Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Approach-avoidance goals and psychological well-being, health, and interpersonal relationship outcomes… Takagi, Kaori 2005

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-ubc_2005-0661.pdf [ 6.53MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0092217.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0092217-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0092217-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0092217-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0092217-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0092217-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0092217-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0092217-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0092217.ris

Full Text

A P P R O A C H - A V O I D A N C E G O A L S A N D P S Y C H O L O G I C A L W E L L - B E I N G , H E A L T H , A N D I N T E R P E R S O N A L R E L A T I O N S H I P O U T C O M E S A C R O S S E U R O - C A N A D I A N , J A P A N E S E , A N D M E X I C A N C U L T U R E S by K A O R I T A K A G I B . A . The University of California, Los Angeles, 2002 A THESIS S U B M I T T E D IN P A R T I A L F U L F I L L M E N T OF T H E R E Q U I R E M E N T S F O R T H E D E G R E E O F M A S T E R OF A R T S in T H E F A C U L T Y OF G R A D U A T E S T U D I E S (Psychology) T H E U N I V E R S I T Y OF B R I T I S H C O L U M B I A August 2005 © Kaori Takagi, 2005 Approach and Avoidance Goals ii Abstract Japanese, Euro-Canadian, and Mexican university students listed their personal goals and completed questionnaires on their psychological well-being, health, and interpersonal relationship status at Time 1 (the beginning of the semester) and at Time 2 (the end of the semester). The relationships between the kinds of goals they listed (i.e., approach or avoidance) and their well-being, health, and interpersonal relationship status were assessed to investigate the moderating role of culture among these relationships. The regression analyses revealed marginal and significant interaction effects of culture and avoidance goals on psychological well-being, health, and interpersonal relationship outcomes at Time 2. The results offer support for the hypothesis: Compared with Canadians, Mexicans, and especially Japanese are less likely to experience adverse effects in the areas of well-being, health, and interpersonal relationship associated with avoidance goals. Approach and Avoidance Goals i i i T A B L E OF C O N T E N T S Abstract i i Table of Contents i i i List of Tables •••••vi i List of Figures x Acknowledgments x i i Introduction 1 Background of Approach-Avoidance Motivations Literature 3 Early Work on Approach/Avoidance Orientations 3 More Recent Work on Approach/Avoidance Orientations 5 Approach-Avoidance Goals 7 Approach-Avoidance Orientations and Psychological Well-Being 8 Approach-Avoidance Orientations and Health 10 Approach-Avoidance Orientations and Interpersonal Relationship 11 Culture and Self-Construals 12 Culture and Motivational Orientations 13 Mexicans and Motivational Orientations 19 Present Research 20 Hypothesis 23 Method 24 Participants 24 Procedure : 25 Measures 25 Approach and Avoidance Goals iv Measures of Approach and Avoidance Goals 25 Measures of Approach and Avoidance Orientations 27 Measures of Psychological Well-Being 28 Measures of Health 29 Measures of Interpersonal Relationship Status 30 Individual-Differences Measures 30 The End of the Semester Follow-up Assessment 31 Results : 31 Preliminary Analyses 31 Participant Attrition 31 Gender Differences 31 Age Differences 33 Hypothesis 1: The Dispositional Hypothesis (Approach-Avoidance Orientations Across Cultures) 33 Hypothesis 2: The Goal Hypothesis (Avoidance Goals Across Cultures) 33 Hypothesis 3: The Outcome Hypothesis (Analyses of the Effects of Avoidance Goals and Avoidance Orientations on Psychological Well-Being, Health, and Interpersonal Relationship Outcomes) 34 Overview of Psychological Well-Being Analyses: 34 Psychological Well-Being Analyses: End-of-Semester Psychological Well-Being, Controlling for Beginning-of-Semester Psychological Well-Being (Change in Psychological Well-Being) and Avoidance Goals 35 Overview of Physical Health Analyses: 40 Approach and Avoidance Goals v Physical Health Analyses: End-of-Semester Physical Health, Controlling for Beginning-of-Semester Physical Health (Change in Physical Health) and Avoidance Goals 40 Overview of Interpersonal Relationship Status Analyses: ..44 Interpersonal Relationship Status Analyses: End-of-Semester Interpersonal Relationship Status, Controlling for Beginning-of-Semester Interpersonal Relationship Status (Change in Interpersonal Relationship Status) and Avoidance Goals 44 Hypothesis 4: The Mediation Hypothesis (The Relationship between the Mediator Variables and the Outcome Variables, with Avoidance Goals Controlled) 47 Mediation Analyses Overview: 47 Second Path Mediational Analysis #1: The Relationship between the Hypothesized Mediator Variables (Perceived Competence & Perceived Controlledness) and Avoidance Goals at Time 2 48 Second Path Mediational Analysis #2: The Relationship between the Hypothesized Mediator Variables (Perceived Competence & Perceived Controlledness) and Avoidance Orientations (BIS) at Time 2 48 Summary for Second Path Mediation Analyses 49 Summary for Mediation Analyses 50 Supplementary Analyses 51 Supplementary Analyses 1: The Relationship between Avoidance Goals and the Goal Variables (Time 2) 51 Supplementary Analyses 2: The Relationship between Avoidance Orientations (BIS) and the Goal Variables (Time 2) 53 Approach and Avoidance Goals v i Supplementary Analyses 5: The Relationship between the Motivational Orientation and Avoidance Goals 55 Summary 63 Future Directions 67 References 70 Approach and Avoidance Goals v i i List of Tables Table l a : 80 Means and Standard Deviations for the Ma in Variables 80 Table lb : 81 Means and Standard Deviations for the Ma in Variables 81 Table l c 82 Means and Standard Deviations for the Main Variables 82 Table 2a 83 Common Approach Goals for Japanese Sample 83 Table 2b 84 Common Avoidance Goals for Japanese Sample 84 Table 2c 85 Common Approach Goals for Canadian Sample 85 Table 2d 86 Common Avoidance Goals for Canadian Sample 86 Table 2e 87 Common Approach Goals for Mexican Sample 87 Table 2f. 88 Common Avoidance Goals for Mexican Sample 88 Betas for the Relationships Between Avoidance Goals and the Psychological Well-Being, Health, and Interpersonal Relationship Variables Controlling for Gender, the Target Variable at Time 1, Culture, and the Interaction between Culture and Avoidance Goals 89 Table 3b : : 90 Approach and Avoidance Goals v i i i Betas for the Relationships Between Avoidance Goals and the Psychological Well-Being, Health, and Interpersonal Relationship Variables Controlling for Gender, the Target Variable at Time 1, Culture, and the Interaction between Culture and Avoidance Goals 90 Table 4 91 Summary Table for M a i n Results at Time 2 for Avoidance Goals (the Relationships Between Avoidance Goals and the Psychological Well-Being, Health, and Interpersonal Relationship Variables Controlling for Gender, the Target Variable at Time 1, Culture, and the Interaction between Culture and Avoidance Goals) 91 Summary Table for Cultural Differences (Interaction Effects) for M a i n Outcome Variables...92 Table 5b 93 Summary Table for Cultural Differences (Interaction Effects) for Mediational and Goal Variables 93 Table 6a 94 Summary Table for Within Culture Main Effects Analyses Results Outcome Variables (the Relationships Between Avoidance Goals and the Outcome Variables at Time 2 94 Table 6b 95 Summary Table for Within Culture Main Effects Analyses Results Outcome Variables (the Relationships Between Avoidance Orientations and the Outcome Variables at Time 2) 95 Table 7a 96 Summary Table for Within Culture Ma in Effects Analyses Results for Goal Variables (the Relationships Between Avoidance Goals and the Goal Variables at Time 2) 96 Table 7b 97 Approach and Avoidance Goals ix Summary Table for Within Culture Main Effects Analyses Results for Goal Variables (the Relationships Between Avoidance Orientations (BIS) and the Goal Variables at Time 2) 97 Approach and Avoidance Goals x List of Figures Figure 1 98 The Regression Line for the Well-Being Composite at Time 2 Predicted by Avoidance Goals Controlling for the Well-Being Composite at Time 1, Gender, Culture, and the Interaction of Culture x Avoidance Goals 98 Figure 2 99 The Regression Line for Negative Affect at Time 2 Predicted by Avoidance Goals Controlling for Negative Affect at Time 1, Gender, Culture, and the Interaction of Culture x Avoidance Goals 99 Figure 3 100 The Regression Line for General Good Feelings at Time 2 Predicted by Avoidance Goals Controlling for General Good Feelings at Time 1, Gender, Culture, and the Interaction of Culture x Avoidance Goals 100 Figure 4..... 101 The Regression Line for Physical Symptoms at Time 2 Predicted by Avoidance Goals Controlling for Physical Symptoms at Time 1, Gender, Culture, and the Interaction of Culture x Avoidance Goals 101 Figure 5 102 The Regression Line for Semester Health at Time 2 Predicted by Avoidance Goals Controlling for Semester Health at Time 1, Gender, Culture, and the Interaction of Culture x Avoidance Goals 102 Figure 6 103 Approach and Avoidance Goals x i The Regression Line for Loneliness at Time 2 Predicted by Avoidance Goals Controlling for Loneliness at Time 1, Gender, Culture, and the Interaction of Culture x Avoidance Goals.... 103 Figure 7 104 The Regression Line for Friendship Satisfaction at Time 2 Predicted by Avoidance Goals Controlling for Friendship Satisfaction at Time 1, Gender, Culture, and the Interaction of Culture x Avoidance Goals 104 Figure 8 105 The Regression Line for Perceived Goal Progress at Time 2 Predicted by Avoidance Goals Controlling for Perceived Goal Progress at Time 1, Gender, Culture, and the Interaction of Culture x Avoidance Goals 105 Figure 9 106 The Regression Line for Goal Satisfaction at Time 2 Predicted by Avoidance Goals Controlling for Gender, Culture, and the Interaction of Culture x Avoidance Goals 106 Approach and Avoidance Goals x i i Acknowledgments I acknowledge that this work could not have been completed just by myself. I am truly grateful for the many people who helped me throughout the program. I thank D a m n Lehman for accepting me to the program. Thank you, Darrin, for all the support you gave me. I thank Steven Heine for supervising my research projects throughout the program. Thank you, Steve, for meeting me weekly in the second year of my master's program. I appreciate your support in implementing ideas and research projects. I also thank, Mark Schaller, for reading my rather long thesis and being available as a committee member. I am grateful to Shelley Taylor and Heejung K i m for believing in me. Heejung, thank you so much for your kind advice and helping me with various challenges. I thank my family and friends, especially Laura Estrada, Jess (Gao Jie), Kimberly McGinnis , and Matthew Kenna, for your emotional and tangible support. Approach and Avoidance Goals 1 Approach-Avoidance Goals and Psychological Well-Being, Health, and Interpersonal Relationship Satisfaction across Euro-Canadian, Japanese, and Mexican Cultures Introduction According to Gray (1987a), there are two basic motivational systems: the behavioral inhibition system (BIS) and the behavioral approach system (BAS) . The BIS responds to signals of punishment and novel stimuli; high-BIS individuals are motivated to avoid negative outcomes. The B A S responds to signals of rewards; high-BAS individuals are motivated to approach good things. According to Gray, these two motivational systems constitute dispositional, stable traits (Gray, 1987b). Similarly, Ell iot and his colleagues (Elliot, 1999; Ell iot & Church, 1997; Elliot & Sheldon, 1997) proposed approach and avoidance motivations, and Higgins and his colleagues (Higgins, 1996; Higgins, Shah, & Friedman, 1997) conceptualized two motivational regulations as prevention- and promotion-focus. Moreover, these two regulation systems have been investigated as neurobiological sensitivity (Davidson, 1993). Although the names are different, these two distinct motivational systems share many commonalities. Approach and avoidance motivations also have implications for psychological well-being and physical health. Research indicates that avoidance motivations are associated with anxiety and agitation. The result of one study showed that college students with more avoidance goals reported lower levels of subjective well-being during and at the end of a semester (Elliot & Sheldon, 1997). Moreover, these researchers found that adopting avoidance goals results in lower perceived progress, and that lower perception of progress was, in turn, associated with lower levels of subjective well-being. Similarly, avoidance motivations were associated with physical Approach