This study explores the role of self-regulation in opportunity recognition by pioneering an investigation of the influence of two antecedent factors: chronic regulatory focus and media on opportunity recognition. 155 students participated in a two-stage experimental design that first measured chronic regulatory focus, and in the second stage primed situational regulatory focus through the use of media stories. Participants then engaged in an opportunity recognition exercise, identifying opportunities to apply the smart phone technology to the South African market. The measured outcome was the number and quality of opportunities identified. Findings did not yield a significant relationship of chronic regulatory focus and opportunity recognition as expected, but however demonstrate that media plays an influence in opportunity recognition. The potential role of motivational individual differences and prior knowledge factors in opportunity recognition highlighted in this study provide a broad array of opportunities for further research to advance the field of entrepreneurship.Copyright / Dissertation (MBA)--University of Pretoria, 2012. / Gordon Institute of Business Science (GIBS) / unrestricted

The aim of this research is to determine the extent to which the framing of information can reduce the persistence of misinformation. The overall research consists of two experiments of which the first has been conducted and is described in this paper. It investigates the strength of differently framed statements and the degree to which the regulatory focus fit the participants experienced influenced their preference for certain statements. 52 participants have completed the survey in which they were presented several statements containing the same facts but framed differently based on the principles of valence message framing. The research found the positive goal frame, positive valence frame and the company s original statement to be most effective. These statements will form the basis for the second experiment which aims to combine the different frames in such a manner that the continued influence effect will be reduced.

Team psychological safety fosters interpersonal risk-taking and constructive debate. Yet, how psychological safety develops in diverse teams needs to be explained. I apply collective regulatory lenses to shed light on how collective prevention focus (status quo) and collective promotion focus (growth) uniquely affect team psychological safety. I believe promotion focus makes it easier to attain psychological safety, while prevention focus makes it harder. Under a collective promotion lens, teams seek growth. Under a collective prevention lens, teams desire protection and not making things any worse. A pilot study of 76 students in 17 student project teams provided initial support for individual relationships in my model. In Study 2, an experiment, I manipulated team regulatory foci in three tasks (building towers, selling a house, negotiating a salary). I did not find significant mean group differences in psychological safety between promotion (n = 17) and prevention (n = 15) teams; yet, promotion teams experienced greater team viability in the final activity. In Study 3, I employed an experimental vignette method that suggested leadership conditions (e.g., leader humility vs transactional leadership) created differences in regulatory foci and subsequent differences in psychological safety with 343 working professionals in 7 scenarios.

京都大学 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(人間・環境学) / 甲第23270号 / 人博第985号 / 新制||人||233(附属図書館) / 2020||人博||985(吉田南総合図書館) / 京都大学大学院人間・環境学研究科共生人間学専攻 / (主査)教授 内田 由紀子, 教授 齋木 潤, 教授 月浦 崇 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Human and Environmental Studies / Kyoto University / DGAM

Co-creation has been conceptualized in a number of ways but is generally referred to as an ongoing partnership between a firm and stakeholders (i.e. consumers) to collaboratively identify and solve mutually beneficial issues. While current scholarship has deepened our knowledge about the process of including consumers in the co-production of value, much remains to be learned. This is particularly true with respect to the consumer behavior side of the discipline as it pertains to creativity and motivation. Thus, the focus of the following three essays is to investigate how customer participation in the ideation of products and advertising influences down-stream responses, depending upon an individual's regulatory focus. According to regulatory focus theory, individuals are motivated to pursue their goals based upon two distinct self-regulatory systems known as promotion and prevention. Promotion-focused consumers are most concerned with the achievement of accomplishments and aspirations, which often results in approach oriented behavior. In contrast, prevention focused individuals seek to avoid negative end states, such as losses, and therefore are concerned with their security, duties, and obligations, resulting in avoidance-related behavior. These two distinct motivational states influence the way these individuals approach creative goals, which shares commonalities with co-creation. By its very nature, the goal of co-creation is to develop novel output, which often requires creativity. However, the way promotion versus prevention consumers approach creativity significantly varies, and therefore, the purpose of the present research is to understand how regulatory focus interacts with co-creation across three specific contexts to influence consumer responses. Essay 1, titled "From Ordinary to Extraordinary: Using Analogies to Increase Consumer-Brand Outcomes," finds across two studies that when engaging in co-creation, promotion focused individuals have significantly greater purchase intentions if first given an analogical reasoning task prior to a co-creation activity. Prevention-focused consumers (who are often considered less creative) can also experience heightened creativity and purchase intentions if first primed with images having common ground (near analogies) as inspiration, compared to promotion individuals who need images with less common ground (far analogies). In addition, study 1 found that an analogical reasoning task produces ideas that are significantly more creative than providing no task, whereas study 2 finds that far visual analogies produce ideas that are significantly more creative than near analogies. Two post-hoc studies also provide additional insights. Essay 2, titled "Advertising Co-Creation to Decease Texting and Driving: A Regulatory Focus Perspective," demonstrates that co-creation and creativity can also be helpful within a social marketing context (i.e. texting and driving). Construal level theory is combined with regulatory focus theory to show how user generated advertisements about the dangers of texting and driving are more effective at decreasing harmful behavior than an ad that was not self-created. However, it depends upon who the advertisement is created for (i.e. social distance). Across 4 studies, essay 2 finds that a co-created advertisement, as opposed to an ad that was no self-created, is more effective at reducing cell phone related distracted driving because it encourages deeper processing of information which then increases mental imagery and advertisement believability. However, the effectiveness of a co-created ad for decreasing harmful texting behavior can be further enhanced by asking promotion focused consumers to create a socially far advertisement (i.e. ad for an average college student) vs a socially near advertisement (i.e. ad for best friend) for prevention focused individuals. Analytical vs. imagery processing are offered as explanations. Essay 3, titled "Regulatory Focus and Creativity: How an Episodic Induction Enhances Self-Perceived Levels of Creativity and Downstream Consumer-Brand Responses," explores the differences between prevention and promotion individuals pertaining to their self-views of creativeness and how this influences brand responses. Specifically, 5 studies demonstrate that promotion individuals have more positive brand responses (i.e. willingness to pay) when engaging in a creative brand encounter because they have more certainty in their own ideas which increases self-perceived level of creativity. However, prevention individuals can also experience positive outcomes by appealing to their episodic memory through a remembering the past task, which helps them to have more certainty in their own ideas which then increases self-perceived level of creativity. These positive outcomes can be further strengthened by prompting prevention consumers to remember a positive past experience. In summary, these three essays provide a solid foundation of how regulatory focus interacts with co-creation and creativity to influence down-stream responses. Essay 1 provides evidence for the merits of giving consumers a creative task that matches their regulatory focus prior to engaging in a creative brand encounter. Next, essay 2 explores how advertising co-creation can be an effective way of reducing texting and driving behavior among college students. Lastly, essay 3 examines how self-perceived creativity influences downstream brand responses depending upon one's regulatory focus.

