507088

research-article2013
PSPXXX10.1177/0146167213507088Personality and Social Psychology BulletinSevincer et al.

Article

Personality and Social

Mental Contrasting and Transfer of

Psychology Bulletin
2014, Vol. 40(2) 139­–152
© 2013 by the Society for Personality
Energization and Social Psychology, Inc
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0146167213507088
pspb.sagepub.com

A. Timur Sevincer1, P. Daniel Busatta1,

and Gabriele Oettingen1,2

Abstract
Mental contrasting a desired future with present reality is a self-regulation strategy that fosters energization in line with
a person’s expectations of successfully attaining the desired future. We investigated whether physiological energization
(measured by systolic blood pressure) elicited by mental contrasting a desired future of solving a given task transfers to
effort in an unrelated task. As predicted, mental contrasting a desired future of excelling in an intelligence test (Study 1)
and of writing an excellent essay (Study 2) triggered changes in energization that translated into physical effort in squeezing
a handgrip (Study 1) and translated into mental effort in writing a get-well letter (Study 2). Results suggest that mental
contrasting of solving one task triggers energization that may fuel effort for performing an unrelated task. Implications for
intervention research are discussed.

Keywords
mental contrasting, expectations, energization, effort, performance

Received June 27, 2013; revision accepted September 03, 2013

A young adult is considering whether to start a career in sing- present reality. Would this state of heightened energization
ing. Mental contrasting the desired future of becoming a suc- help her perform an unrelated task such as doing her home-
cessful artist (e.g., being admired) with obstacles in the work for her English class?
present reality that stand in the way of becoming a successful
artist (e.g., not yet having performed on stage) will help her
Mental Contrasting
in mobilizing the necessary energy to pursue the desired
future (e.g., practice singing), given that she has high expec- When people use the self-regulation strategy of mental con-
tations of attaining the desired future. Indeed, mental con- trasting, they first name an important desired future they
trasting, a desired future with present reality, is an effective would like to attain, such as completing one’s admission appli-
self-regulation strategy that translates high expectations of cation for art school. Then they imagine the best outcome of
success into mobilization of energy. Energy mobilization in attaining the specified desired future (e.g., feeling proud), and
turn fuels effort and performance toward attaining the desired thereafter they imagine the present reality that stands in the
future (Oettingen, 2012; Oettingen et al., 2009). way of attaining the desired future (e.g., getting distracted).
Energy mobilization or energization, defined as “the extent Imagining the desired future followed by the present reality
to which the organism as a whole is activated or aroused” leads people to recognize that they have not attained the
(Duffy, 1934, p. 194), can be assessed by physiological indica- desired future yet and need to overcome the reality to do so. As
tors of autonomic functions (e.g., blood pressure; Cannon, a consequence, expectations of success, defined here as peo-
1915; Wright, 1996). Energization is associated with high per- ple’s judgments about how likely it is that they can attain the
formance, particularly in challenging tasks (Wright, Murray, desired future (see, for example, Bandura, 1997), become acti-
Storey, & Williams, 1997). Here, we investigated whether vated. The activated expectations then inform behavior
mental contrasting the desired future of solving a given task
may lead “the organism as a whole to be activated or aroused” 1
University of Hamburg, Germany
and whether this heightened energization would predict effort 2
New York University, New York, USA
in a task unrelated to the desired future targeted by mental con-
Corresponding Author:
trasting. With regard to our example above, suppose the stu-
Timur Sevincer, Department of Psychology, University of Hamburg, Von-
dent feels energized because she mental contrasted her desired Melle-Park 5, D-20146 Hamburg, Germany.
and feasible future of becoming an artist with obstacles in the Email: [email protected]

Downloaded from psp.sagepub.com at NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIV LIB on May 30, 2015
140 Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 40(2)

(Oettingen, 2012; Oettingen, Pak, & Schnetter, 2001). When as one mechanism (summary by Sevincer & Oettingen, in
expectations are high, people will vigorously try to attain the press). In one study (Oettingen et al., 2009, Study 1), partici-
desired future. Conversely, when expectations are low, they pants either mental contrasted or indulged about solving an
will let go from trying to attain the desired future. Such selec- interpersonal task (e.g., getting to know someone).
tive effort will save resources: People who mental contrast Energization was assessed by systolic blood pressure (SBP),
invest their resources such as time, energy, or money in pursu- a reliable indicator of energy mobilization (Wright, 1996),
ing attainable futures and refrain from wasting their resources while participants engaged in the mental exercise. Participants
in pursuing unattainable futures. in the mental contrasting, but not those in the indulging con-
The effects of mental contrasting are thus in line with the dition, showed expectancy-dependent changes in SBP. Of
motivational intensity theory (Brehm & Self, 1989), which importance, the effect of mental contrasting on performance
states that effort mobilization is guided by a resource conser- was mediated by the change in SBP. This pattern was concep-
vation principle. That is, the amount of effort people are will- tually replicated in a second study (Oettingen et al., 2009,
ing to spend on a given task depends on the experienced task Study 2) in which participants mental contrasted or indulged
demand as long as the task completion is possible (expecta- about giving an excellent fictitious job talk. Energization was
tions of success) and justified (incentive value; Gendolla, assessed by self-report (e.g., “How full of energy do you feel
Wright, & Richter, 2012; Richter, 2013; Silvestrini & with respect to the upcoming talk?”) directly after the mental
Gendolla, 2013; Wright & Kirby, 2001). However, research exercise. Performance in the job talk was videotaped and
on motivational intensity theory specifies how situational judged by two independent observers. In sum, mental con-
determinants such as task demand, expectations, and the trasting the desired future of solving a given task elicited
incentive value to solve the task, guide effort mobilization, expectancy-dependent energization, which fueled subsequent
and research on mental contrasting focuses on the mental performance in that task. On the basis that energization can be
processes that influence how expectations are translated into understood as a general arousal state, the present research
selective effort mobilization and performance. aims to extend these findings by examining whether mental
Merely elaborating the future (i.e., indulging) or the real- contrasting with regard to solving a given task elicits energi-
ity (i.e., dwelling) leads to effort and performance that is zation that fuels performance in a task, unrelated to the initial
expectancy-independent (Oettingen, 2012; Oettingen et al., task targeted by mental contrasting.
2001). These one-sided elaborations fail to induce a percep-
tion of the reality as standing in the way of the desired
future. Thus, expectations do not become activated and do
Energization
not translate into effort and performance. Elaborating reality The concept of energization has a long tradition in motiva-
before the future (i.e., reverse contrasting) also fails to tion psychology. Hull (1943, 1952) described variations in
induce a perception of reality as standing in the way of the behavior as a function of two variables, namely, direction
future because the future is not a reference point for the real- and intensity. While direction specifies whether an organism
ity, and thus the reality cannot be perceived as an obstacle approaches or avoids a cue (Atkinson, 1957; Elliot, 2006),
that needs to be overcome to attain the desired future intensity has been described as energization, excitation,
(Oettingen et al., 2001). Therefore, after reverse contrasting, arousal, or activation (Cannon, 1915). Traditionally, energy
expectations do not become activated and do not translate mobilization is assessed by indicators of autonomic function,
into effort and performance. specifically of the cardiovascular system. Because energiza-
A multitude of studies supports the effects of mental con- tion or effort mobilization leads to an increased bodily
trasting on selective effort and performance (summary by demand of oxygen and nutrients, and the cardiovascular sys-
Oettingen, 2012). These studies measured various indicators tem supplies tissue with energy in the form of oxygen and
of effort and performance including cognitive (e.g., making nutrients (Duffy, 1934; Wright, 1996), increased energization
plans), affective (e.g., feelings of anticipated disappointment is manifested in a stronger cardiovascular response (Brownley,
in case of failure), motivational (e.g., feelings of determina- Hurwitz, & Schneiderman, 2000). The increased cardiovas-
tion), and behavioral (e.g., self-reports of achievement and cular response is mediated by activation in the sympathetic
grades). The predicted pattern emerged whether these indica- nervous system (Obrist, 1981). Sympathetic activation (e.g.,
tors were assessed via self-report or observations, directly beta-adrenergic discharge) directly influences the force with
after the experiment or weeks later, and whether mental con- which the heart pumps (i.e., myocardial contractility), which
trasting was experimentally induced or unobtrusively observed in turn systematically influences SBP—the maximum pres-
(Kappes, Singmann, & Oettingen, 2012; Oettingen, 2000; sure exerted by the blood against the vessel walls. Therefore,
Oettingen, Marquardt, & Gollwitzer, 2012; Oettingen, Mayer, SBP is a reliable (and widely used) indicator for assessing
& Thorpe, 2010; Oettingen, Stephens, Mayer, & Brinkmann, energization (Wright, 1996; Wright & Kirby, 2001). Other
2010; Oettingen et al., 2001; Sevincer & Oettingen, 2013). cardiovascular responses, such as diastolic blood pressure
Regarding the processes mediating mental contrasting (DBP), the minimum pressure of the blood against the vessel
effects on performance, research has identified energization walls, and heart rate (HR), the pulse or pace with which the