and Avoidance Goals 2 symptoms such that individuals with higher avoidance motivations reported more physical symptoms such as headaches, coughs, and dizziness (Elliot & Sheldon, 1998). The findings outlined above seem to suggest that avoidance motivations are undeniably harmful. However, the negative impact of avoidance goals does not seem to be universal. Most research in this area has been conducted in North America. A s far as I know, there is only one study that investigated the effects of avoidance goals on subjective well-being cross-culturally (Elliot, Chirkov, K i m , & Sheldon, 2001). In this study, Korean and American College Students listed their personal goals and completed the subjective well-being scale. It was found that there were negative relations between avoidance goals and well-being for American students, whereas there were no relations between avoidance goals and psychological well-being for Korean students. Therefore, this study showed that East Asians may not exhibit the relationship between avoidance goals and psychological well-being. This finding has been attributed to the fact that interdependent self-construals, as well as other psychological features characteristic of East Asians, are more consistent with avoidance motivations (Heine, 2005; Lee, Aaker, & Gardner, 2000). It can be argued that East Asians may benefit from having avoidance motivations because it can lead to fitting in to society and maintaining harmonious relationships. Therefore, being especially concerned with avoiding negative outcomes may not negatively affect East Asians as it does North Americans. The aim for the current study was to clarify the relations between avoidance motivations and well-being by investigating participants from a number of cultural backgrounds over a course of a semester. The study was implemented by looking at Euro-Canadian, Japanese, and Mexican students. In addition, to my knowledge, there are no studies focusing on health and interpersonal relationships for this line of cross-cultural research. Thus, the other goal for the current study is to Approach and Avoidance Goals 3 expand the investigations of the effects of avoidance goals to health and interpersonal relationship domains in addition to the psychological well-being domain. Here, the literature on approach-avoidance orientations w i l l be examined. To introduce the topic of interest, this section begins by examining the background and early work on approach-avoidance orientation systems. Next, the recent work on approach-avoidance orientations wi l l be discussed. Furthermore, the literature on the effects of the two motivational regulation systems on cognition, psychological well-being, health, and interpersonal relations wi l l be reviewed. Finally, some cultural implications regarding avoidance motivations and well-being, which lead to the current research, w i l l be discussed. Background of Approach-Avoidance Motivations Literature Early Work on Approach/Avoidance Orientations There is much research that demonstrates that people can take two psychologically distinct routes to achieve a desired state of affairs: approach good things or avoid bad things (e.g., Emmons, 1991; Fowles, 1988; Gray, 1987a; Higgins, 1996). In early work on approach-avoidance orientations, Schneirla (1959) demonstrated approach-avoidance reactions in a simple organism. The researcher placed an amoeba under either weak or strong light. When an amoeba was given weak intensity of light, it moved toward the light, but when it was given strong intensity of light, it moved away from the light. The study demonstrates that two distinct approach-avoidance behaviors were executed in the amoeba, and moving towards or away from a stimulus, which was dependent on the intensity of the light. Schneirla (1959) claims that the two motivational regulations were adapted through natural selection. He argues that the reactions of approach-avoidance are adaptive in all animals, including humans, because they determine the Approach and Avoidance Goals 4 consequences of species' future. Therefore, approach-avoidance motives that led to organisms' survival were selected and thus still exist. Moreover, two motivational regulation systems were studied in the area of learning. McClel land, Atkinson, Clark, and Lowel l (1964) examined functions of classical learning in animals and claimed that appetitive-anxiety motives were learned. The researchers reasoned that after an animal has learned to associate eating saccharine with hearing a buzzer, it shows positive reactions when it hears the buzzer (appetitive motive), in contrast, after an animal has learned that it w i l l get shocked when a buzzer goes off, then it has negative reactions to the buzzer (anxiety motivation). From the examples of amoeba and other animals, it can be said that these two conceptualizations of motivational orientations are fundamental in organisms. Some early researchers studied two independent motives in the academic area. Atkinson and Li twin (1960) found that individuals tend to be either motivated to achieve success or motivated to avoid failure in a test situation. The researchers claim that achievement and anxiety levels are related to the strength and weakness of two distinct motivational dimensions, called achievement motives and avoidant motives, respectively. It was found that individuals with strong approach achievement motives had low anxiety and tended to achieve success, whereas individuals with strong avoidant motives had high anxiety and tended to be afraid of failure. Individuals with high achievement motives take risks more often and have higher levels of performance in test situations compared to individuals with high avoidant motives. Moreover, Mehrabian (1976) distinguished two motivational regulations in social context, affiliative tendency and sensitivity to rejection, as independent constructs. For decades, researchers have been investigating these two motivational regulations and have accumulated much information. In recent years, theorists have revisited the idea that there Approach and Avoidance Goals 5 are two distinct motivational systems and they have expanded research regarding the consequences of pursuing them. More Recent Work on Approach/Avoidance Orientations According to Gray, behavioral activation system (BAS) involves responding to signals of rewards and being motivated to seek those rewards. High B A S is associated with impulsivity and the emotion of hope, whereas low approach orientations motivate people to seek out little (Carver & White, 1994; Gray, 1991). In contrast, behavioral inhibition system (BIS) is related to fear and anxiety (Gray, 1987b). The BIS involves sensitivity to signals of punishment and novel stimuli and motivation to avoid those stimuli. When people are high in BIS, they are motivated to avoid any potential negativity. High BIS leads to inhibition of behavior, increased arousal, and heightened attention (Gray, 1994), whereas low BIS induces little motivation to avoid negative outcomes (Gray, 1991). These two motivational systems are independent: that is, being high in one system does not affect the strength of the other system. The interaction between the two motivational systems regulates people's behavior and emotions (Gray, 1994). These two motivational systems are said to be associated with dispositional, stable traits. For example, it is said that chronically anxious people have high degrees of BIS and that anxiety leads to introversion (Gray, 1987b). In addition, impulsivity is related to high reactivity of B A S , and high impulsivity in turn is related to extraversion. Moreover, heightened BIS sensitivity can make a person prone to anxiety or depression, whereas under-active BIS may be associated with psychopathic personality (Fowles, 1997). One study investigated the relationship between approach-avoidance tendencies and their propensities of alcohol abuse and problematic eating patterns among senior high school girls in Australia (Loxton & Dawe, 2001). The researchers found that women who had alcohol problems Approach and Avoidance Goals 6 had high sensitivity to reward (BAS) , and women who had a dysfunctional eating pattern showed both high sensitivity to reward (BAS) and punishment (BIS). This study suggests that the levels of two sensitivities to reward and punishment can predict vulnerabilities to alcohol abuse and eating disorders. The research results above show that the two motivational systems have important implications for personality, emotion, and behavior. Approach and avoidance motivations have been conceptualized in other ways as well . Higgins and his colleagues (Higgins, 1996; Higgins, Shah, & Friedman, 1997) propose that people can be promotion-focused (i.e., approach good things) or prevention-focused (i.e., avoid bad things). Higgins suggests that these motivations can take the form of either chronic individual differences, such as dispositional traits, or temporarily activated states. In either chronic or temporary forms, there is evidence that the two motivations are associated with distinct psychological consequences similar to those described by Gray (1987a). In particular, depending on success or failure to attain goals, promotion-focus is associated with cheerfulness and dejection, whereas prevention-focus is associated with quiescence and agitation (Higgins et al., 1997). Consistent with Gray's two motivational systems, Watson and Tellegen (1985) theorized two independent structures in affectivity based on the statistical analysis of self-report mood measures and called their structures negative affect and positive affect. Negative affect reflects the tendencies toward negative emotional states, such as "distressed, fearful, hostile, or nervous" (p.221). On the other hand, positive affect is related to the tendencies toward positive emotional states, such as "active, elated, enthusiastic, and excited" (p.221). Similar to B I S / B A S , these affective dimensions are independent in that they can occur at different levels simultaneously. In their recent review, Watson and Tellegen (1999) argue that positive affect is related to behavioral approach, and negative affect is associated with behavioral withdrawal. Approach and Avoidance Goals 7 Thus far, motivational orientations have been discussed. Although people's behaviors are closely related to their motivational orientations, everyday behavior is not completely directed by motivational orientations. Instead, people form personal goals to direct their behaviors to approach success or to avoid failures. Elliot and Sheldon (1998) defined personal goals as "consciously articulated, personally meaningful objectives that individuals pursue in their daily lives" (p. 1282). Motivations are said to be distal regulators of behavior, whereas goals are more proximal regulators of behavior (Elliot & Sheldon, 1998). Approach-Avoidance Goals Emmons (1991) investigates personal strivings of people. Personal strivings are defined as the objectives that a person is trying to accomplish. They are said to be goals that people try to pursue in their daily life. Personal strivings are said to originate from motivation, but they are more specific and better explanations for people's everyday-behavior than motivation. For example, a person may have a striving toward "trying to help others in need of help" or "trying to persuade others that I am right" (p.455, Emmons, 1991). Motivations are more stable than personal strivings, because personal strivings tend to change by daily events (Emmons, 1991). Similar to Emmons' theory of personal strivings, Elliot, Sheldon, and Church (1997) studied approach personal goals and avoidance personal goals. Personal goals are defined as the self-regulatory systems that lead people to pursue carefully evaluated, personally valuable objectives in their daily lives. Approach goals are associated with obtaining toward positive outcomes, and avoidance goals are associated with moving away from negative outcomes (Elliot & Covington, 2001). People might take different goals in order to accomplish the same outcome. For example, an approach goal may be reading a textbook every morning, and an avoidance goal may be reducing time spent by watching T V . In this case, the end-state sought might be doing well Approach and Avoidance Goals 8 on a test, but the actual goals are different. Reading a textbook in order to improve one's score on the test means approaching toward one's desired outcome, and staying away from T V means moving away from a negative outcome. Moreover, it can be said that personality disposition in conjunction with other situational factors lead to the adoption of specific personal goals. The difference between approach-avoidance motivations and goals is that motivations are distal to a person's behavior than goals, and goals can explain one's behavior better because they are based more on situational factors, in addition to dispositional factors (Elliot & Sheldon, 1998). When people choose