No description available.

No description available.

Pressure-performance relationship in sport situations was investigated within a self-regulatory focus framework (regulatory focus theory; Higgins, 1997). To that end, the role of regulatory fit in different ecologically valid handball penalty situations taken in the 2021 World Cup was examined. Competition data available from 102 games was collected; from 743 penalties taken in total, 716 penalties were finally included for analysis (those within the original game time of 60 minutes; handball match consists in two parts of 30 minutes each). A series of univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were performed; no significant effects were found on performance (goal or save/miss; in points) for neither situational focus (critical and non-critical moment), reward structure (losses [team taking the penalty is behind] and gains [team taking the penalty is ahead or score is tied]), or when the goalkeeper was substituted or not by the defending team. Furthermore, penalty shot placements were gathered to examine ‘safe’ versus ‘risky’ shooting options taken by players when under different situations (critical vs noncritical); it was found that players in general choose ‘safe’ penalty shot options under both situations. Findings are discussed considering pressure performance and regulatory fit frameworks. / Relationen mellan press och prestation i sportsituationer undersöktes inom ett självregulatoriskt fokusramverk; regulatoriskt fokus teorin (Higgins, 1997). Därav studerades rollen av regulatoriskt fit i olika ekologiskt valida handbollsstraffs situationer tagna under världsmästerskapet 2021. Tävlingsdata från 102 matcher samlades in, totalt sköts 743 straffar och 716 straffar var inkluderade för vidare analys: straffarna var tvungna att vara tagna inom ordinarie matchtid (60 minuter, två halvlekar om 30 minuter). Ett flertal univariate och multivariate logistiska regressioner genomfördes och ingen signifikant effekt av situationsfokus (kritiskt och icke kritisk situation), belöningsstruktur (losses [laget ligger under] och gains [laget leder eller lika]) och målvaktsbyte (byte innan straff sköts eller inget byte) på prestation (mål eller miss) hittades. Vidare undersöktes om skottplacering indikerade på om straffskyttarna valde att placera straffarna på ’säkra’ eller ’osäkra’ ställen i olika situationer, denna undersökning visade att spelarna generellt valde att skjuta på ett ’säkert’ ställe oavsett situation.

Background: Due to the growth of green markets, the phenomenon of greenwashing arises. This leads to consumers experiencing feelings of betrayal and having trust problems with the brand using this misleading tactic. Nevertheless, there is also literature indicating that some customers ignore this and do not alter their purchasing behavior by continuing to buy from these misbehaving brands. This can be explained by moral decoupling, which allows customers to separate their judgements of morality from their judgements of the company's performance. In addition to this, three further variables were analyzed, to comprehend this concept better. Purpose: This study's goal was to retest relationships established in previous research, concretely moral decoupling linked with brand identity fusion, purchase intention and the regulatory focus theory in the context of a greenwashing infraction. By retesting and further proving these, this study’s contribution would have been to propose the expansion of the moral decoupling model with the mentioned variables. Also, this study would expand the existing literature on causes of customer behavioral responses and bring light and study further the detrimental practice of greenwashing.  Method: The foundation of this study was previous literature, which helped construct three hypotheses that were tested via an online questionnaire that has 122 usable responses. In summary, this study follows a deductive approach using quantitative methods to fulfill the purpose of this explanatory, positivist research.  Conclusion: There was not enough evidence to support hypotheses 1 and 2. These stated that regulatory focus influences moral decoupling in a greenwashing context, promotion focus negatively and prevention positively, and that brand identity fusion influences moral decoupling positively in a greenwashing context. The third hypothesis stating that moral decoupling positively influences purchase intention was only proven in the English survey. The overall results contradict the findings of the literature this study is based on, meaning that future research is needed to reconcile these differences.

No description available.