Self-Regulation Theory

DEVELOPERS

Carver & Scheier (1981, 1982, 1998) first adapted the feedback-loop theory to self-regulation. Carver & Scheier (2000) state “goals serve as reference values for feedback loops” (p.42). This feedback-loop of self-regulation is referred to as TOTE (test, operate, test, and exit) (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008, p. 133). One begins by comparing the self to the standard. If he self does not meet the standards one begins to make changes to closer resemble the standard. Once again the self is compared to the standard, and the cycle continues until the two are in line (Baumeister & Vohs, 2007). It is at this point that the person can exit, ceasing self-regulation of that specific behavior.

In social cognitive theory human behavior is extensively motivated and regulated by the ongoing exercise of self-influence. The major self-regulative mechanism operates through three principal sub-functions. These include self-monitoring of one's behavior, its determinants, and its effects; judgment of one's behavior in relation to personal standards and environmental circumstances; and affective self-reaction. Self-regulation also encompasses the self-efficacy mechanism, which plays a central role in the exercise of personal agency by its strong impact on thought, affect, motivation, and action. Bandura 1991

BACKGROUND

Historical Roots of self-regulation Zimmerman (2000) states that self-regulation is important to human survival in that self-regulation is directly connected with the goal of social acceptance. Historically, social acceptance was crucial for survival. Both survival and reproduction proved to be easier with social acceptance than when one faced social isolation (Baumeister & Vohs, 2007). Humans, unlike other animals, get what they need from the social group more often than getting what they need directly from nature (Baumeister & Vohs, 2007). Due to the heavy reliance on the social group, social acceptance, and therefore self-regulation is crucial for success.

Self-regulation refers to the self’s capacity to alter its behaviors (Baumeister & Vohs, 2007). These behaviors are changed in accordance to some standards, ideals or goals either stemming from internal or societal expectations (Baumeister & Vohs, 2007). The presence and quality of these actions depend on one’s beliefs and motives (Zimmerman, 2000). Shah and Kruglanski (2000) suggest that everyday self-regulation involves the pursuit of many different goals, standards, and ideals.

REFERENCES ~ Selected Entries Detailed Reference Sheet

• Steel, P. (2007). The Nature of Procrastination: a Meta-Analytic and Theoretical Review of Quintessential Self-Regulatory Failure. Psychological Bulletin, 133, 65-94.
• Bandura, A. (1991). Social Cognitive Theory of Self-Regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 248-287.