to behave in a certain way, it is influenced both by motivations and goals. However, people choose goals based on their motivations, and motivations are dispositional and stable, whereas goals are more situational and changeable. Moreover, motivations are placed in a higher position in a hierarchy of behavior, that is, motivations are more abstract than goals, and goals are concrete and specific (Elliot & Sheldon, 1998). For example, i f a woman wishes to become more attractive (a motivation), she may choose to lose weight (a goal), or she may try to smile more often (a goal). A s the example shows, a person can have the same motivation, yet she can have different goals to achieve her primary motivation. Thus far, approach-avoidance motivations and goals have been discussed. The importance of studying approach-avoidance orientations comes from the fact that they have implications in individuals' cognition, psychological well-being, health, and interpersonal relationship outcomes. In the following sections, I discuss how avoidance orientations are associated with these dimensions. Approach-Avoidance Orientations and Psychological Well-Being Elliot, Sheldon and Church (1997) studied the relationship between avoidance goals and subjective well-being. They examined college students three times over the course of a semester Approach and Avoidance Goals 9 and measured the relationship between the use of avoidance goals and subjective well-being. Students listed ten goals that they typically are trying to do in their daily life and completed measurements of neuroticism, extraversion, perceived progress, the importance of goals, the expected progress of goals, and life satisfaction. The results revealed that people with more avoidance goals had lower levels of subjective well-being during, and at the end of the semester. Moreover, it was found that higher number of avoidance goals is directly related to low perceived progress, and that low perception of progress in turn is related to low levels of subjective well-being. The study suggests that adopting avoidance goals is detrimental to psychological well-being longitudinally. In another study of goals and well-being, Coats, Janoff-Bulman, and Alpert (1996) examined the relations between approach and avoidance goals and self-esteem and well-being of college students. The researchers found that avoidance goals are related to negative self-evaluations and optimism as well as greater depression (Study 1). In addition, the researchers manipulated approach and avoidance goals and had participants engaged in creative tasks (Study 2). The results show that students in avoidance condition generally evaluated their tasks negatively regardless of performance, and the negative self-evaluations were associated with lower well-being for students with lower performance. Thus, the researchers claimed that avoidance goals have negative effects on one's well-being and self-evaluations. Other researchers (Gable, Reis & Elliot, 2000) investigated approach-avoidance orientations in daily life. Specifically, they investigated the associations between approach-avoidance orientations and people's experience of positive and negative daily events and emotions. The results showed that people high in avoidance motivations were likely to experience negative affect, and people high in approach motivations were likely to experience positive affect Approach and Avoidance Goals 10 in their daily lives. In addition, experiences of negative events had stronger effects on negative affect for high avoidance orientation individuals than for high approach orientation individuals. Moreover, people with high approach orientation reported experiencing more positive events daily. These results suggest that people's approach-avoidance tendencies may predict individuals' daily experiences in affect in relation to daily experiences of events: Approach-oriented people tend to experience positive events more, and thus feel more positive affect, whereas avoidance-oriented people have strong negative reactions to negative events. Approach-Avoidance Orientations and Health In addition to being associated with psychological well-being, approach and avoidance motivations also have implications for physical health. Elliot and Sheldon (1998) conducted a series of three studies with college students to examine the link between physical health and avoidance goals. The researchers found that individuals with higher avoidance goals reported more physical symptoms such as headaches, coughs, and dizziness. Future research is needed to test the robustness of this finding with other measures of physical health. A s far as I am aware of, this research is the only published study that directly examined the relations between approach-avoidance systems and health. Takagi, Beals, and Gable (2002) examined the relations between physiological reactivity and B I S / B A S in disclosing situations. In the study, participants were exposed to an experimental manipulation in which they either disclosed a secret that was important to them or disclosed a positive attribute of which they were proud. In addition, participants completed dispositional measures of B I S / B A S , psychological well-being and emotion measures. Blood pressure and heart rate data were collected every two minutes throughout the study. The results showed that high avoidance people maintained higher heart rate while thinking of a secret compared to low Approach and Avoidance Goals 11 avoidance people. In addition, people who were high in avoidance motives were more physiologically aroused when thinking of a secret, compared to people who were low in avoidance motives, because the secret condition activated their avoidance motives. It was suggested that having to conceal negative personal information may have impact on health especially for those who are avoidance-oriented. Approach-Avoidance Orientations and Interpersonal Relationship In addition to cognition, psychological well-being, and health, approach-avoidance motivations are related to interpersonal relationship outcomes. Gable (2000) examined approach-avoidance regulations in the social situation. In the study, the researcher investigated people's social behavior and approach-avoidance social orientations. Specifically, the study examined the influence of fear of rejection (i.e., avoidance disposition and goals) and hope for affiliation (i.e., approach disposition and goals) on an individuals' experience of loneliness, social well-being, and relationship anxiety over the course of two months. The results show that people with high-approach social orientation at the beginning of the study showed decreases in the level of loneliness and increases in social well-being two months later. In addition, people with high-avoidant social orientation exhibited high loneliness and high relationship anxiety at the beginning of the study, and avoidance motivation also predicted increases in relationship anxiety two months later. Frank and Brandstatter (2002) investigated approach and avoidance types of commitment in intimate relationships and the relation of them to the relationship satisfaction. They measured couples commitment types, personal values, and similarity between partners' ideas about a good relationship three times over 13 months. They found that approach commitment at Time 1 was positively related to relationship satisfaction at Time 2 and Time 3 (6 months and 13 months later). Approach and Avoidance Goals 12 In addition, approach commitment at Time 1 was related to greater well-being at Time 2 and Time 3 where as avoidance commitment at Time 1 was related to lower well-being at Time 2. Moreover, approach commitment at Time 1 was related to greater positive emotions at Time 2 whereas avoidance commitment at Time 1 was negatively related to lower positive emotions at Time 2. Therefore, this study suggests that avoidance commitment predicts adverse relationship qualities. In summary, many researchers agree that these two orientations are associated with people's cognition, emotions, and health. Furthermore, although aforementioned motivational systems, prevention- and promotion-focus, personal strivings, and personal goals are called by different names, these all suggest that there are two independent psychological regulating systems in human behavior, which are approaching positive stimuli and avoiding negative stimuli. Approach-avoidance motivations are dispositional, stable construct, and these motivations can manifest in the form of personal goals. The findings outlined above show that avoidance motivations are undeniably harmful. However, the negative impact of avoidance goals does not seem to be universal. Most research in this area has been conducted in North America. In the following section, I discuss the relevant theories in cultural psychology and research on approach-avoidance motivations across cultures. Culture and Self-Construals. Research has shown that cultural identifications have an impact on the way people think, feel, and behave. Markus and Kitayama (1991) have addressed two dimensions that can be used to characterize cultural differences: independence and interdependence. Independence/interdependence refers to the way a person construes the self. Individuals with independent views of self conceptualize the self as separate, distinct entity and independent from others. Most Europeans and Americans are said to be independent. The primary task of the Approach and Avoidance Goals 13 independent self is to assert one's uniqueness from others through personal accomplishment and self-sufficiency (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). In contrast, people from East Asian, Latin, South American, and African cultures are said to be interdependent. Individuals with interdependent views of self conceptualize the self as connected, relational entity and as interdependent with others. The primary task of the interdependent self is to fit in to the group by maintaining interpersonal relationships and group harmony, fulfilling social obligations, and attending to others (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). Although these self-construals are prominent in certain cultures, the self and culture are also intertwined with each other: the culture shapes the self and the self shapes the culture. These independent and interdependent views of the self influence cognition, emotion, and motivation (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). Culture and Motivational Orientations Cultural practices and self-construals can influence individuals' motivational orientations. For example, East Asians are concerned with fulfilling social roles and maintaining harmonious relationships. In order for East Asians to maintain harmonious relationships, they must pay attentions to how they behave, what they say to others, and where they stand in the relationship. This requires careful avoidance of inappropriate behaviors and negative interactions. Freely stating one's true opinions, wants, and needs may disturb harmonious relationships. Thus, it can be argued that East Asians have learned to be avoidance-oriented rather than approach-oriented. On the other hand, North Americans are more concerned with asserting one's uniqueness from others and being autonomous. In order for North Americans to feel one's uniqueness from others and feel independent, they must focus on their traits that are better than others and clearly know and assert their own desires instead of focusing on what others want or the benefit of a group " " ... Approach and Avoidance Goals 14 as a whole. Thus, it can be argued that North Americans have learned to be more approach-oriented. Research findings support the argument that East Asians are avoidance-oriented and North Americans are approach-oriented. Markus and Kitayama (1991) demonstrated that North Americans exhibit false uniqueness bias, in which people tend to see themselves as better than others are, while Japanese students did not exhibit this bias. This suggests that North Americans are sensitive to positive information about themselves, indicating that North Americans are approach-oriented while Japanese people are not. Heine and Lehman (1997) claim that North Americans self-enhance, that is, they are sensitive to positive cues about themselves and engage in activities that are affirming of their positive characteristics, indicating that North Americans are more approach-oriented. In the field of emotions, Kitayama, Markus, and Kurokawa (1991) investigated the cultural differences in self- and other- related emotions. They found that Americans experience greater self-relevant positive emotions than negative emotions, whereas Japanese people did not show the difference as Americans did. These findings all suggest that North Americans are sensitive to positive cues, thus are approach-oriented. On the other hand, Heine and Lehman (1999) demonstrated that East Asians evaluate themselves more critically than North