Important features of goal construal  PPA = Personal projects Analysis (Little, 1983)  Adults average about 14 personal goals  Content may be significant –e.g., Health goals for hypochondriacs –Most common goal across settings & populations: “lose weight” 5 factors used to interpret the PPA  Meaningfulness (importance, enjoyment)  Efficacy (progress, outcome, skills)  Structure (control, initiation, time adequacy)  Stress (stress, difficulty, challenge)  Social Support (visibility, other’s view)

Meaning-Efficacy trade-off  Molecular goals (time focused & concrete) –high efficacy but low meaningfulness  Molar goals (broad, life long pursuits) –low efficacy but high meaningfulness  Anxiety can be predicted from goals with hi meaning & low efficacy  Research on college students and their goals shows that depression is marked by low efficacy & low meaningfulness (Lecci et al., 1994)  Depression can also be marked by the failure to disengage (Kuhl, 1986) from unsuccessful projects - depression as “information”  Goals also linked to hypochondriasis (more automated illness prevention goals with low efficacy and hi stress; Lecci et al., 1996), life satisfaction (Palys & Little, 1993), health (Emmons & King, 1988)  Project system coherence comes from a balance of projects or from “Project spin”

Ipsative scoring for the PPA  Ipsative scoring refers to comparisons within the individual (no need for a norm group, though normative scoring can be done)  Goals can be scored by comparing your own score at one time to scores from obtained from another time –Meaningful because scores can change (traits are supposed to be stable, so any changes on the NEO are considered error in measurement)  Goals can also be scored by comparing ratings across different content domains (e.g., social vs. academic) – look at your scores  Goals can also be scored normatively (see next slide)

Normative scoring for the PPA – an example for academic vs leisure goals  Academic goals –Importance:  High = 10  Low = 5 or < –Enjoyment  High = 7 or >  Low = 2 or < –Stress  High = 9 or >  Low = 3 or < –Other’s view of importance  High = 10  Low = 4 or <  Leisure goals –Importance:  High = 9 or >  Low = 4 or < –Enjoyment  High = 9 or >  Low = 6 or < –Stress  High = 5 or >  Low = 1 or < –Other’s view of importance  High = 8 or >  Low = 1 or <

Class “cocktail” party – don’t write this down  Please complete the top half of the self assessment form & print your name on the bottom  Once finished the assessment, please stand in line to get drinks (bring your books with you)  You will be assigned to groups of 6-7  After getting drinks, sit together somewhere  You need to be familiar with the names of those in your group, find out what they are doing this summer and their long term plans.

Self vs. Peer Ratings – include in class notes  High degree of consistency between self ratings and the ratings of others even after only a brief interaction –Almost as accurate as assessments from those who know you very well  How does social desirability effect ratings? Social constraints? The short time period of the assessment?  Which traits will show the greatest discrepancies?  Do discrepancies necessarily reflect problems with the self-report? –Real differences between internal and external presentation may be meaningful  FUNDAMENTAL ATTRIBUTION ERROR –When evaluating others, people tend to attribute behavior to traits –When evaluating our own behavior, we tend to attribute it to the situation (Why? - baserates)