Downloaded from psp.sagepub.com at NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIV LIB on May 30, 2015
Sevincer et al. 141

heart pumps, are less reliable indicators of energization (indicated by changes in SBP), which then would translate
because they are also heavily influenced by other parameters into physical effort in an unrelated task. To induce mental
(e.g., DBP is strongly influenced by peripheral resistance— contrasting and to measure SBP, we modeled our procedure
the diameter of the blood vessels—and HR by parasympa- after previous research on mental contrasting and energiza-
thetic activation; Berntson, Cacioppo, & Quigley, 1993). tion (Oettingen et al., 2009). That is, we first assessed partici-
Causes of energization can be manifold: Physical exercise, pants’ baseline SBP. Analogous to SBP, we also assessed
drugs, a bodily need state (hunger, thirst), threatening or DBP and HR. Thereafter, we presented participants with
novel stimuli (which may elicit a fight or flight response), their task of writing an excellent fictitious graduate admis-
stimuli that prime an action-mind-set (words such as “action,” sion essay and asked them to indicate their expectations of
“go”; Gendolla & Silvestrini, 2010), performing difficult writing an excellent essay. Moreover, because the incentive
tasks, as well as simply thinking about upcoming challenges value of attaining a desired event may influence SBP (Wright,
(e.g., when people anticipate that they will perform complex Shaw, & Jones, 1990), we also asked participants how impor-
arithmetic tasks; Contrada, Wright, & Glass, 1984) have all tant it was to them to write an excellent essay. Then partici-
been linked to increased energy mobilization. pants mental contrasted the desired future of writing an
Evidence for our main contention that energization trig- excellent essay with the present reality. We included two
gered by mental contrasting of solving a given task may fuel control conditions: An indulging condition and an irrelevant
performance in an unrelated task comes from Hull’s drive content condition. In the indulging condition, participants
theory (Hull, 1943, 1952). Hull (1943) conceptualized drive elaborated the desired future of writing an excellent essay
as an undifferentiated, universal energizer that was fueled by only. Thus, only in the mental contrasting condition partici-
the sum of all current bodily deficits/needs (hunger, thirst, pants elaborated both the desired future and the present real-
sex, etc.). This nonspecific drive state energized behavior, ity. Following Kappes et al. (2012), in the irrelevant content
but it did not direct it. Rather, direction of behavior was control condition, participants elaborated an unrelated event
determined by habit, and habit was influenced by whether (a positive and a negative experience with a teacher). We
the organism had learned that a particular behavior would chose elaborating a positive experience followed by a nega-
lead to drive-reduction in a specified situation. Thus, accord- tive experience as a control condition in addition to the
ing to Hull, there was no one-to-one linkage between a par- indulging control condition to exclude the alternative expla-
ticular drive and an associated behavior. In principle, the nation that simply thinking about something positive (such
unspecific drive state could facilitate any behavior. Hull as the desired future) and then about something negative
termed this principle that energization which had not yet (such as the present reality) is sufficient to produce expec-
spurred the drive-reducing behavior, but in principle could tancy-dependent energization (Kappes et al., 2012).
spur an unrelated behavior, irrelevant drive. Following up on After the mental exercise, we measured SBP a second time.
Hull’s ideas, Zillmann (1971) contented that according to To assess our dependent variable, physical effort in an unre-
Hull’s conception, irrelevant drive should function analo- lated task, we measured for how long participants could
gously to physical energization in that it “indiscriminately squeeze a handgrip (Muraven, Tice, & Baumeister, 1998). We
‘energizes’ and thus facilitates enacted behavior” (p. 422). chose squeezing a handgrip because performance on this task
Our research builds on Hull’s and Zillmann’s conception is a measurement of physical stamina, which strongly depends
of energization as an unspecific motor-force for behavior, on the mobilization of effort and energy (Hutchinson, Sherman,
and at the same time goes beyond it by proposing that ener- Martinovic, & Tenenbaum, 2008; Krombholz, 1985).
gization can also be triggered by mental contrasting of solv- We hypothesized that mental contrasting the desired
ing a task (rather than by physiological need states only). The future of writing an excellent essay with present reality
elicited energization state may then fuel performance in a mobilizes expectancy-dependent energization, indicated by
task unrelated to the initial task. In Study 1, we tested whether changes in SBP, which in turn translates into physical effort
energization triggered by mental contrasting of writing an in the handgrip task. Indulging and the control exercise, in
excellent essay translated into exertion of physical effort as contrast, should lead to expectancy-independent energiza-
measured by performance in squeezing a handgrip; in Study tion. Because DBP and HR are less consistently linked to
2, we examined whether energization triggered by mental energization than the SBP, we did not have specific hypoth-
contrasting of excelling in an intelligence test translated into eses for DBP and HR.
mental effort as measured by performance in writing a sup-
portive get-well letter.
Method
Study 1: Energization Transfer Into Participants and design.  We recruited 168 undergraduate psy-
chology students (85 females; M age = 19.58, SD = 1.34)
Physical Effort from a large university in the United States to participate in a
We investigated whether mental contrasting of effectively study on practicing to write an essay and its effects on blood
solving an academic task triggers physiological energization pressure. Students were given course credit. To be eligible,

