Pre- Versus Post-Decisional Deliberation and Goal Commitment: The Positive Effects of Defensiveness

Abstract

Building on Gollwitzer’s (1990) mindset theory of action phases, it is proposed that the effects of deliberation on subsequent goal commitment are moderated by people’s pre- versus post-decisional status. A balanced deliberation and impartial assessment of pros and cons is expected to reduce goal commitment in pre-decisional individuals, whereas a partial, defensive deliberation and a focus on the pros should strengthen goal commitment in post-decisional individuals. Indeed, in Study 1, deliberation on the pros and cons of pursuing a focal goal promoted stronger reported goal commitment in participants who had decided to pursue this goal, but reduced goal commitment for people who had not yet made such a decision. In Study 2, the same pattern of results emerged when goal commitment was assessed in terms of planning to act on the goal rather than by mere self-report. Study 3 replicated findings using a different decision status manipulation and an objective measure of commitment. Moreover, it explored the underlying process and provided evidence that it is the defensive focus on the pros of goal pursuit that drives post-decisional deliberation’s strengthening effects on goal commitment. Finally, results of Studies 4 and 5 suggested that the increase in commitment produced by defensive post-decisional deliberation is consequential. It was found to differentially strengthen conflicting behavioral intentions (Study 4), and to drive real-life behavior by promoting goal-directed action (Study 5). Implications for mindset theory, goal commitment theory, and decision making are discussed.

Keywords: Deliberation,Goal Commitment, Predecisional and Postdecisional Action Phases, Defensiveness