Americans, indicating that East Asians pay attentions to negative self-relevant information, thus are avoidance-oriented. In addition, Heine et al. (2001) found that, following failure feedback, Japanese persisted in a cognitive task longer than following successful feedback. Conversely, following success feedback, North Americans persisted in the task significantly longer than following failure feedback. The results indicate that Japanese individuals were sensitive to negative feedback, and in order to remove themselves from the Approach and Avoidance Goals 15 negatively-evaluated situation, they worked hard on the task that they had failed. The studies above demonstrated that Japanese people are more avoidance-oriented. The argument that East Asians are avoidance-oriented and North Americans are approach-oriented can be explained by using the theory of face in East Asian cultures and self-enhancement in North American cultures. Heine (2005) claims that in order to maintain positive views about themselves, East Asians tend to strive for maintaining "face" by sustaining their social roles and fitting into a group. According to Ho 's definition, face is "the respectability and/or deference which a person can claim for himself from others by virtue of the relative position he occupies in his social network and the degree to which he is judged to have functioned adequately in that position" (p. 883, Ho, 1976, as cited in Heine, 2005). It is argued that face is valued in East Asian cultures and self-esteem is valued in North American cultures (Hamamura & Heine, 2005). Heine (2005) claims that individuals' self-esteem is under their own control, because only they themselves can decide how they feel about themselves. It is relatively easy to enhance one's positive views because enhancement of one's views is dependent on their own evaluations (Heine, 2005). In order to self-enhance, individuals need to focus on their positive attributes and success, and this can lead to adoption of approach orientations. On the other hand, face is not under their own control, since it is maintained by other people. Because face is dependent on others' evaluations, face can be at risk of losing. Therefore, when individuals strive for maintaining face, they must deal with the possibility of losing face, and this can lead to the adoption of avoidance orientations. Because face is more valued in East Asian cultures and self-esteem is more valued in North American cultures, it is argued that North Americans are more consistent with approach orientation, and East Asians are more consistent with avoidance orientation (Heine, 2005). Approach and Avoidance Goals 16 Moreover, Markus and Kitayama (1991) claim that individuals from East Asian cultures tend to derive their motivations from what benefits others and a group as a whole, such as the need to be amenable to others, to accommodate to their needs, and to restrain their own wishes or wants. In addition to Heine, other researchers also claim that independent self-construals (characteristic of North Americans) are more consistent with approach orientation, and interdependent self-construals (characteristic of East Asians) are more consistent with avoidance orientation (Heine, 2005; Heine, Lehman, Markus, & Kitayama, 1999; Lee, Aaker, & Gardner, 2000). Furthermore, Briley and Wyer (2002) demonstrated that when individuals are made aware of their group membership (i.e., focused on interdependence), they became more avoidance-oriented, whereas when individuals are made aware of their individual self, separate from others (i.e., focused on independence), they became more approach-oriented. Similarly, Lee, Aaker, and Gardner (2000) claim that interdependent self-construal moderates prevention-orientation, and independent self-construal moderates promotion-orientation. The findings above all suggest that North Americans tend to be motivated to see positive things about themselves, whereas East Asians tend to be motivated to avoid negative cues. Thus, research confirms the argument that North Americans are approach-oriented and East Asians are avoidance-oriented. In sum, research clearly supports the notion that North Americans are approach-oriented and East Asians are avoidance-oriented. Additionally, research has shown that being avoidance-oriented is harmful to psychological well-being, health, and interpersonal relationship outcomes. If the East Asians are avoidance-oriented and avoidance orientations are harmful to individuals, then do East Asians unavoidably suffer from the negative consequences of being avoidance-oriented in their psychological well-being, health, and interpersonal relationships? The Approach and Avoidance Goals 17 research results showing negative relations between avoidance orientations and negative outcomes were obtained exclusively in North America. It is argued that the negative impact of avoiding negative things is not necessarily universal. I argue that being avoidant is functional for East Asians. Why Being Avoidant May Be Less Harmful or Even Beneficial for East Asians? As mentioned earlier, East Asians' primary objective is to maintain harmony with others and feel the sense of interconnectedness with others. In order to do so, they often require being avoidance-oriented, paying attentions to the surroundings and the preferences of the group as a whole. By successfully using their avoidance strategies and fitting in to the group, East Asians may obtain the sense of well-being. Therefore, the negative impact of avoidance goals may not apply for East Asians. If East Asians consistently used approach motivations in their interpersonal relationships, it could be troublesome. For instance, i f an East Asian woman states clearly what she wants in the group without sensitively censoring the needs of a group, it could disturb the group harmony. Consequently, she may not be appreciated in the group. The feeling of being unappreciated could lead to lower well-being, because she fails to accomplish her primary objective of fitting in to a group. Therefore, being predominantly approach-oriented might be harmful for East Asians. On the other hand, North Americans' primary objective is to be independent from others and to find their uniqueness from others. To do so, they need to find what they want to do and go toward their own desires. B y successfully using their approach motivations in their daily lives, North Americans can fulfill their desire to acquire their unique self and independence. It can in turn lead to the sense of well-being for North Americans. Therefore, it can be argued that North Americans may benefit from having approach motivations. Approach and Avoidance Goals 18 In summary, it is be argued that East Asians benefit from being avoidance-oriented while North Americans benefit from being approach-oriented because by successfully being avoidance-or approach-oriented, they can accomplish their primary objectives as being interdependent and independent. It in turn leads to well-being and positive outcomes in interpersonal relationships. Evidence of the Differences in the Relations Between Avoidance/Approach Motivations and Well-Being Across Cultures Consistent with the above arguments, research shows that there is a negative relation between avoidance goals and psychological well-being for North Americans whereas there are no relations between avoidance goals and psychological well-being for East Asians. Elliot and his colleagues investigated the effects of avoidance goals on subjective well-being cross-culturally (Elliot, Chirkov, K i m , & Sheldon, 2001). In this study, Korean and American College Students listed their personal goals and completed the subjective well-being measures. The results indicate a negative relationship between avoidance goals and well-being for American students, whereas there were no relations between avoidance goals and psychological well-being for Korean students. The study also examined Russian participants, who were considered to be interdependent, and indicated a similar pattern of Koreans. Similarly, Heine and Lehman (1999) demonstrated East Asians' self-critical tendencies had less negative impact on the well-being of East Asians than of North Americans. This study also suggests that avoidance focus is not detrimental to East Asians. The studies above showed that East Asians tend not to exhibit the relationship between avoidance goals and psychological well-being. Further studies are needed to investigate with different measures of well-being and with different samples. Thus in the current study, the relations between avoidance orientations and well-being outcomes (i.e., psychological well-being, Approach and Avoidance Goals 19 physical health, and interpersonal relationship satisfaction) were examined among Euro-Canadian, Japanese, and Mexican individuals. Mexicans and Motivational Orientations Latinos and Mexicans are found to have strong positive affect, stronger than North Americans (Diener, 2000). Mexicans are said to be expressive and affectionate in interpersonal relations as well as having positive attitudes (Diaz-Loving & Draguns, 1999). For example, in the work place, it is common for individuals in Latin cultures to express their appreciations to colleagues by embracing them (Condon, 1985 as cited in Sanchez-Burks, Nisbett, & Ybarra, 2000). Moreover, Latin Americans reported the highest importance ratings to subjective well-being in a large multi-national sample (Diener, 2000). Because Latin Americans value and focus on their well-being and positive feelings, they would appear to be quite approach-oriented. However, researchers noted that the Mexican culture tends to be collectivistic (e.g., Hofstede, 1983) and interdependent (Markus & Kitayama, 1994). Mexicans also have reciprocal obligations with friends, and have strong affective bonds with their family members (Diaz-Loving & Draguns, 1999). Consistently, in the work place, Mexicans value social relationships (Sanchez-Burks, Nisbett, & Ybarra, 2000). Mexicans are found to focus more on interpersonal relationships rather than trying to complete their tasks in the work place. Furthermore, Diaz-Guerrero (1979) noted three coping styles that differ between American and Mexican individuals. Mexicans tend to use a more passive, external coping style; prefer affiliative obedience, and interdependence in social interactions. Moreover, Mexicans have high affiliative obedience, fear of authority, and respect for parents (e.g., Diaz-Guerrero, 1987, 1993). Diaz-Guerrero (1967) asserted that Latino's value of social harmony is similar to that of East Asian cultures; however, the expressive natures are more specific to Latin cultures. Approach and Avoidance Goals 2 0 The evidence seems to imply that Mexicans are both approach and avoidance-oriented. While they value positive feelings, and are therefore more approach-oriented, the assumption that Mexicans try to maintain harmony with others suggests that they are also avoidance-oriented. It can be proposed that they are both approach and avoidance-oriented because these two constructs are considered to be independent to each other (Gray, 1994) just as positive emotions and negative emotions are independent (Watson & Tellegen, 1985). From the research findings that Mexicans and Latinos are extremely high in positive affect, it was expected that Mexicans would be more approach-oriented than Canadians. It is not clear how their interdependence with its implications in avoidance orientations would interact with their approach orientations. It may be that their approach and avoidance orientations interact such that the adverse effects on well-being, health, and interpersonal relationships that the research has shown may disappear. In addition, it is possible that their strong approach orientation leads them to manifest their goals in a more approaching rather than avoidant manner. Summary for Cultural Implications In summary, research in cultural psychology has demonstrated that North Americans are more approach-oriented and East Asians are more avoidance-oriented. It is argued that North Americans can benefit from being approach-oriented whereas East Asians may benefit from being avoidance-oriented because North Americans can fulfill their primary objectives of accomplishment and finding their own unique self by being approach while East Asians can fulfill their primary objectives of fitting in to a society, fulfilling one's social role, maintaining face, and making harmony with others. Therefore, it is argued that East Asians do not show the aversive effects of being avoidance-oriented which has been observed among North Americans. Present Research Approach and Avoidance Goals 21 The aim for the current study was to investigate the consequences of pursuing avoidance goals over the course of a semester across cultures. Specifically, this study investigated three specific aspects of well-being, including (1) psychological well-being, (2) physical health, and (3) interpersonal relationship status in