Downloaded from psp.sagepub.com at NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIV LIB on May 30, 2015
142 Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 40(2)

they had to be right-handed, free from heart disease and Students then listed two aspects of the desired future they
hypertension, and had to abstain from cigarettes, alcohol, associated with writing an excellent essay (they named, for
strenuous exercise, caffeine, and medication for at least 2 hr example, “feeling confident for my graduate admission”).
prior to the session (Shapiro et al., 1996). They were ran- Thereafter, they listed two aspects of the present reality
domly assigned to one of the three experimental conditions: standing in the way of writing an excellent essay (they
Mental contrasting, indulging, and control. Students were named, for example, “having little experience in writing
tested individually. admission essays”). To prevent extensive mental elabora-
tions at this point, we instructed students to only type in
Procedure.  Students were seated at a table with a computer keywords.
and a compressing cuff. The cuff was connected to a blood Next, we established the three conditions (mental con-
pressure monitor (Carescape V100) and placed in an adja- trasting, indulging, and control). In the mental contrasting
cent room to the experimental cubicle. The apparatus used condition, students elaborated one aspect of the future and
oscillometry to determine SBP in millimeters of mercury one aspect of the reality beginning with a future aspect. To
(mmHg), DBP (mmHG), and HR (beats per minute). Each accomplish this procedure, they saw their first keyword per-
individual SBP measurement period (simultaneously assess- taining to the future displayed on the screen with the follow-
ing DBP and HR) lasted approximately 30s. The experi- ing instructions:
menter gave a brief overview of the procedure and stressed
that answers would remain confidential and that participa- Think about this aspect and depict the respective events or
tion was voluntary. Students gave their written consent. experiences in your thoughts as intensively as possible! Let the
mental images pass by in your thoughts and do not hesitate to
Thereafter, a compressing cuff connected to a blood pressure
give your thoughts and images free reign. Take as much time
monitor was placed over the brachial artery of their left arm: and space as you need to describe the scenario.
They were asked to rest quietly while five baseline SBP mea-
surements were taken. To obtain students’ baseline SBP, we
For example, one student elaborated her future aspect
averaged the five measurements (α = .98). Moreover, after
“feeling confident”: “Feeling validated in my writing abili-
the SBP measurement, we took a baseline measurement of
ties. Validation gives me the motivation to pursue things fur-
physical performance using the handgrip task from Muraven
ther with more drive and confidence. I feel a sense of pride
et al. (1998). This task involves squeezing a commercially
and elation . . .”
available handgrip exerciser. The device consists of two han-
Students then moved to the next screen on which the first
dles connected by a metal spring. Squeezing the handles
keyword pertaining to the reality appeared with the same
together compresses the spring. To assess for how long stu-
instructions as above. For example, the aforementioned stu-
dents were able to squeeze the handgrip, the experimenter dent elaborated her reality aspect “little experience in writing
inserted a folded paper between the two handles when stu- admission essays”: “I have never tried writing a practice
dents started to squeeze them together. When students graduate admissions essay before. It will probably take me a
released their handgrip, the paper would fall out. The experi- while to think of a topic I can expand upon . . .”
menter used a stopwatch to measure the time from inserting In the indulging condition, students elaborated only the
the paper until it fell. Students completed the experiment on two future aspects. In the control condition, they elaborated
the computer. one positive and one negative experience with a teacher at
their university, beginning with the positive experience.
Strategy induction: Writing an excellent essay.  On the com-
puter screen, students read that their next task was to write a Dependent variable: Physical performance.  After the mental
fictitious graduate admission essay. The essay should involve exercise, as an indicator of physical effort, students engaged
detailing their academic achievements, study interests, edu- in the handgrip task a second time. Because performance on
cational objectives, and future career plans. Moreover, we the handgrip task strongly depends on hand strength, we con-
stressed that the essays would later be evaluated by mem- trolled for within-subjects variations of hand strength. Spe-
bers of a graduate admission committee and that they would cifically, we calculated change scores in handgrip duration
receive feedback on their essay. Writing the essay would thus from the baseline measurement to the final measurement and
be an excellent opportunity to prepare themselves for their used these change scores as our dependent variable. After
graduate admissions. To measure students’ expectations of the second handgrip task, students completed a short demo-
writing an excellent essay, we asked: “How likely is it that graphic questionnaire. To conclude, they were thanked and
you will write an excellent fictitious admission essay?” To fully debriefed.
measure the incentive value of writing an excellent essay,
we asked: “How important is it to you to write an excellent SBP measurement.  Directly before the handgrip task, we
fictitious admission essay?” We used 7-point scales ranging took two final SBP measurements. To control for individual
from 1 (not at all) to 7 (very). differences in SBP (Wright et al., 1997), we calculated SBP

Downloaded from psp.sagepub.com at NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIV LIB on May 30, 2015
Sevincer et al. 143

Table 1.  Studies 1 and 2: Means and Standard Deviations for are based on 155 students because two (1%) students failed
SBP Baseline Values in Each Condition. to squeeze the handles together during the final handgrip
Condition M SD measurement. We then submitted the change scores to a Gen-
eral Linear Model (GLM) with condition (mental contrasting
Study 1 vs. the other two conditions combined) as a fixed between-
  Mental contrasting 108.13 7.61 subject factor and the continuous expectations variable as
 Indulging 111.26 10.46 independent variables in the first step; the interaction term of
 Control 108.91 8.58 condition by expectations was added as an independent vari-
Study 2 able in the second step (Aiken & West, 1991).
  Mental contrasting 110.83 10.38
We observed main effects of condition and expectations,
 Indulging 110.96 10.45
Fs > 4.24, ps = .04, η2s = .03, as well as the predicted inter-
 Dwelling 106.52 10.21
action effect of condition by expectations, F(1, 151) = 4.91,
  Reverse contrasting 108.46 10.03
p = .03, η2 = .03, indicating that the relation between expec-
Note. SBP = systolic blood pressure. tations about performance in essay writing and performance
in the handgrip task was stronger in the mental contrasting
Table 2.  Studies 1 and 2: Means for Expectations and Incentive condition than in the other conditions combined (Figure 1,
Value. left graph).1
To investigate whether the handgrip duration time
Study Initial task Expectations Incentive value increased or decreased from baseline to the final measure-
1 Performance in essay 3.80 (1.43) 4.15 (1.88) ment in mental contrasting students with high versus low
writing expectations, we conducted a repeated measures GLM
2 Performance in 4.00 (1.20) 4.24 (1.47) focusing only on the mental contrasting condition. Baseline
intelligence test time and final time were entered as within-subject variables
and expectations as a covariate. When students who mental
Note. Standard deviations in parenthesis.
contrasted had high expectations about their performance in
essay writing, they squeezed the handgrip for a longer
change scores from baseline to directly before the handgrip period: t(54) = 1.96, p = .05, η2 = .07; when they had low
task by averaging the two final SBP measurements (r = .85) expectations, they squeezed for a shorter period: t(54) =
and subtracting mean baseline SBP from the averaged score. 4.23, p < .001, η2 = .25.
We calculated change scores for DBP and HR in an analo-
gous way. Change in SBP.  We used a GLM entering the same predictors
as above and selected the SBP change score as the dependent
variable. There was a main effect of expectations, F(1, 154)
Results
= 6.00, p = .02, η2 = .04, which was qualified by the predicted
Eleven students (7%) were excluded from the following interaction effect of condition by expectations, F(1, 153) =
analyses: one for engagement in high-performance sports, 3.93, p < .05, η2 = .03, indicating that the link between expec-
two for caffeine consumption prior to the experiment, two tations and change in SBP was stronger in the mental con-
for hypertension, and six for technical difficulties with the trasting condition than in the other conditions combined
SBP measurement. (Figure 1, right graph).1 Moreover, in the mental contrasting
condition, when expectations were high, SBP increased:
Descriptive analyses t(55) = 3.70, p = .001, η2 = .20; when expectations were low,
Baseline SBP.  Baseline SBP did not differ between condi- SBP did not change: t(55) = .31, p = .76.
tions: F(2, 154) = 1.81, p = .17. Means and standard devia-
tions for baseline SBP in each condition are provided in Change in SBP as a mediator.  Next, we tested whether the
Table 1. In each condition, baseline SBP was correlated with interaction effect of condition (mental contrasting vs. the
the averaged final SBP scores (rs > .41, ps < .004). other two conditions combined) by expectations on handgrip
performance was mediated by change in SBP. To test this
Expectations and incentive value.  Means and standard devi- mediated moderation, we followed a bootstrapping proce-
ations for expectations and incentive value are provided in dure using the SPSS PROCESS macro provided by Hayes
Table 2. Expectations and incentive value correlated posi- (2012). The macro allows estimating the indirect effect of the
tively (r = .58, p < .001). condition by expectations on handgrip performance through
change in SBP by considering the interaction effect of IV
Physical performance.  To calculate handgrip duration change (expectations) and the moderator (condition: mental con-
scores, we subtracted each student’s initial handgrip squeeze trasting vs. other conditions combined) on the DV (handgrip
duration time from his or her final time. The handgrip scores performance), the interaction effect of the IV and the

Downloaded from psp.sagepub.com at NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIV LIB on May 30, 2015
144 Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 40(2)

Figure 1.  Study 1: Regression lines depict the link between expectations in writing an excellent essay and change in handgrip duration
(left) and change in SBP from before the mental exercise to directly thereafter (right) as a function of condition.

