This paper compares the predictive power of the goal-striving reasons model and the self-concordance model on a sub-dimensional and an individual goal-striving reasons level based on a cross-sectional research design (N = 139). Multiple regression analyses on a sub-dimensional level show that approach, as well as avoidance goal motivation, have higher predictive power in the prediction of affective and cognitive subjective well-being than autonomous and controlled goal motivation. Equally, the predictive power of the four individual goal-striving reasons is generally stronger than the predictive power of the individual self-concordance reasons. The analyses of the theoretical differences between goal-striving reasons and self-concordance show that on an overall goal-striving reasons index level, on a sub-dimensional level as well as on an individual goal-striving reasons level that the goal-striving reasons framework is generally more strongly related to measures representing people’s tendency to be influenced by others in their goal pursuit. Self-concordance is not significantly associated with either of these measures. Based on these findings, it is concluded that the goal-striving reasons framework is more sensitive to the influence of others than self-concordance. The theoretical implications of these findings revolve around the fact that goal-striving reasons can be seen as a more comprehensive goal reason measure than self-concordance. Practical implications point towards the importance of personal assertiveness as a correlate of positive goal-striving reasons.
Oxford Brookes Business School\Oxford Brookes Business School\Department of Business and Management
Year of publication: 2019Date of RADAR deposit: 2019-01-28
© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019. "Users may view, print, copy, download and text and data-mine the content, for the purposes of academic research."
RADAR: Research Archive and Digital Asset RepositoryAbout RADAR