Euro-Canadians, Japanese, and Mexican samples. The Mexican sample was similar to the Japanese one in that they both consisted of exchange students living in Canada. In contrast, the Canadian sample did not consist of exchange students. Hence, comparisons between Mexicans and Japanese provide for more control than comparisons between Canadians and Japanese. A n additional purpose of the present research is to identify mechanisms underlying the observed cultural differences. Previous research (Elliot & Sheldon, 1997,1998) has identified two variables that mediate the relationship between avoidance motivations and negative outcomes. Specifically, avoidance motivations are associated with lower perceived competence and higher perceived controlledness, which are, in turn, associated with lower well-being. Perceived competence refers to the extent to which individuals feel capable and efficient in their goal pursuits (Brunstein, 1993; Ell iot et al., 1997; Elliot & Sheldon, 1998). Perceived controlledness is defined as "the degree to which goal pursuit is experienced as coerced, or pressured by external forces or intrapsychic demands" (Elliot & Sheldon, 1998; Ryan & Connell, 1989; Sheldon & Elliot, 1998). It is unclear at this point where the cultural differences lie. Because East Asians work harder and perform better when trying to avoid failures (Heine et al., 2001), avoidance motivations might not lead to lower perceived competence among East Asians. That is, it is possible that being focused on negative things and avoiding those negative things is what makes East Asians feel good about themselves. In addition, previous research shows that East Asians and North Americans have different use of control. North Americans tend to use primary control which is to control Approach and Avoidance Goals 22 external situations, whereas East Asians tend to use secondary control which is to accommodate themselves to existing situations (Morling, Kitayama, Miyamoto, 2002; Weisz, Rothbaum, Blackburn, 1984). Research has shown that primary control is related to better health outcomes for North Americans (e.g., Thompson, Sobolew-Shubin, Galbraith, Schwankovsky, & Cruzen, 1993). However, this may not be the case for East Asians. For example, Morl ing, Kitayama, and Miyamoto (2002) found that Japanese focused on adjustment over influence. Adjustment is considered to be secondary control because by adjusting one is modifying oneself to external circumstances, while influence is considered to be primary control because it is acting on the environment to influence it. Specifically, in the study, the researchers found that Japanese students remembered more incidences of adjustment while Americans remembered more incidences of influence. In addition, it was found that influence situations made American participants to feel the sense of efficacy, while adjustment situations made Japanese participants to feel the sense of relatedness. This study suggests the differential influences of primary and secondary controls for North Americans and East Asians. Moreover, compared to Chinese, Americans performed better in a cognitive task when given a sense of control (Ji, Peng, & Nisbett, 2000). This finding suggests that North Americans benefit from feeling in control while East Asians do not. In the same study, J i , Peng, and Nisbett (2000) found that Americans were more confident when they were given the sense of control, while East Asians did not change the levels of confidence when they were given the sense of control. Furthermore, Chinese participants performed in a cognitive task slightly worse when given a sense of control. Consequently, the feeling of being coerced to pursue a goal (i.e., higher perceived controlledness), which leads to lower well-being among North Americans, might not have such effects among East Asians. Approach and Avoidance Goals 23 Past findings show that there is a relationship between neuroticism and physical symptom reports (e.g., Watson & Pennebaker, 1989). Therefore, as Ell iot and Sheldon (1998) did in their study, neuroticism was measured and statistically controlled in testing the relationship between avoidance goals and physical health. In addition, as another potential predictor variable, hypochondriasis was measured and statistically controlled in testing the relationship between avoidance goals and physical health. Hypothesis Based on the findings from past research, the following results were predicted: 1. The Japanese and Mexicans are similar in their avoidance orientations, and Euro-Canadians would be least avoidance-oriented. In addition, Mexicans would be most approach-oriented, Euro-Canadians would be in the middle, and the Japanese would be least approach-oriented. I refer to this as the dispositional hypothesis. 2. The Japanese would have most avoidance goals, whereas Euro-Canadians and Mexicans would have fewer numbers of avoidance goals compared to Japanese, and Euro-Canadians and Mexicans would have similar numbers of avoidance goals. I refer to this as the goal hypothesis. 3. Avoidance goals would be negatively related to well-being, health, and interpersonal outcomes in the Euro-Canadian samples, whereas avoidance goals would be less negatively related, perhaps even positively related to well-being, health, and interpersonal outcomes in the Japanese samples. Avoidance goals would also be less negatively related to well-being, health, and interpersonal outcomes in the Mexican samples. I refer to this as the outcome hypothesis. 4. Perceived control and perceived competence w i l l mediate the relations between avoidance goals and well-being, health, and interpersonal relationships for Canadians whereas perceived Approach and Avoidance Goals 24 control and perceived competence wi l l not mediate the relations between avoidance goals and well-being, health, and interpersonal relations for Japanese and Mexican students. Specifically, for Canadians, avoidance goals would lead to higher perceived control and lower perceived competence, and that in turn lead to lower well-being, poor health, and lower satisfaction in interpersonal relationships. I refer to this as the mediation hypothesis. Method Participants ' The participants were 52 Euro-Canadian students (12 men and 40 women), 72 Japanese students (20 men and 52 women), and 37 Mexican students (16 men and 20 women; the remaining one did not report his or her gender). The Euro-Canadian students were recruited from the University of British Columbia's Department of Psychology subject pool and compensated for their participation with course credit for Time 1 and with their choice of $ 15 cash or two movie tickets for the follow-up study. Euro-Canadian participants were born in Canada or in the United States and both parents were of Canadian/European descent. The Japanese participants were exchange students from Ritsumeikan University, and the Mexican participants were exchange students from Tec de Monterrey. Both Japanese and Mexican students were recruited at the new student orientation and compensated for $ 15 or two movie tickets for the first part of the study, and $ 15 or two movie tickets for the follow-up study. Japanese and Mexican students were recruited, run, and debriefed in their native language (i.e., Japanese and Spanish). Attrition. Among the 52 Euro-Canadians, 18 did not complete the follow-up assessment, resulting in an attrition rate 34.62% and a final sample of 34 participants (8 man and 26 women). Among the 72 Japanese participants, 32 did not complete the follow-up assessment, resulting in an attrition rate 44.44% and a final sample of 40 participants (8 men and 32 women). Finally, among Approach and Avoidance Goals 25 the 37 Mexican students, 13 did not complete the follow-up assessment, resulting in an attrition rate 35.14% and a final sample of 24 participants (9 men and 15 women). Procedure Two sessions were conducted over the course of the semester. During the first three weeks of the semester, participants listed eight personal goals that they thought they would be pursuing in their daily life during the semester and answered a series of questions regarding these goals. In addition, they completed questionnaires regarding their psychological well-being, health, and interpersonal relationship status "during the past two weeks of your summer break" for Euro-Canadian participants; "during the past two weeks when you were in Japan" for Japanese participants; and "during the past two weeks when you were in Mex ico" for Mexican participants. Finally, they filled out various personality measures. One to two weeks before the end of the semester, participants again reported their psychological well-being, health, and interpersonal relationship status "during the past two weeks" and answered a series of questions regarding the progress and social desirability of their goals. In sum, motivational orientations, recent subjective well-being, health, and interpersonal relationship status, and personal goals were assessed as the semester began, and motivational orientations, recent subjective well-being, health, and interpersonal relationship status, and participants' perceptions of competence and progress regarding their goals were assessed as the semester drew to an end. Measures Measures of Approach and Avoidance Goals Participants were asked to generate a list of personal goals that they would be pursuing during the semester, using a procedure modeled after that of Ell iot and Sheldon's (1998). Personal Approach and Avoidance Goals 26 goals were defined as the "things that you typically or characteristically are trying to do in your daily life" (p. 1287). Participants were introduced to the concept of approach and avoidance goals (in order for them to have a clear understanding of what kind of goals they can list) and informed that some of their goals would involve trying to approach good things, and some of them would involve trying to avoid bad things. The aim of this was to draw explicit attention to the distinction between approach and avoidance goals while participants generated their personal goals. More specifically, the following instructions were provided: Personal goals are defined as things that you typically or characteristically are trying to do in your daily life. Some of our goals involve trying to approach good things, and some of our goals involve trying to avoid bad things. Some examples of personal goals are to "be more organized," "avoid excessive partying," "excel in my workplace," "avoid procrastination," "make good friends at U B C , " "avoid being lonely," "become physically fit," "avoid gaining weight," "do well compared to others in school," "avoid doing poorly in school," "be more gentle and humble," "avoid being lazy," "I want to be together with my friends as much as possible," and "I want to avoid being by myself on weekends." Please think carefully about what matters to you, and list eight personal goals that you think you w i l l be pursuing in your daily life during this semester. Each participant was provided with a form on which they could write eight goals. Many participants listed goals that are both avoidance and approach, as well as goals that are unclassifiable. Therefore, instead of coding the goals for approach and avoidance, participants were asked to classify each of their goals as approach or avoidance in the questionnaire by Approach and Avoidance Goals 27 indicating on the scale of 1 = "approach" to 5 = "avoidant" for each goal (for a similar procedure, see Elliot, Sheldon, & Church, 1997). A n avoidance goals index was created for each participant by computing the mean ratings of the approach-avoidance classification in their set of eight personal goals. The higher the avoidance goals index is, greater the degree of avoidance goals is. Goal Measures. A t Time 1, participants rated the degree to which they felt they were pursuing each goal at the present time for each of two different reasons (see Rayan & Connell, 1989 as cited in Ell iot & Sheldon, 1998): external ("Because somebody else wants you to or because the situation demands it"), and introjected ("Because you would feel ashamed, guilty, or anxious i f you didn't"). Participants indicated their ratings on a 1 (not at all) to 9 (completely) scale. Participants' external ratings were multiplied by 2, added to their introjected ratings, averaged across the eight 10 goals, and then averaged across the two assessments to form a perceived controlledness index (see Ryan & Connell, 1989, for the rationale for doubling the intrinsic and external scores; see also Sheldon & Elliot, 1998; Sheldon & Kasser, 1995). For each testing time, participants rated how well they were doing at the present time on each goal on a 1 (not at all) to 9 (very) scale. These ratings were averaged across the 8 goals and then averaged across the 2 assessments to form a perceived competence index. Measures of Approach and Avoidance Orientations. The Behavioral Inhibition System/Behavioral Activation System (BIS/BAS) Scale (Carver & White, 1994) is a 20-item self-report scale designed to measure a person's dispositional positions of the sensitivity to reward (a behavioral activation system: B A S ) and punishment (a behavioral inhibition system: BIS). B A S involves responding to signals of rewards and being motivated to seek those rewards. When people are high in B A S , they are motivated to approach Approach and Avoidance Goals 28 something good. When people are high in BIS, they are motivated to avoid any potential negativity. High BIS leads to inhibition of behavior, increased arousal, and heightened attention (Gray, 1994). A n example of a BIS item is "I worry about making mistakes." A n example of a B A S item is "When I see an opportunity for something I like, I get excited right away." The B A S has three positively correlated sub-scales: Reward responsiveness, drive, and fun seeking. Participants responded to items on a 5-point scale from "strongly disagree" to "Strongly agree," which were averaged to create one overall B A S scale. The Cronbach's alphas were .81 (Euro-Canadians), .74 (Japanese), and .72 (Mexicans) for BIS, and .82 (Euro-Canadians), .74 (Japanese), and .77 (Mexicans) for B A S . The correlation between BIS and B A S mean scores were -.042: they were not highly correlated to each other. Measures of Psychological Well-Being. In order to assess participants' psychological well-being, the Positive Affect Negative Affect Scale ( P A N A S ; Watson, Clark & Tellegen, 1988), Satisfaction with Life Scale (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffith, 1985), and the General Good Feelings Scale (Kitayama, Markus, & Kurokawa, 2000) were used. The Positive Affect Negative Affect Scale. This scale measures a participant's levels of positive affect and negative affect. Participants were asked to indicate how intensely they were currently feeling each of 20 emotions from "very slightly" to "extremely." The P A N A S has been shown to have very good reliability and validity. Examples of positive affect are "excited," "enthusiastic," "active," and "inspired." Examples of negative affect are "distressed," "scared," "nervous," and "guilty." Satisfaction with Life Scale. This scale consists of 5-items that measure respondents' overall assessment of their satisfaction with their lives. A n example of the items is "In most ways Approach and Avoidance Goals 29 my life is close to my ideal." Participants indicated their degree of agreement or disagreement on a five-point scale from "not at a l l " to "extremely." The scale has been shown to be highly reliable (Pavot & Diener, 1993). General Good Feelings Scale. This 4-item measure is used in Kitayama, Markus, and Kurokawa (2000), and it is a measure of how frequently individuals experience general positive feelings. This measure is said to have no consequences to independence or interdependence. Therefore, the scale should serve as a culturally-neutral proxy for general well-being. Participants indicated how frequently they had experienced each feeling "during the last two weeks of their summer break" (for Time 1) and "during the last two weeks" (for Time 2) on a 1 (never) to 5 (always) scale. Measures of Health. Physical symptoms measure. This scale is used in Ell iot and Sheldon's (1998) study. This is a modification of Emmons physical symptoms measure (1992) in that four items are added from Derogatis and Spencer's (1982) Brief Symptom Inventory to Emmons's nine-item measure (as cited in Elliot & Sheldon, 1998). The following symptoms are in Emmons physical symptoms measures (1992): headaches, coughing or sore throat, shortness of breath, stiff or sore muscles, chest or heart pain, faintness or dizziness, acne or pimples, stomach ache or pain, and runny or congested nose. This measure is a short version of the Pennebaker Inventory of Limbic Languidness (Emmons & King , 1988). The reliability and validity of the measure have been shown widely (Elliot & Sheldon, 1998; Emmons, 1992; Pennebaker, 1982). Participants answered how often they had experienced each of the physical symptoms "during the last two Approach and Avoidance Goals 30 weeks of their summer break" (for Time 1) and "during the last two weeks" (for Time 2) on a 1 (not at all) to 9 (very frequently) scale. Health Practices Scale. The scale is composed of various health practice questions. Examples of the questions are the number of minutes participants had spent exercising strenuously and moderately, the number of caffeine and alcoholic beverages consumed, and the quality of their sleep during the assessment time. Measures of Interpersonal Relationship Status. Friendship Satisfaction Scale. This is a modified version of Murray, Holmes, & Griffin's (1996) relationship satisfaction scale that measures individuals' satisfactions of their friendship status. Participants indicated their agreement or disagreement of each item on the scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Examples of the items are "I am extremely happy with my friendships" and " M y friendships are very rewarding (i.e., gratifying, fulfilling)." UCLA Loneliness Scale (Version 3; Russell, 1996). This scale measures the extent to which individuals feel lonely. Participants answered how often they generally feel the way each item describes on the sale of 1 (never) to 4 (always). Examples of the items are "How often do you feel that you lack companionship?" and "How often do you feel alone?" Individual-Differences Measures. Illness attitude scale (IAS; Kellner, 1986). This scale is a self-report instrument that measures individuals' attitudes associated with hypochondriasis and abnormal illness behavior. Participants circled the response that applies best to them on a scale of "no" "rarely" "sometimes" Approach and Avoidance Goals 31 "often" and "most of the time." Examples of the items are "Do you worry about your health?" and "Are you worried that you may get a serious illness in the future?" Neuroticism scale. This is the subscale of the B i g Five Inventory (BFI; John & Srivastava, 1999) consisting of 12 items. Participants indicated how much they agree with each statement on the scale of 1 (not true) to 5 (very true). Examples of items are "I am not a worrier" and "At times I have been so ashamed I just wanted to hide." The End of the Semester Follow-up Assessment. The end of the term follow-up assessment was designed to collect follow-up dependent variable information one to two weeks before the end of the semester. The same measures of psychological well-being, physical health, and interpersonal relationship status that were used during baseline testing again were used. In addition, participants were asked to read their personal goals that they had made at the beginning of the semester and answer questions regarding their outcomes and the desirability of each goal. Participants who agreed to come in for the follow-up assessment were contacted by email to pick up their study packet. Results Preliminary Analyses Participant Attrition T-tests were conducted to determine whether participants who completed the study versus those who did not differed on any of the dependent variables at Time 1, sex, or age. The results showed that fewer men participated in the follow-up study than did women (Ms = 1.40 and 1.24 for Time 1 and Time 2, respectively; note: 1 is female and 2 is male, ^(161) = 2A2,p < .05). Therefore, in all analyses, gender was included as one of the predictors in multiple regression analyses. Gender Differences Approach and Avoidance Goals 32 A series of /-tests was conducted to probe for gender differences on all of the variables used in the study. First, the gender differences within cultures are reported, then the gender differences for all participants are reported. Gender differences within cultures. A series of /-tests were conducted to probe for gender differences on all o f the variables used in the study within each culture. For Canadian samples, a single effect emerged from these analyses: Men reported greater loneliness than women (Ms = 2.23 and 1.93 for men and women, respectively, /(53) = -2.22, p < .05). For Japanese samples, three significant effects emerged from these analyses: Women consumed more caffeine beverages than men (Ms = 1.55 and .90 for women and men, respectively, /(54) = 2.24,/? < .05). M e n exercised more than women (Ms = 445.12 and 151.64 for men and women, respectively, /(19) = -2.74, p = .01). Women reported greater subjective well-being than men (Ms = 3.04 and 2.53 for women and men, respectively, /(70) = 2.20,p < .05). For Mexican samples, three significant effects emerged from these analyses: Women reported more avoidance goals than men (Ms - 1.25 and .25 for women and men, respectively, t(32) = 3.85,/? = .001). M e n consumed more alcoholic beverages than women (Ms = 2.63 and 1.48 for men and women, respectively, /(34) = -2.13,/? < .05). Finally, women reported greater neuroticism than men (Ms = 2.48 and 2.08 for women and men, respectively, /(34) = 2.20,p < .05). Gender differences for all participants. Five gender effects emerged from these analyses: Women reported more avoidance goals than men (Ms = 1.46 and .94 for women and men, respectively, /(108) = 3.04,/? < .01). Men consumed more alcoholic beverages than women (Ms = 2.32 and 1.70 for men and women, respectively, /(160) = -2.13,/? < .05). M e n exercised more than women (Ms = 459.88 and 239.16 for men and women, respectively, /(70) = -3.07,p< .001). M e n reported greater loneliness than women (Ms = 2.05 and 1.90 for men and women, respectively, Approach and Avoidance Goals 33 t(\ 61) = -2.00,p < .05). A n d finally, women reported greater neuroticism than men (Ms = 2.93 and 2.57 for women and men, respectively, t(\6\) = 2A3,p< .05). Because of these cultural differences, gender was controlled for the subsequent outcome analyses. Age Differences The mean ages of the Euro-Canadian, Japanese, and Mexican samples were 21.04, 19.8, and 20.92 years, respectively. A n analysis of variance ( A N O V A ) revealed that there were no significant differences in the average ages of the three samples, F(2, 160) = 2.12,/? > .05. Hypothesis 1: The Dispositional Hypothesis (Approach-Avoidance Orientations Across Cultures) Table 1 shows the means and standard deviations for the main variables including B I S / B A S measures. Analyses of variance ( A N O V A ' s ) were conducted to determine whether Euro-Canadians, Japanese, and Mexicans differ in their levels of approach-avoidance orientations by examining the means for the BIS and B A S scales at Time 1 across cultures. The results of these A N O V A s showed significant effect of culture on the means for B A S , 7^(2,161) = 3.12, p < .05. Post Hoc analyses (Tukey's for unequal ns) revealed that there were no differences between Canadians and Japanese (M = 3.67 vs. M = 3.78), nor Japanese and Mexicans (M = 4.00 vs. M-1.86). However, Mexicans were more approach-oriented than Canadians (M = 4.00 vs. M = 3.67). In addition, the results revealed that there were significant effect of culture on the means for BIS, F(2,156) = 3.45,p< .05. Post Hoc analysis (Tukey's for unequal ns) revealed that there were no differences between Canadians and Japanese (M = 3.75 vs. M = 3.90), nor Canadians and Mexicans (M = 3.75 vs. M= 3.54). However, Japanese were more avoidance-oriented than Mexicans (M = 3.90 vs. M = 3.54). In sum, there was little support for Hypothesis 1 (the dispositional hypothesis) using the B I S / B A S measures. Hypothesis 2: The Goal Hypothesis (Avoidance Goals Across Cultures) Approach and Avoidance Goals 34 Participants classified each of their goals as approach or avoidance in the questionnaire by indicating on the scale of 1 = "approach" to 5 = "avoidant" for each goal. A n avoidance goals index was created for each participant by computing the mean ratings of the approach-avoidance classification in their set of eight personal goals. The higher the avoidance goals index is, greater the degree of avoidance goals is. The means for avoidance goals index were analyzed cross-culturally. The results of an A N O V A showed a significant effect of culture on the means for avoidance goals index, F(2,156) = 5.53,p< .01. Post Hoc analyses (Tukey's for unequal ns) revealed no difference between Canadians and Japanese (M = 2.18 vs. M = 2.33), nor between Canadians and Mexicans (M = 2.18 vs. M= 1.86). However, Japanese reported more avoidance goals than Mexicans (M = 2.33 vs. M = 1.86). Examples of common personal goals for Euro-Canadians, Japanese, and Mexicans are reported in Table 2. In sum, there was little support for Hypothesis 2 (the goal hypothesis) except that as predicted Mexicans reported fewer numbers of avoidance goals compared to Japanese. Hypothesis 3: The Outcome Hypothesis (Analyses of the Effects of Avoidance Goals and Avoidance Orientations on Psychological Well-Being, Health, and Interpersonal Relationship Outcomes) Overview of Psychological Well-Being Analyses: A factor analysis was conducted on the set of four well-being items (the