Regulatory Focus Theory, developed by Higgins in 1997, is a theory about how people regulate themselves based either on their strong ideals or their strong thoughts. It suggests that when it comes to self-regulation, there are two types of focus: promotion focus and prevention focus. Promotion focus is about striving for success and achieving goals, while prevention focus is about avoiding failures and fulfilling obligations.
A person’s regulatory focus can be influenced by both long-term factors and immediate situations. In sports psychology, most studies have looked at a person’s chronic motivational orientation using a self-reported measure called the General Regulatory Focus Measure (Lockwood et al., 2002). This measure combines scores from two scales, one for prevention focus and one for promotion focus.
However, certain situations can override a person’s long-term tendency, shifting their regulatory focus in different ways (Shah et al., 1998). The nature of the task itself can influence a person’s focus. If a task is easy and the chances of success are high, it creates a sense of obligation to perform well and avoid failure, leading to a prevention focus. In sports, tasks like penalty kicks in soccer or 7-meter throws in handball, where scoring is likely, can create such prevention situations. On the other hand, when facing a difficult task, a person is more likely to be in a promotion focus, striving to achieve success. Pressure can also affect a person’s regulatory focus. Studies (e.g., Markman et al., 2005) have shown that pressure enhances prevention focus. However, when the only option is to take a risk to avoid a loss, a person’s promotion focus becomes a motivational necessity (Scholer et al., 2010).
Neither type of motivation has an inherent benefit in terms of performance. However, Regulatory Fit Theory (Higgins, 2000), suggests that the match between a person’s regulatory focus and the reward structure of a situation can influence performance. When the type of focus matches the needs of the environment, this is called regulatory fit (Plessner et al., 2009). When the situational focus and reward structure do not match, it is called regulatory mismatch. Regulatory fit is generally believed to lead to better performance, but studies have shown inconsistent results.
Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52, 1280 1300.
Higgins, E. T. (2000). Making a good decision: Value from fit. American Psychologist, 55, 1217 1230.
Lockwood, P., Jordan, C. H., & Kunda, Z. (2002). Motivation by positive or negative role models: Regulatory focus deter- mines who will best inspire us. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 854 864.
Markman, A. B., Baldwin, G. C., & Maddox, W. T. (2005). The interaction of payoff structure and regulatory focus in classification. Psychological Science, 16, 852 855.
Plessner, H., Unkelbach, C., Memmert, D., Baltes, A., & Kolb, A. (2009). Regulatory fit as a determinant of sport perfor- mance. Psychology of Sport & Exercise, 10, 108 115.
Scholer, A. A., Zou, X., Fujita, K., Stroessner, S. J., & Higgins, E. T. (2010). When risk-seeking becomes a motiva- tional necessity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 215 231.
Shah, J., Higgins, E. T., & Friedman, R. S. (1998). Performance incentives and means: How regulatory focus influences goal attainment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 285 293.