DBP and HR.  Because DBP and HR are less consistently

linked to energization than SBP, we did not predict any
expectancy-dependent changes in DBP and HR by mental
contrasting. Indeed, when performing analyses analogous
to change in SBP, using change in DBP and HR, respec-
tively, as dependent variables, we did not observe any
interaction effects of condition by expectations, Fs < .72,
ps > .40.

Figure 2.  Study 1: Moderated mediation model (Model 8 in the

Discussion 
PROCESS macro by Hayes, 2012). Mental contrasting the desired future of writing an excellent
fictitious graduate admission essay with obstacles in the
present reality elicited expectancy-dependent energization
moderator on the mediator (change in SBP), and the main that translated into physical effort as assessed by how long
effect of the mediator on the DV together in one model participants could squeeze a handgrip. Mental contrasting
(Model 8 in the PROCESS macro; see also Edwards & Lam- participants’ handgrip performance depended on their
bert, 2007; Preacher, Rucker, & Hayes, 2007; Figure 2). expectations about writing an excellent essay, and this effect
The indirect effect of condition by expectations on hand- was mediated by energization assessed by the changes in
grip performance through change in SBP was significantly SBP. In contrast, participants in the indulging condition and
different from 0, 95% CI = [−2.0238, −.0020], with 10.000 in the irrelevant content condition evinced expectancy-inde-
iterations. Within the mediated moderation model, the direct pendent handgrip performance and energization. In Study 2,
effect of condition by expectations on handgrip performance we were interested in whether the energization transfer by
was not significantly different from 0, 95% CI = [−7.3638, mental contrasting can also be observed with regard to men-
.0864]. Finally, to investigate whether the results were due to tal effort rather than physical effort. Specifically, we exam-
within-subjects variations of incentive value, we repeated the ined whether energization triggered by mental contrasting
analyses reported above adjusting for incentive value. The of excelling in an intelligence test may fuel mental effort in
pattern of results did not change. writing a get-well letter to a friend.

Downloaded from psp.sagepub.com at NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIV LIB on May 30, 2015
Sevincer et al. 145

Study 2: Energization Transfers Into study on blood pressure during intelligence tests. Students
Mental Effort were given course credit. They had to meet the same require-
ments as in Study 1 (being right-handed, free from heart dis-
Study 2 tested whether energization elicited by mental con- ease and hypertension, and abstaining from cigarettes,
trasting of solving an achievement-related task translates alcohol, strenuous exercise, caffeine, and medication for at
into mental effort in an unrelated task, this time from the least 2 hr prior to the session). Students were randomly
interpersonal domain (writing a fictitious get-well letter). As assigned to one of the four experimental conditions: mental
an indicator for how much effort participants exerted in com- contrasting, indulging, dwelling, and reverse contrasting.
posing the letter, we asked them to self-evaluate their invest- They were tested individually.
ment in writing the letter. To induce mental contrasting and
to measure SBP, we used the same basic procedure as in Procedure.  Students were prepared for the experiment like in
Study 1 with the following modifications: Study 1. To assess the baseline SBP, we took 10 SBP mea-
First, as control conditions, in Study 1, we used an indulg- surements and averaged them into one index (α = .98).
ing condition and an irrelevant content condition in which Because mental contrasting did not affect DBP and HR in
participants elaborated a positive and a negative experience Study 1 nor in the previous research by Oettingen et al.
with a teacher. It may be argued, however, that in the latter (2009), we did not record DBP and HR.
condition, participants did not show expectancy-dependent
energization simply because they did not elaborate on solv- Strategy induction: Excelling on an intelligence test.  We told
ing their initial task. Therefore, in Study 2, we used a full students that they would work on a test that measures intel-
design in which we had all participants elaborate on solving ligence and analytic thinking. They were informed that the
their task and in which we induced all four relevant modes of test consisted of 36 items and were given five example items.
thought: mental contrasting, indulging, dwelling, and reverse The example items were taken from the revised Culture Fair
contrasting (Oettingen et al., 2001, Study 3). In the indulging Intelligence Test (CFT-20-R; Cattell, 1960). Students were
condition, participants were not confronted with an obstacle, asked to indicate for each item which of five presented fig-
and in the dwelling condition, there was no future toward ures correctly completed a series of geometrical figures. We
which to act. Thus, participants in these conditions should told students that before they started working on the test,
not show expectancy-dependent energization. Similarly, par- they would answer some questions. We measured students’
ticipants in the reverse contrasting condition fail to under- expectations about their performance on the test by two
stand the reality as an obstacle (Kappes, Wendt, Reinelt, & items: “How likely do you think it is that you will answer
Oettingen, 2013), and thus participants in this condition 100% of the intelligence test items correctly?” and “How
should not show expectancy-dependent energization either. likely do you think it is that you will be able to perform better
Second, in Study 2, we again asked participants to elabo- than the average NYU student?” Because the two items cor-
rate solving a task from the achievement domain: performing related positively, r = .57, we combined them into one index
well on an intelligence test. Third, we used an extended pro- of expectations. Moreover, we assessed students’ incentive
cedure for inducing the modes of thought, that is, partici- value about performing well on the test by asking: “How
pants listed four (rather than two) future aspects and four important is it to you that you will perform well on the intel-
(rather than two) reality aspects. Then they had to elaborate ligence test?” For all items, we used 7-point scales ranging
four of the eight aspects (Oettingen et al., 2001). Fourth, par- from 1 (not at all) to 7 (very).
ticipants’ writing a get-well letter allowed us to conduct the Students then listed four aspects of the desired future they
final SBP measurements during the task itself rather than associated with performing well on the intelligence test (they
directly before the task. Finally, to increase reliability of the named, for example, feeling self-assured). Thereafter, they
baseline SBP measurement before the mental exercise, we listed four aspects of the present reality standing in the way
took 10 SBP measurements rather than 5 as in Study 1. of performing well on the test (they named, for example,
We hypothesized that mental contrasting the desired feeling distracted).
future of excelling in an intelligence test with present reality Next, we established the four conditions (mental contrast-
mobilizes expectancy-dependent energization, which trans- ing, indulging, dwelling, and reverse contrasting). In the
lates into performance in the interpersonal task. Indulging, mental contrasting condition, students elaborated two future
dwelling, and reverse contrasting in contrast should lead to aspects and two reality aspects in alternating order beginning
expectancy-independent energization and performance. with a future aspect. In the indulging condition, they elabo-
rated only the four future aspects, and in the dwelling condi-
Method tion, they elaborated only the four reality aspects. Finally, in
the reverse contrasting condition, as in the mental contrast-
Participants and design.  We recruited 114 undergraduate psy- ing condition, students also elaborated two future aspects
chology students (85 females; M age = 19.21, SD = 1.15) and two reality aspects in alternating order, but this time,
from a large university in the United States to participate in a they began with a reality aspect.

