Self-control
Self-control
Self-control, an aspect of inhibitory control, is the
ability to regulate one's emotions, thoughts, and behavior in the face of
temptations and impulses.[1][2] As an executive function, it is a cognitive
process that is necessary for regulating one's behavior in order to achieve
specific goals.[2][3]
A related concept in psychology is emotional
self-regulation.[4] Self-control is thought to be like a muscle. According to
studies, self-regulation, whether emotional or behavioral, was proven to be a
limited resource which functions like energy.[5] In the short term, overuse of
self-control will lead to depletion.[6] However, in the long term, the use of
self-control can strengthen and improve over time.[2][6]
Self-control is also a key concept in the general theory of
crime, a major theory in criminology. The theory was developed by Michael
Gottfredson and Travis Hirschi in their book titled A General Theory of Crime,
published in 1990. Gottfredson and Hirschi define self-control as the
differential tendency of individuals to avoid criminal acts independent of the
situations in which they find themselves.[7] Individuals with low self-control
tend to be impulsive, insensitive towards others, risk takers, short-sighted,
and nonverbal. About 70% of the variance in questionnaire data operationalizing
one construct of self-control had been found to be genetic.
Counteractive
Desire is an affectively charged motivation toward a certain
object, person, or activity, but not limited to, that associated with pleasure
or relief from displeasure.[9] Desires vary in strength and duration. A desire
becomes a temptation when it impacts or enters the individual's area of
self-control, if the behavior resulting from the desire conflicts with an
individual's values or other self-regulatory goals.[10][11] A limitation to
research on desire is the issue of individuals desiring different things. New
research looked at what people desire in real world settings. Over one week,
7,827 self-reports of desires were collected and indicated significant
differences in desire frequency and strength, degree of conflict between
desires and other goals, and the likelihood of resisting desire and success of
the resistance. The most common and strongly experienced desires are those
related to bodily needs like eating, drinking, and sleeping.[11][12]
Desires that conflict with overarching goals or values are
known as temptations.[11][10] Self-control dilemmas occur when long-term goals
and values clash with short-term temptations. Counteractive Self-Control Theory
states that when presented with such a dilemma, we lessen the significance of
the instant rewards while momentarily increasing the importance of our overall
values. When asked to rate the perceived appeal of different snacks before
making a decision, people valued health bars over chocolate bars. However, when
asked to do the rankings after having chosen a snack, there was no significant
difference of appeal. Further, when college students completed a questionnaire
prior to their course registration deadline, they ranked leisure activities as
less important and enjoyable than when they filled out the survey after the
deadline passed. The stronger and more available the temptation is, the harsher
the devaluation will be.[13][14]
One of the most common self-control dilemmas involves the
desire for unhealthy or unneeded food consumption versus the desire to maintain
long-term health. An indication of unneeded food could also be over expenditure
on certain types of consumption such as eating away from home. Not knowing how
much to spend, or overspending one's budget on eating out can be a symptom of a
lack of self control.[15]
Experiment participants rated a new snack as significantly
less healthy when it was described as very tasty compared to when they heard it
was just slightly tasty. Without knowing anything else about a food, the mere
suggestion of good taste triggers counteractive self-control and prompted them
to devalue the temptation in the name of health. Further, when presented with
the strong temptation of one large bowl of chips, participants both perceived
the chips to be higher in calories and ate less of them than did participants who
faced the weak temptation of three smaller chip bowls, even though both
conditions represented the same amount of chips overall.
Weak temptations are falsely perceived to be less unhealthy,
so self-control is not triggered and desirable actions are more often engaged
in, supporting the counteractive self-control theory.[16] Weak temptations
present more of a challenge to overcome than strong temptations, because they
appear less likely to compromise long-term values.[13][14]
https://www.gold-pattern.com/en
Satiation
The decrease in an individual's liking of and desire for a
substance following repeated consumption of that substance is known as
satiation. Satiation rates when eating depend on interactions of trait
self-control and healthiness of the food.
Comments
Post a Comment