Satisfaction with Life Scale, positive affect, negative affect, and the General Good Feelings Scale) at Time 1 and Time 2. For the Time 1 well-being items, the analysis revealed an elbow in the plot of eigenvalues after extraction of the third factor. The first factor accounted for 44.02% of the variance (eigenvalue = 1.76). For Time 2 well-being items, the analysis revealed a clear elbow in the plot of Approach and Avoidance Goals 35 eigenvalues after extraction of the first factor. The first factor accounted for 48.78% of the variance (eigenvalue = 1.95). Because the four well-being items for both Time 1 and Time 2 were loaded well in one factor, principal components analysis (PCA) composite scores for well-being (the Well-Being Composite) were calculated using the Satisfaction with Life Scale, the P A N A S , and the General Good Feelings Scale for both Time 1 and Time 2. Based on the P C A analysis, the P C A composite weighted each item differently, and it maximized the reliability of the scales. For subsequent analyses for psychological well-being, the following procedures were implemented: first, predictions were examined by using the overall measure of psychological well-being using the Well-Being Composite. Next, the test of whether statistical results for the Well-Being Composite could be generalized across the various subscales used to measure the overall psychological well-being was conducted. Hence, the analyses were rerun with measures of life satisfaction, emotions, and well-being terms disaggregated. Moreover, to compare the group differences, a multiple regression with two dummy codes for the three cultural groups was used. The reason for using dummy codes is because culture is a categorical variable, and thus must be reduced to two sets of dichotomous variables. Psychological Well-Being Analyses: End-of-Semester Psychological Well-Being, Controlling for Beginning-of-Semester Psychological Well-Being (Change in Psychological Well-Being) and Avoidance Goals Well-Being Composite In order to assess the relation of participants' psychological well-being at the end of the semester across cultures, a longitudinal test measuring psychological well-being on avoidance goals was conducted. A sequential multiple regression analysis was used, in which Approach and Avoidance Goals 36 end-of-semester psychological well-being (i.e., the Well-Being Composite at Time 2) was regressed on the various independent variables in the following order: (1) psychological well-being at Time 1 (i.e., the Well-Being Composite at Time 1), (2) gender, (3) culture, (4) avoidance goals, and (5) the interaction term for culture and avoidance goals in the equation. The interaction term is added to test the interaction between culture and avoidance goals. The regression revealed that adding interaction terms to the model marginally increased the R square over and above the main effect terms (i.e., the Well-Being Composite at Time 1, gender, culture, and avoidance goals), A =.04, AF(2,84) = 2.94, p = .06, indicating that there was a marginal interaction effect of culture and avoidance goals on psychological well-being at Time 2. Then the effects of avoidance goals on psychological well-being within each cultural group were assessed. Among Canadians, there was a negative relationship between avoidance goals and psychological well-being (B = -.63, beta = -.46, t = 2.82,p < .01), whereas among Japanese and Mexicans, there were no relations between avoidance goals and psychological well-being (B = -. 17, beta = - .12,/ = -.99,p > .05; B = .08, beta = .06, t=37,p> .05, respectively). The betas for the relations between avoidance goals and the dependent variables for all the regression analyses are listed in Table 3. Figure 1 presents the regression line for the analysis. The results, although only marginally significant, indicate that Canadian participants pursuing a greater number of avoidance goals evidenced a decline in psychological well-being from the beginning to the end of the semester, whereas it did not have a negative influence on Japanese individuals' well-being. Mexicans showed no associations between the pursuit of avoidance goals and psychological well-being. Individual Psychological Well-Being Measures (i.e., the Positive Affect, Negative Affect Scales, the Satisfaction with Life Scale, and the General Good Feelings Scale) Approach and Avoidance Goals 37 In order to investigate the relations of the individual psychological well-being measures to avoidance goals, regression analyses examining each psychological well-being scale (i.e., the Positive Affect, Negative Affect Scales, the Satisfaction with Life Scale, and the General Good Feelings Scale) were conducted independently. Similar to the Well-Being Composite analysis, sequential multiple regression analyses were used, in which end-of-semester psychological well-being (i.e., the Positive Affect, Negative Affect Scales, the Satisfaction with Life Scale, or the General Good Feelings Scale at Time 2) was regressed on the various independent variables in the following order: the psychological well-being at Time 1 (i.e., the Positive Affect, Negative Affect Scales, the Satisfaction with Life Scale, or the General Good Feelings Scale at Time 1), gender, culture, avoidance goals, and the interaction term for culture and avoidance goals in the equation, respectively. The only significant interaction was found for negative affect. The regression revealed that adding interaction terms to the model significantly increased the R square over and above the main effect terms (i.e., negative effect at T i m e l , gender, culture, and avoidance goals), A = .04, AF(2,87) = 3.23,p < .05, indicating that there was a significant interaction effect of culture and avoidance goals on negative affect at Time 2. Further analysis for each cultural group showed that among Canadians, there was a positive relationship between avoidance goals and negative affect (B = .49, beta = .42, t - 2.35, p < .05). Among Japanese and Mexicans, there were no relations between avoidance goals and negative affect (B = -.06, beta = -.06, t = -.39,p > .05; B = -.08, beta = -.07, t = -A\,p> .05, respectively). The regression line for the analysis is presented in Figure 2. The results indicate again that Canadians with more avoidance goals showed the deleterious consequences of pursuing avoidance goals whereas Japanese and Mexicans showed no deleterious consequences of pursuing avoidance goals. Approach and Avoidance Goals 38 Additionally, a marginally significant interaction for the General Good Feelings measure was found (Kitayama, Markus, & Kurokawa, 2000). The regression revealed that adding interaction terms to the model marginally increased the R square over and above the main effect terms (i.e., General Good Feelings at Time 1, gender, culture, and avoidance goals), A = .04, AF(2,85) = 2.53,/? = .09, indicating that there was a marginal interaction effect of culture and avoidance goals on the General Good Feelings at Time 2. Further analysis for each cultural group showed that among Canadians, there was a negative relationship between avoidance goals and general good feelings (B = -.37, beta = -.48, t = -2.48,/? < .05). Among Japanese and Mexicans, there were no relations between avoidance goals and general good feelings (B = .04, beta = .05, / = .34,/? > .05; B = -.06, beta = -.07, t = -.41,/? > .05, respectively). Figure 3 presents the regression line for the analysis. The results for the analyses again indicate that Canadians with more avoidance goals showed the deleterious consequences of pursuing avoidance goals whereas Japanese and Mexicans showed no deleterious consequences of pursuing avoidance goals. The interactions for positive affect and satisfaction with life were not significant (A = .01, AF(2,87) = 1.03,/? > .05, A = .01, AF(2,88) = 1.51,/? > .05, respectively). Then, main effects analyses were conducted for positive affect and satisfaction with life measures. For positive affect, the main effect analyses for each cultural group showed that, for all cultural groups, there were no relations between avoidance goals and positive affect (B = -. 10, beta = -.10, t = -.62,p> .05 for Canadians; B = -.05, beta = -.04, t = -.35,/? > .05 for Japanese; B = .20, beta = . 19, t = -1.24, p > .05 for Mexicans). The results indicate that the number of avoidance goals was not related to positive affect for all participants. For satisfaction with life, further main effect analyses for each cultural group showed that among Canadians, there was a significant negative relationship between avoidance goals and Approach and Avoidance Goals 39 satisfaction with life (B = -.40, beta - -.29, t = -2.03, p< .05), whereas among Japanese and Mexicans, there were no relations between avoidance goals and satisfaction with life (B = -.22, beta = -.16, / = -1.47,/? > .05; B = .06, beta = .05, t = .34,/? > .05, respectively). The results indicate that higher numbers of avoidance goals were related to lower satisfaction with life for Canadians, while the number of avoidance goals was not related to satisfaction with life for Japanese and Mexicans. However, the differences across cultures were not significant. Main Effects of Avoidance Goals for Canadian Samples The main effects of avoidance goals on psychological well-being for Canadian samples were examined to investigate whether the findings of past research would be replicated (Elliot, Sheldon, & Church, 1997). In addition to the aforementioned significant negative relations between avoidance goals and psychological well-being for Canadians (i.e., the Well-Being Composite, negative affect, and the General Good Feelings Scale), avoidance goals predicted lower satisfaction with life for Canadians (B = -.40, beta = -.29, t = -2.03,p < .05). The findings indicate that the present study replicated the findings of Elliot et al. (1997) that more avoidance goals predict lower well-being for Canadians. However, the results showed that avoidance goals did not predict lower positive affect for Canadians (B = -.10, beta = -.10, t = -.62,p >.05). Elliot et al. (1997) used a composite of positive affect, negative affect, and satisfaction with life, and reported only the results for the composite. Thus, it is not clear whether or not the current study results for positive affect were consistent with the results of Ell iot et al. However, overall, the current study results were consistent with the results of Elliot et al. In summary, significant cultural differences in the relations between avoidance goals and negative affect, marginally significant cultural differences in the relations between avoidance goals and well-being composite and general good feelings were found. Looking at each culture Approach and Avoidance Goals 40 separately, higher numbers of avoidance goals was related to negative psychological well-being for Canadians while Japanese and Mexicans did not show such relations. Psychological Well-Being Analyses With BIS The above analyses were repeated using BIS as the independent variable. None of the significant effects described above were replicated. The results with BIS were somewhat reversed for Japanese and Canadians compared to the results with avoidance goals such that Japanese showed negative relationships between psychological well-being and avoidance goals whereas Canadians showed no relations between psychological well-being and avoidance orientations. Specifically, significant cultural differences in the relations between avoidance orientations and satisfaction with life were observed such that greater avoidance orientations were related to poor satisfaction with life only for Japanese while there were no such relations for Canadians and Mexicans (A = .06, AF(2,88) = 7.52,/? = .001; B = -.57, beta = -.38, f = -3.90,/? < .001 for Japanese; B = .17, beta = .11, t = .80,/? > .05 for Canadians; B = .23, beta = A6,t= 1.24,/? > .05 for Mexicans). Overview of Physical Health Analyses: To examine the relations between physical health and avoidance motivations and goals, multiple regression analyses were conducted for the following dependent variables: physical symptoms, semester health (at Time 2 only), sleep quality, alcohol consumptions, caffeine intake, doctor visits, and exercise. For physical symptoms and semester health, three different analyses are reported: (1) without controlling for any related variables; (2) controlling for neuroticism; (3) controlling for hypochondriasis. Physical Health Analyses: End-of-Semester Physical Health, Controlling for Beginning-of-Semester Physical Health (Change in Physical Health) and Avoidance Goals Approach and Avoidance Goals 41 In order to assess the relation of participants' physical health to avoidance goals across cultures, longitudinal tests of measuring physical health on avoidance goals were conducted by examining each health measure separately. Physical Symptoms A sequential multiple regression analysis was used in which physical symptoms at Time 2 was regressed on the various independent variables in the following order: (1) physical symptoms at Time 1, (2) gender, (3) culture, (4) avoidance goals, and (5) the interaction term for culture and avoidance goals in the equation. The regression revealed that adding interaction terms to the model significantly increased the R square over and above the main effect terms (i.e., physical symptoms at Time 1, gender, culture, and avoidance goals), A = .04, AF(2,87) = 3.58,/? < .05, indicating that there was a significant interaction effect of culture and avoidance goals on physical symptoms at Time 2. Then the effects of avoidance goals on physical symptoms within each cultural group were assessed. Among Canadians, there was a positive relationship between avoidance goals and physical symptoms (B = 7.96, beta - .38, t = 2.42,/? < .05). Among Japanese and Mexicans, there were no relations between avoidance goals and physical symptoms (B = -.2.93, beta = -.14, t = -1.17,/? > .05; B = 1.25, beta = .06, t = .39,/? >.05, respectively). It is noteworthy that the relations of avoidance goals and physical symptoms for Japanese participants are in the negative direction. Consistent with the hypothesis, and similar to the results for psychological well-being, the results indicate that Canadians showed the deleterious consequences of pursuing avoidance goals on physical symptoms, whereas Japanese and Mexicans showed no adverse effects of it. The analysis was also conducted by controlling for neuroticism and hypochondriasis separately; however, the relationship remained significant (A = .04, AF(2,86) = 3.19,/? < .05 when Approach and Avoidance Goals 42 controlled for neuroticism; B = 7.61, beta = .37, t = 2.05,p < .05 for Canadians; B = -3.07, beta = -. 