Downloaded from psp.sagepub.com at NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIV LIB on May 30, 2015
146 Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 40(2)

Dependent variable: Performance in letter writing. After write about their friends’ recovery, used inappropriate lan-
students had finished their mental exercise, we simulated a guage, and did not display empathy for their friend. For exam-
computer breakdown to make them believe that the mental ple, they wrote primarily about themselves, used slang or
exercise was not connected to the following letter writing swear words, and made indifferent remarks about their friends’
task. Specifically, the screen went black and white, with recovery. A “4” meant that students partly wrote about their
symbols appearing on various points of the screen. There- friends’ recovery, chose moderately appropriate language, and
upon, the experimenter entered the experimental cubicle and displayed empathy to some extent. For example, they men-
explained: tioned their friends’ recovery but also extensively elaborated
on unrelated topics, used slang words only rarely, and formally
Apparently, we have a computer problem. It looks like we can’t expressed concern about their friends’ accident. Finally, a “7”
continue with this experiment. Would you be willing to continue meant that students focused on their friends’ recovery, chose
with a different experiment? This way we could still use the appropriate language, and seemed to honestly display empa-
time. The new experiment will take about 15 minutes. It also thy. For example, they inquired in detail about their friends’
involves blood pressure measurements.
accident and current condition, used warm and cordial lan-
guage, expressed great concern, and promised to visit.
All students agreed to take part in the second experiment.
Interrater reliability was α = .66. Disagreements were resolved
The experimenter explained that the new experiment was
through discussion between the two raters. If agreement could
about cardiovascular reactivity to interpersonal tasks and
not be reached, the mean between the two ratings was given.
that students’ new task was to write a fictitious get-well letter
To check whether students guessed the hypotheses, we
to a friend while SBP measurements would be taken. The
used a funnel debriefing procedure, in which we asked stu-
experimenter then started a new computer program. Students
dents to indicate in an open-ended questionnaire what they
read the following instructions on the screen:
thought the hypotheses of the study were, whether they
thought the two experiments were related, and if so, in what
Your best friend had a car accident and has to stay at the hospital
for a few weeks. Please write an authentic letter and send him
way the two experiments were related. No one correctly
your best wishes for a speedy recovery. You have 10 minutes to guessed the hypotheses or how the two experiments were
complete the task. related. After completing a short demographic questionnaire,
students were thanked and fully debriefed.
Students wrote the letter in the designated space. After
10 min, the program automatically proceeded to the next SBP measurement. While students wrote the letter, we
screen. conducted five final SBP measurements. The first measure-
ment was initiated 2 min after students read the instructions.
Self-rated performance. The other four measurements followed in 2-min intervals.
On the next screen, students evaluated their letter. They To calculate SBP change scores from baseline to during let-
indicated for each of the following four statements the ter writing, we averaged the five final SBP scores (r = .93)
extent to which they thought the statement held true on a and subtracted students’ mean baseline SBP score from their
7-point scale from 1 (not at all true) to 7 (very true): “My averaged final score.
get-well letter was meaningful,” “I used inappropriate lan-
guage” (reverse coded), “I honestly stated my best wishes Results
for a speedy recovery,” “The get-well letter would be
greatly appreciated by my friend.” To obtain an index of Five students (6%) were excluded from the following analy-
self-rated performance in letter writing, we combined the ses: two because they reported having engaged in high-per-
four items. Because reliability of the scale was only moder- formance sports, one because of having consumed caffeine,
ate (α = .60), we dropped one item (“I used inappropriate and two because of hypertension.
language”) from the final index. Dropping the item
improved reliability to α = .77. Descriptive analyses
Baseline SBP.  Baseline SBP did not differ between condi-
Other-rated performance. tions: F(3, 105) = 2.02, p = .11 (Table 1). In each condition,
In addition to self-rated performance, we also obtained a mea- baseline SBP was correlated with the averaged final SBP
sure of other-rated performance in writing the letter. Two inde- score (rs > .67, ps < .001).
pendent raters coded the quality of the letters based on
Oettingen et al. (2009) and Sevincer and Oettingen (2013). Expectations and incentive value.  Means and standard devi-
The raters employed a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (very poor ations for expectations and incentive value are provided in
performance) to 4 (moderate performance) to 7 (excellent per- Table 2. Expectations and incentive value correlated posi-
formance). Specifically, a “1” meant that students failed to tively (r = .51, p < .001).

Downloaded from psp.sagepub.com at NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIV LIB on May 30, 2015
Sevincer et al. 147

Figure 3.  Study 2: Regression lines depict the link between expectations about performance in the intelligence test and self-rated
performance in letter writing (left), and change in SBP from before the mental exercise to during letter writing (right) as a function of
condition.

Performance in letter writing analogous GLM as reported above using other-rated perfor-
Self-rated performance. We used a GLM with self-rated mance as the dependent variable. We observed marginally
performance in letter writing as the dependent variable. We significant main effects of condition and expectations: Fs
entered condition (mental contrasting condition vs. the other > 2.93, ps < .09, η2s > .02. The expectations by condition
three conditions combined) as a fixed between-subject factor (mental contrasting vs. the other three conditions combined)
and the continuous expectations variable as an independent interaction effect in predicting other-rated performance,
variable in the first step. The interaction term of condition however, did not reach significance: F(1, 105) = 2.00, p =
by expectations was added as an independent variable in .16. We will return to this point in the Discussion.
the second step. We observed main effects of condition and
expectations, Fs > 5.61, ps < .02, η2s > .05, as well as the Change in SBP.  We used a GLM with SBP change score as the
predicted interaction effect of condition by expectations, dependent variable. We observed the predicted interaction
F(1, 105) = 5.42, p = .02, η2 = .05, indicating that the rela- effect of condition (mental contrasting condition vs. the other
tion between expectations and performance was stronger in three conditions combined) by expectations, F(1, 105) =
the mental contrasting condition than in the other conditions 5.95, p = .02, η2 = .05, indicating that the link between expec-
combined (Figure 3, left graph).2 When expectations were tations and change in SBP was stronger in the mental con-
high, mental contrasting students rated their performance as trasting condition than in the other conditions combined
stronger than those in the other conditions: t(105) = 2.05, p = (Figure 3, right graph).2 Moreover, in the mental contrasting
.04, η2 = .04; when expectations were low, they rated their condition, when expectations were high, SBP increased:
performance as less strong: t(105) = 2.36, p < .02, η2 = .05. t(24) = 2.09, p < .05, η2 = .15; when expectations were low,
SBP decreased: t(24) = 2.22, p = .04, η2 = .17.
Other-rated performance. Other-rated performance in
letter writing correlated only moderately positively with Change in SBP as a mediator.  We tested whether the interac-
self-rated performance: r = .20, p = .04. We estimated an tion effect of condition (mental contrasting condition vs. the

Downloaded from psp.sagepub.com at NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIV LIB on May 30, 2015
148 Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 40(2)

