- 06 Apr, 2021
- 0 Comments
- 1 Min Read
Self-Regulation
Results and discussion
We performed a two-way ANOVA on the amount of time participants procrastinated by working on the first task, with
instrumentality condition (focal goal, control goal, or control
nongoal) and task frame (nondepleting or depleting) as
between-subjects factors.
As predicted, a main effect of instrumentality condition
emerged, F(2, 68) = 10.58, p < .001. Participants spent more
time on the distractor task in the focal-goal condition (M =
3.34 min, SD = 1.25) than in the control-goal condition (M =
2.05 min, SD = 1.18), F(1, 46) = 13.65, p = .001, and in the
control-nongoal condition (M = 2.17 min, SD = 1.11), F(1, 47) =
12.16, p = .001. The means of the two control conditions did
not differ significantly from each other, F < 1.
A main effect of task frame also emerged, F(1, 68) = 5.39,
p = .02; participants spent less time on the distractor task when
it was framed as depleting resources for the target task (M =
2.09 min, SD = 1.40) than when it was framed as nondepleting
(M = 2.82 min, SD = 1.12).
Finally, as predicted, the Instrumentality Condition × Task
Frame interaction was significant, F(2, 68) = 3.08, p = .052.
As shown in Figure 2, when the distractor task was framed as
depleting resources for the goal-relevant task, instrumentality
condition significantly affected time spent on the distractor
task, F(2, 30) = 10.83, p < .001; participants in the focal-goal
condition spent more time on the distractor task (M = 3.53 min,
SD = 1.44) than did participants in the control-goal condition
(M = 1.42 min, SD = 1. 00), F(1, 19) = 15.94, p = .001, or
participants in the control-nongoal condition (M = 1.68 min,
SD = 0.90), F(1, 19) = 13.30, p = .002. The same pattern was
evident when the task was framed as nondepleting (focal-goal
condition: M = 3.22 min, SD = 1.15; control-goal condition: M =
2.63 min, SD = 1.05; control-nongoal condition: M = 2.59 min,
0
1
2
3
4
Control Nongoal
(Positive Partner)
Control Goal
(Recreation)
Instrumentality Condition
Focal Goal
(Academics)
Time Spent on Distractor Task (min)
Depleting Frame
Nondepleting Frame
Fig. 2. Results from Experiment 2: time spent on the distractor task as
a function of task frame (depleting or nondepleting) and instrumentality
condition (control nongoal, control goal, or focal goal). Error bars denote
standard errors of the mean.
Downloaded from pss.sagepub.com at NORTHWESTERN UNIV LIBRARY on March 30, 2011
Outsourcing Self-Regulation 373
SD = 1.12), although the effect was not significant, F(2, 32) = 1.41,
p = .26, and none of the conditions differed significantly from
each other, ps > .16.
Participants in both the control-goal and the control-nongoal
conditions responded to the task frame by spending less time
on the distractor task when it was described as depleting
than when it was described as nondepleting—control-goal
condition: F(1, 23) = 8.69, p < .001; contro