “Says Who? Epistemic Authority Effects in Social Judgment,” in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 37, ZannaM.P., ed. New York: Academic Press, 346–92.
7.
KruglanskiA.W.ShahJ.Y.FishbachA.FriedmanR.ChunW., and Sleeth-KepplerD. (2002), “A Theory of Goals Systems,” in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 34, ZannaM.P., ed. New York: Academic Press, 331–78.
8.
NisbettR.E., and WilsonT.D. (1977), “Telling More Than We Can Know: Verbal Reports on Mental Processes,”Psychological Review, 87, 231–59.
9.
TetlockP.E. (1992), “The Impact of Accountability on Judgment and Choice,” in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 25, BerkowitzL., ed. New York: Academic Press, 331–76.