Participants’ felt empathy that was rated as one criterion of

writing performance may have been difficult to judge from
an outside perspective.
Study 2 conceptually replicated and extended the find-
ings of Study 1 in several ways: Specifically, in Study 2, we
(a) used mental effort rather than physical effort as our
dependent variable, (b) used an unrelated task in the inter-
personal domain (writing the letter) rather than in the
domain of physical performance (squeezing a handgrip), (c)
added a dwelling and a reverse contrasting condition to the
Figure 4.  Study 2: Moderated mediation model (Model 8 in the mental contrasting and indulging conditions, (d) asked par-
PROCESS macro by Hayes, 2012). ticipants to elaborate four rather than only two aspects, and
(e) conducted the final SBP measurements during rather
than before participants engaged in the unrelated task.
other three conditions combined) by expectations about per-
formance in the intelligence test on self-rated performance in
letter writing was mediated by change in SBP. We performed General Discussion
an analogous analysis as in Study 1 using the SPSS PRO- We investigated whether physiological energization
CESS macro by Hayes (2012; Figure 4). The indirect effect (assessed by changes in SBP) triggered by mental contrast-
of condition by expectations on performance in letter writing ing of one task transferred to an unrelated task. Mental con-
through change in SBP was significantly different from 0, trasting about successfully solving an achievement-related
95% CI = [−.2887, −.0018], with 10,000 iterations. Within task (writing an excellent essay, excelling in an intelligence
the mediated moderation model, the direct effect of condi- test) elicited energization that translated into physical effort
tion by expectations on performance was not significantly (Study 1) and mental effort (Study 2) in an unrelated task
different from 0, 95% CI = [−.9127, .0245]. Because the (measured by performance in a handgrip exercise and in
interaction effect of condition by expectations on other-rated writing a get-well letter, respectively). Participants’ perfor-
performance in letter writing did not reach significance, we mance in the unrelated tasks depended on their expectations
did not conduct respective mediation analyses. Finally, to of success regarding the initial tasks, and this effect was
investigate whether the results were due to within-subjects mediated by energization.
variations of incentive value, we repeated the analyses We found energy transfer effects of mental contrasting
reported above adjusting for incentive value. The pattern of across different domains (interpersonal and physical), across
results did not change. different initial tasks (writing an essay; performing an intel-
ligence test), using various control conditions (indulging,
Discussion  dwelling, reverse contrasting, and an irrelevant content con-
dition), using a short and an extended procedure of mental
Mental contrasting the desired future of excelling in an intel- elaborations (elaborating two aspects and elaborating four
ligence test with obstacles in the present reality elicited aspects), and measuring participants’ final SBP directly
expectancy-dependent energization that fueled mental effort before and while they engaged in the unrelated task. Effect
in an unrelated task as measured by the self-rated perfor- sizes for changes in energization and performance were typi-
mance in writing a get-well letter: Mental contrasting partici- cal for the behavioral sciences (Cohen, 1988). Our findings
pants’ self-evaluated performance in letter writing depended have theoretical implications for research on energization
on their expectations to perform well in the intelligence test, and applied implications for developing interventions geared
and this effect was mediated by the changes in SBP. In con- at improving people’s self-regulation of effort.
trast, participants in the indulging, dwelling, and reverse
contrasting condition evinced expectancy-independent ener-
gization and performance in letter writing.
Implications for Research on Energization
In explaining why we found the predicted pattern for self- We found that mental contrasting about successfully solving
rated rather than for other-rated performance, we suspect a task triggered energization that fueled behavior in an unre-
that, because we did not assess change in writing perfor- lated task. Assuming that mental contrasting participants with
mance, our other-rated performance measure may have been high expectations had committed to the goal of solving their
more influenced by the individual differences in writing abil- task, research on intergoal inhibition becomes relevant. The
ity than self-rated performance. That is, self-rated but not latter research suggests that when people commit to a goal,
other-rated writing performance can be based on one’s past that goal becomes activated and guides subsequent behavior.
performance history. In addition, interrater reliability for the That is, it inhibits the activation of and mobilization of
performance rating was acceptable (α = .66) but not high. resources for competing goals (Bargh & Huang, 2009;

Downloaded from psp.sagepub.com at NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIV LIB on May 30, 2015
Sevincer et al. 149

Kruglanski et al., 2002). How can these seemingly conflicting such tasks, mental contrasting of solving a task for which one
findings be reconciled? In our studies, mental contrasting has low rather than high expectations should facilitate per-
with high expectations to solve a given task led to increased formance. Future research may even explore whether mental
energization. However, once energization was established, contrasting of futile endeavors may be used as a useful relax-
participants did not have the opportunity to act on their task ation exercise.
and were presented with an unrelated task instead. In Study 1,
rather than writing the called for essay, they were asked to
Relation to Excitation-Transfer Theory
squeeze a handgrip. In Study 2, rather than working on the
intelligence test, they were informed that due to a computer The present research relates to findings on the transfer of
breakdown, they would write a get-well letter. Future research excitation. According to excitation-transfer theory (Zillmann,
may test this contention that goal inhibition may be limited by 1971), residual excitation (defined as nonspecific emotional
whether there are opportunities to act on the original goal. arousal) triggered by one stimulus may potentiate people’s
Future research should also investigate energization trans- responses to another stimulus. In a series of studies (sum-
fer effects by mental contrasting over time (weeks and maries by Bryant & Miron, 2003; Zillmann, 1983), partici-
months). Because physiological energization decays rela- pants were either exposed to an arousing stimulus (e.g.,
tively quickly (Cantor, Zillmann, & Bryant, 1975; Wright, pedaling an exercise bicycle, an erotic movie) or to a nonar-
Weeks, Burch, & Hernandez, 1990), energization effects ousing stimulus (e.g., an agility task, a neutral movie).
may reoccur if people mental contrast about solving their ini- Thereafter, participants’ arousal was assessed by a number of
tial task again. Thus, it may be that although transfer effects physiological indicators (SBP, DBP, HR, and skin tempera-
of mental contrasting appear in the short term, they only can ture). Before the physiological arousal from the first stimulus
be sustained if people further engage in mental contrasting decayed, participants were exposed to a second stimulus
about resolving the initial task. unrelated to the first stimulus (a funny cartoon, a hostile
provocation). Participants in the arousing (vs. nonarousing)
condition showed a more intense response to the second
Implications for the Self-Regulation of Effort stimulus (i.e., they judged the cartoons to be funnier or
Our findings may have implications for helping people to reacted more aggressively, respectively), but only when they
translate their energization resulting from mental contrasting could not attribute their arousal to the first stimulus. However,
a particular desired future to bolster effortful or unpleasant rather than investigating whether residual arousal (or energi-
behaviors. Future research may be targeted at developing zation) emerging in reaction to one stimulus may intensify
interventions in an academic context: A student who has high people’s reaction to another stimulus, our studies show that
expectations of becoming an outstanding athlete, for exam- the self-regulatory strategy of mental contrasting produces
ple, may mental contrast the desired future of becoming an selective energization that then translates into effort and per-
athlete to mobilize the energy needed to study history or formance in an unrelated task.
clean up her room. In this vein, people may even use mental
contrasting targeted at solving a task for which they have
Other Types of Mental Simulations
high expectations (e.g., winning a tennis match) to energize
themselves for behavior for which they have low expecta- Our research relates to other types of mental simulations such
tions (e.g., excelling in math). as fantasies about the future, outcome versus process simula-
We should note that people may not always estimate their tions, counterfactual thinking, and mind wandering. Positive
expectations accurately. That is, people’s expectations may (vs. questioning, neutral, or negative) future fantasies led to
paint the facts too optimistically or too pessimistically. In the low effort and poor performance in solving challenging tasks,
case of unrealistically high expectations, expectancy-depen- and this effect was mediated by decreased energization,
dent energization elicited by mental contrasting may lead to assessed by SBP (Kappes & Oettingen, 2011). Relatedly,
an unjustified high level of energization. For example, a mentally simulating having attained a desired outcome (out-
middle-aged English teacher who believes he still will be come simulation) led to worse academic performance and
discovered as an outstanding actor even though he has little problem solving than mentally simulating a cumbersome path
experience in acting may use mental contrasting to translate toward attaining the outcome (process simulation; Taylor,
the energy of becoming an actor into excelling in his teach- Pham, Rivkin, & Armor, 1998; see also Zimmerman &
ing. The present results thus suggest that mental contrasting Kitsantas, 1999). In contrast to future fantasies and outcome
combined with unrealistically high expectations, by leading versus process simulations, which both focus on the future,
to “unjustified” energization, may benefit performance on counterfactual thinking refers to mental simulations of alter-
unrelated tasks. natives to past events, that is, people imagine “what might
Finally, some tasks may require decreased rather than have been” (Roese, 1997). Counterfactual thinking most
increased energization, for instance, progressive muscle often occurs in the presence of a failed goal (e.g., having
relaxation or escalation of commitment tasks. With regard to failed a test). It serves a corrective function and facilitates

Downloaded from psp.sagepub.com at NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIV LIB on May 30, 2015
150 Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 40(2)

future performance by mechanisms such as the formation of Acknowledgment

behavioral intentions (e.g., next time I study harder), or the We thank Johanna Kalvelage and Greta Wagner for their help with
instigation of negative affect which in turn motivates behav- collecting the data.
ior change (Epstude & Roese, 2007). Finally, mind wander-
ing occurs when one’s attention shifts away from a primary Declaration of Conflicting Interests
task toward internal thoughts and images. Although mind The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect
wandering may impair performance on the primary task, it to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
can promote the solving of personal concerns and the initia-
tion of behavior change (Oettingen & Schwörer, 2013;
Funding
Smallwood & Schooler, 2006). However, in distinction from
research on mental contrasting, none of the above approaches The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support
consider the contrasting of a desired future with obstacles in for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article:
Preparation of this article was supported by German Science
the present reality and its consequences for energization and
Foundation Grant OE 237/12-1 awarded to Gabriele Oettingen.
performance.
Notes
Other Indicators of Energization 1. We also compared the mental contrasting condition with each of
We measured energization by SBP, a reliable and widely the other two conditions (indulging and control). The results for
the expectations by condition interaction effect were as follows:
used indicator of energization (Wright, 1996). As men-
regarding handgrip performance as dependent variable, mental
tioned before, energy mobilization can be most directly contrasting versus indulging: F(1, 105) = 3.39, p = .07; mental
quantified by beta-adrenergic sympathetic nervous system contrasting versus control: F(1, 98) = 4.21, p = .04. Regarding
discharge to the heart. Beta-adrenergic discharge directly change in systolic blood pressure (SBP): mental contrasting
determines the force with which the heart contracts, which versus indulging: F(1, 107) = 5.31, p = .02; mental contrasting
systematically influences SBP. SBP may, however, also be versus control: F(1, 99) = 1.17, p = .28.
influenced by other factors (e.g., the diameter of the arter- 2. We also compared the mental contrasting condition with each
ies). A more direct indicator of the force with which the of the other three conditions (indulging, dwelling, and reverse
heart contracts is the cardiac preejection period (PEP), contrasting). The results for the expectations by condition inter-
which refers to the time interval that starts from the begin- action effect were as follows: regarding self-rated performance
ning of the left ventricular contraction and ends with the in letter writing as dependent variable, mental contrasting versus
indulging: F(1, 48) = 6.29, p = .02; mental contrasting versus
opening of the heart’s aortic valve (Berntson, Lozano,
dwelling: F(1, 51) = 3.34, p = .07; mental contrasting versus
Chen, & Cacioppo, 2004). In sum, whereas SBP is system- reverse contrasting: F(1, 50) = 3.69, p = .06. Regarding change
atically influenced by beta-adrenergic discharge to the in SBP: mental contrasting versus indulging: F(1, 48) = 2.66, p
heart, PEP more directly measures it. Therefore, PEP is a = .11; mental contrasting versus dwelling: F(1, 51) = 6.35, p =
more reliable indicator of resource mobilization (Gendolla .02; mental contrasting versus reverse contrasting: F(1, 50) =
et al., 2012; Richter & Gendolla, 2009). To explore mental 5.14, p = .03. Moreover, when we used the full set of four items
contrasting effects on energization, future research may use (α = .60) rather than the set of three items (α = .77) for self-rated
PEP as well as nonphysiological ways of assessing energi- performance, the expectations by condition (mental contrasting
zation (e.g., unobtrusive behavioral observations, reaction vs. the other three conditions combined) interaction effect did
time paradigms, self-reported emotions). not reach significance p = .21.

References
Conclusion
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing
Mental contrasting a specified desired future with present and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
reality selectively mobilizes or demobilizes the energy Atkinson, J. W. (1957). Motivational determinants of risk-taking
needed to actually attain the desired future, depending on a behavior. Psychological Review, 64, 359-372.
person’s expectations of success (Oettingen, 2012; Oettingen Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New
et al., 2009). The present research suggests that the mobi- York, NY: Freeman.
lized versus demobilized energy, as manifested in an Bargh, J. A., & Huang, J. L. (2009). The selfish goal. In G. B.
Moskowitz & H. Grant (Eds.), The psychology of goals (pp.
increased or decreased cardiovascular response, fueled phys-
127-150). New York, NY: Guilford.
ical and mental effort in a task unrelated to the desired future Berntson, G. G., Cacioppo, J. T., & Quigley, K. S. (1993). Cardiac
targeted by mental contrasting. The findings imply that men- psychophysiology and autonomic space in humans: Empirical
tal contrasting a desired and feasible future, such as becom- perspectives and conceptual implications. Psychological
ing a successful singer, may be used as a strategy to mobilize Bulletin, 114, 296-322.
the energy needed to fuel goal-directed behaviors in other Berntson, G. G., Lozano, D. L., Chen, Y. J., & Cacioppo, J. T.
areas, such as doing one’s homework for English class. (2004). Where to Q in PEP. Psychophysiology, 41, 333-337.

Downloaded from psp.sagepub.com at NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIV LIB on May 30, 2015
Sevincer et al. 151

Brehm, J. W., & Self, E. A. (1989). The intensity of motivation. Kappes, A., Wendt, M., Reinelt, T., & Oettingen, G. (2013).
Annual Review of Psychology, 40, 109-131. Mental contrasting changes the meaning of reality. Journal of
Brownley, K. A., Hurwitz, B. E., & Schneiderman, N. (2000). Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 797-810.
Cardiovascular psychophysiology. In J. T. Cacioppo, L. G. Kappes, H. B., & Oettingen, G. (2011). Positive fantasies about
Tassinary & G. G. Berntson (Eds.), Handbook of psychophysi- idealized futures sap energy. Journal of Experimental Social
ology (pp. 224-264). New York, NY: Cambridge University Psychology, 47, 719-729.
Press. Krombholz, H. (1985). On the association of effort and force of
Bryant, J., & Miron, D. (2003). Excitation-transfer theory. handgrip. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 60, 161-162.
In J. Bryant, D. Roskos-Ewoldsen, & J. Cantor (Eds.), Kruglanski, A. W., Shah, J. Y., Fishbach, A., Friedman, R., Chun,
Communication and emotion: Essays in honor of Dolf Zillmann W. Y., & Sleeth-Keppler, D. (2002). A theory of goal-systems:
(pp. 31-59). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Implications for social cognitions, effect, and action. In M.
Cannon, W. B. (1915). Bodily changes in pain, hunger, fear and Zanna (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 34,
rage: An account of recent researches into the function of emo- 331-376. New York: Academic Press.
tional excitement. New York, NY: Appleton. Muraven, M., Tice, D. M., & Baumeister, R. F. (1998). Self-control
Cantor, J. R., Zillmann, D. Z., & Bryant, J. (1975). Enhancement as a limited resource: Regulatory depletion patterns. Journal of
of experienced sexual arousal in response to erotic stimuli Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 774-789.
through misattribution of unrelated residual excitation. Journal Obrist, P. A. (1981). Cardiovascular psychophysiology: A perspec-
of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 69-75. tive. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
Cattell, R. B. (1960). Measuring intelligence with the Culture Fair Oettingen, G. (2000). Expectancy effects on behavior depend on
Tests. Savoy, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing. self-regulatory thought. Social Cognition, 18, 101-129.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sci- Oettingen, G. (2012). Future thought and behavior change.
ences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. European Review of Social Psychology, 23, 1-63.
Contrada, R. J., Wright, R. A., & Glass, D. C. (1984). Task dif- Oettingen, G., Marquardt, M. K., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2012).
ficulty, Type A behavior pattern, and cardiovascular response. Mental contrasting turns positive feedback on creative poten-
Psychophysiology, 21, 638-646. tial into successful performance. Journal of Experimental
Duffy, E. (1934). Emotion: An example of the need of reorientation Social Psychology, 48, 990-996.
in psychology. Psychological Review, 41, 184-198. Oettingen, G., Mayer, D., Sevincer, A. T., Stephens, E. J., Pak,
Edwards, J. R., & Lambert, L. S. (2007). Methods for integrating H., & Hagenah, M. (2009). Mental contrasting and goal com-
moderation and mediation: A general analytical framework mitment: The mediating role of energization. Personality and
using moderated path analysis. Psychological Methods, 12, 1-22. Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 608-622.
Elliot, A. J. (2006). The hierarchical model of approach-avoidance Oettingen, G., Mayer, D., & Thorpe, J. (2010). Self-regulation of
motivation. Motivation and Emotion, 30, 111-116. commitment to reduce cigarette consumption: Mental con-
Epstude, K., & Roese, N. J. (2007). The functional theory of coun- trasting of future and reality. Psychology and Health, 25,
terfactual thinking. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 961-977.
12, 168-192. Oettingen, G., Pak, H., & Schnetter, K. (2001). Self-regulation of
Gendolla, G. H. E., & Silvestrini, N. (2010). The implicit goal setting: Turning free fantasies about the future into bind-
“go”: Masked action cues directly mobilize mental effort. ing goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80,
Psychological Science, 21, 1389-1393. 736-753.
Gendolla, G. H. E., Wright, R. A., & Richter, M. (2012). Effort Oettingen, G., & Schwörer, B. (2013). Mind wandering via mental
intensity: Some insights from the cardiovascular system. In R. contrasting as a tool for behavior change. Frontiers. Advance
M. Ryan (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of motivation (pp. 420- online publication. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.0056
438). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Oettingen, G., Stephens, E. J., Mayer, D., & Brinkmann, B. (2010).
Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool Mental contrasting and the self-regulation of helping relations.
for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional Social Cognition, 28, 490-508.
process modeling [White paper]. Retrieved from http://www. Preacher, K. J., Rucker, D. D., & Hayes, A. F. (2007). Addressing
afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf moderated mediation hypothesis: Theory, methods, and pre-
Hull, C. L. (1943). Principles of behavior. New York, NY: scriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 42, 185-227.
Appleton-Century-Crofts. Richter, M. (2013). A closer look into the multi-layer struc-
Hull, C. L. (1952). A behavior system: An introduction to behavior ture of motivational intensity theory. Social and Personality
theory concerning the individual organism. New Haven: Yale Psychology Compass, 7, 1-12.
University Press. Richter, M., & Gendolla, G. H. E. (2009). The heart contracts
Hutchinson, J. C., Sherman, T., Martinovic, N., & Tenenbaum, G. to reward: Monetary incentives and preejection period.
(2008). The effect of manipulated self-efficacy on perceived Psychophysiology, 46, 451-457.
and sustained effort. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 20, Roese, N. J. (1997). Counterfactual thinking. Psychological
457-472. Bulletin, 121, 133-148.
Kappes, A., Singmann, H., & Oettingen, G. (2012). Mental con- Sevincer, A. T., & Oettingen (in press). Future thought and the self-
trasting instigates goal pursuit by linking obstacles of reality regulation of energization. In G. H. E. Gendolla, M. Tops, &
with instrumental behavior. Journal of Experimental Social S. Koole (Eds.), Biobehavioral foundations of self-regulation.
Psychology, 48, 811-818. New York, NY: Springer.

Downloaded from psp.sagepub.com at NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIV LIB on May 30, 2015
152 Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 40(2)

Sevincer, A. T., & Oettingen (2013). Spontaneous mental con- experimental social psychology (Vol. 33, pp. 255-307). San
trasting and selective goal pursuit. Personality and Social Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Psychology Bulletin, 39, 1240-1254. Wright, R. A., Murray, J. B., Storey, P. L., & Williams, B. J. (1997).
Shapiro, D., Jamner, L. D., Lane, J. D., Light, K. C., Myrtek, M., Ability analysis of gender relevance and sex differences in
Sawada, Y., & Steptoe, A. (1996). Blood pressure publication cardiovascular response to behavioral challenge. Journal of
guidelines. Psychophysiology, 33, 1-12. Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 405-417.
Silvestrini, N., & Gendolla, G. H. E. (2013). Automatic effort mobi- Wright, R. A., Shaw, L. L., & Jones, C. R. (1990). Instrumental
lization and the principle of resource conservation: One can task demand and cardiovascular response magnitude: Further
only prime the possible and justified. Journal of Personality evidence of the mediating role of success importance. Journal
and Social Psychology, 104, 803-816. of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1250-1260.
Smallwood, J., & Schooler, J. W. (2006). The restless mind. Wright, R. A., Weeks, J. L., Burch, D., & Hernandez, H. (1990).
Psychological Bulletin, 132, 946-958. Effect of residual excitation upon appraisals of a potential
Taylor, S. E., Pham, L. B., Rivkin, I. D., & Armor, D. A. (1998). aversive outcome. Journal of Research in Personality, 24,
Harnessing the imagination—Mental simulation, self-regula- 303-322.
tion, and coping. American Psychologist, 53, 429-439. Zillmann, D. (1971). Excitation transfer in communication-medi-
Wright, R. A. (1996). Brehm’s theory of motivation as a model of ated aggressive behavior. Journal of Experimental Social
effort and cardiovascular response. In P. M. Gollwitzer & J. Psychology, 7, 419-434.
A. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology of action: Linking cognition Zillmann, D. (1983). Transfer of excitation in emotional behavior.
and motivation to behavior (pp. 424-453). New York, NY: In J. T. Cacioppo & R. E. Petty (Eds.), Social psychophysiol-
Guilford. ogy: A sourcebook (pp. 215-240). New York, NY: Guilford.
Wright, R. A., & Kirby, L. D. (2001). Effort determination of car- Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (1999). Acquiring writing revi-
diovascular response: An integrative analysis with applica- sion skill: Shifting from process to outcome self-regulatory
tions in social psychology. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 241-250.

Downloaded from psp.sagepub.com at NORTH DAKOTA STATE UNIV LIB on May 30, 2015