15, t = -1.18, p > .05 for Japanese; B = 1.00, 6eta = .05, f = .29, /? >.05 for Mexicans; A = .04, AF(2,86) = 3.40,/? < .05 when controlled for hypochondriasis; B = 7.70, beta = .37, t = 2.24,/? < .05 for Canadians; 5 = -.3.06, beta = -.15, f = -1.19,/? > .05 for Japanese; 5=1 .18 , = .06, r = .37,/? >.05 for Mexicans). The regression line for the relations is presented in Figure 4. Semester Health Participants were asked to rate how their physical health was 'on the whole' during the whole semester at Time 2. A sequential multiple regression analysis was used in which semester health was regressed on the various variables in the following order: (1) gender, (2) culture, (3) avoidance goals, and (4) the interaction term for culture and avoidance goals in the equation. The regression revealed that adding interaction terms to the model significantly increased the R square over and above the main effect terms (i.e., semester health at Time 1, gender, culture, and avoidance goals), A = .14, AF(2,59) = 5.73,/? < .01, indicating that there was a significant interaction effect of culture and avoidance goals on semester health at Time 2. Then the effects of avoidance goals on semester health within each cultural group were assessed. Among Canadians, there was a marginally significant negative relationship between avoidance goals and semester health (B = -.76, beta = -.34, t = -1.92, p = .06). Among Japanese, there was a significant positive relationship between avoidance goals and semester health (B = 2.10, beta = .93, / = 2.77,p < .01). Among Mexicans, there were no relations between avoidance goals and semester health (B = .19, beta = .08, t = .50,p > .05). The results show, consistent with the hypothesis, that Canadians showed the physical negative effect of pursuing avoidance goals whereas Japanese showed the positive effect of pursuing avoidance goals. Figure 5 presents the regression line for the analysis. Approach and Avoidance Goals 43 The analysis was also conducted by controlling for neuroticism and hypochondriasis separately. When controlled for neuroticism, the marginally significant main effect for Canadians was now significant (B = -.97, beta = -.43, t = -2.05,/? < .05) while others are unchanged (A = .15, AF(2,58) = 6.02,/? < .01 when controlled for neuroticism; B = 2.03, beta = .90, t = 2.66,p < .01 for Japanese; B = .04, beta = .02, t = . 10,/? > .05 for Mexicans). When controlled for hypochondriasis, the marginally significant main effect for Canadians was now non-significant (B = -.63, beta = -.28, t = -1.49,/? > .05) while others were unchanged (B = 2.19, beta = .97, / = 2.86,/?< .01 for Japanese; 5 = .23, beta = .10, t= .59,/? > .05 for Mexicans). Other Health Measures Multiple regression analyses were also conducted in which sleep, alcohol consumptions, caffeine intake, doctor visits, and exercise were dependent variables. None of these analyses revealed significant cultural interaction effects of avoidance goals (A =.02, AF(2,87) = .97,/? > .05 for sleep; A =.01, AF(2,87) = .36,/? > .05; for caffeine intake; A = .01, AF(2,87) = .19,/? > .05 for doctor visit; A = .01, AF(2,81) = .05,/? > .05 for exercise; A = .02, AF(2,87) = 1.14,/? > .05 for alcohol consumptions). Additionally, no main effects of avoidance goals were found for Canadians, Japanese, or Mexicans. Main Effects of Avoidance Goals for Canadian Samples A s mentioned in earlier sections, avoidance goals predicted physical symptoms and participants' perceptions of the semester health for Canadian participants. For physical symptoms, the findings of Elliot and Sheldon (1998) were replicated, and the results for the semester health validated the results of Ell iot and Sheldon (1998) in a different measure. In summary, there were cultural differences in the relations between avoidance goals and physical symptoms and semester health at Time 2 such that higher number of avoidance goals Approach and Avoidance Goals 44 were related to more physical symptoms and more reports of poor physical health at the end of the semester for Canadians while avoidance goals were related to less physical symptoms and less reports of poor physical health at the end of the semester for Japanese. Avoidance goals were not related to physical health for Mexicans. Physical Health Analyses With BIS The above analyses were repeated using BIS as the independent variable. None of the significant effects described above were replicated: Specifically, there were no cultural differences in the relations between avoidance orientations and physical health at the end of the semester (A = .01, AF(2,87) = .40, p > .05 for physical symptoms; A = .01, AF(2,59) = .21, p > .05 for semester health). Looking at each culture separately, greater levels of avoidance orientations were related to higher alcoholic consumptions for Japanese while Canadians and Mexicans did not show such relations (B = .51, beta = .29, t = 2.00,p < .05 for Japanese; B = -.23, beta = -. 13, t = -61, p > .05 for Canadians; B = .04, beta = .02, t = .12, p > .05 for Mexicans). N o other main effects were found within cultures. Overview of Interpersonal Relationship Status Analyses: To examine the relations between interpersonal relationship outcomes and avoidance motivations and goals, multiple regression analyses were conducted for the following dependent variables: loneliness and friendship satisfaction. Interpersonal Relationship Status Analyses: End-of-Semester Interpersonal Relationship Status, Controlling for Beginning-of-Semester Interpersonal Relationship Status (Change in Interpersonal Relationship Status) and Avoidance Goals In order to assess the relation of avoidance goals to participants' interpersonal relationship status at the end of the semester across cultures, a longitudinal test of measuring interpersonal Approach and Avoidance Goals 45 relationship status on avoidance goals was conducted by examining participants' loneliness and friendship satisfaction at Time 2. Loneliness A sequential multiple regression analysis was conducted in which loneliness at Time 2 was the dependent variable. The predictor variables were regressed on the various independent variables in the following order: loneliness at Time 1, gender, culture, avoidance goals, and the interaction terms for avoidance goals and cultures, accordingly. The regression revealed that adding interaction terms to the model significantly increased the R square over and above the main effect terms (i.e., loneliness at Time 1, gender, culture, and avoidance goals), A = .08, AF(2,88) = 6.45, p < .01, indicating that there was a significant interaction effect of culture and avoidance goals on loneliness at Time 2. Then the effects of avoidance goals on loneliness within each cultural group were assessed. Among Canadians, there was a positive relationship between avoidance goals and loneliness (B = .27, beta = .46, t = 2.83,/? < .01). Among Japanese, there was a marginally significant negative relationship between avoidance goals and loneliness (B = -.13, beta = -.22, t = -1.91,p = .058). Among Mexicans, there were no relationships between avoidance goals and loneliness (B = -.06, beta = -.10,t = -.58, p > .05). Figure 6 presents the regression line for loneliness at Time 2 predicted by avoidance goals. Friendship Satisfaction A sequential multiple regression analysis was conducted in which friendship satisfaction at Time 2 was the dependent variable. The predictor variables were friendship satisfaction at Time 1, gender, culture, avoidance goals, and the interaction terms for avoidance goals and cultures, accordingly. The regression revealed that adding interaction terms to the model significantly increased the R square over and above the main effect terms (i.e., loneliness at T i m e l , gender, Approach and Avoidance Goals 46 culture, and avoidance goals), A = .10, AF(2,89) = 6.65, p < .01, indicating that there was a significant interaction effect of culture and avoidance goals on friendship satisfaction at Time 2. Then the effects of avoidance goals on friendship satisfaction within each cultural group were assessed. Among Canadians, there was a negative relationship between avoidance goals and friendship satisfaction (B = -.64, beta = -.64, t = -3.56,/? = .001). Among Japanese and Mexicans, there were no relationships between avoidance goals and friendship satisfaction (B = .12, beta = .12, t= .95,p> .05; B = .09, beta = .09, r = .53,/? > .05, accordingly). The regression line for the friendship satisfaction at Time 2 predicted by avoidance goals is presented in Figure 7. Table 4 shows the summary table of the main results for the relations between avoidance goals and psychological well-being, health, and interpersonal relationship satisfactions across cultures. In summary, the results showed strong cultural differences in the relations between avoidance goals and interpersonal relationship status at the end of the semester such that Canadians with more avoidance goals reported greater loneliness and lesser satisfaction with their friendship while Japanese with more avoidance goals marginally reported lesser loneliness at the end of the semester. There were no relations between avoidance goals and interpersonal relationship status at the end of the semester for Mexicans. Interpersonal Relationship Outcomes Analyses With BIS The above analyses were repeated using BIS as the independent variable. None of the significant effects described above were replicated. Specifically, the results showed no cultural differences in the relations between avoidance orientations and interpersonal relationship status at the end of the semester (A = .01, AF(2,88) = .53,/? > .05 for loneliness; A = .04, AF(2,88) = 2.48,/? = 09 for friendship satisfaction). In addition, no main effects were found for each cultural group. Approach and Avoidance Goals 47 The summary results for cultural differences for main outcome variables were shown in Table 5, and the summary results for within culture main effects were shown in Table 6. Hypothesis 4: The Mediation Hypothesis (The Relationship between the Mediator Variables and the Outcome Variables, with Avoidance Goals Controlled) Mediation Analyses Overview: Judd and Kenny (1981) established guidelines for mediational analysis. They suggested that there are three requirements for the validation of a hypothesized mediational model: a direct relationship between the predictor variable and the outcome measure must be established; the predictor variable must be significantly related to the hypothesized mediator; the hypothesized mediator must be significantly related to the outcome variable while controlling for the predictor variable, in addition, as the relations between the predictor variable and the outcome measure must be reduced. However, Shrout and Bolger (2002) argued that the first requirement should not be necessary when we suppose that there may be a suppression effect or when we suspect a small effect size. Therefore, the second step of Judd and Kenny's mediational analysis was investigated first. These mediation analyses were implemented by investigating within-cultural main effects for each target variable (i.e., avoidance goals, avoidance orientations, outcome variables and hypothesized mediation variables). First, as in the second step, the relations between the predictor variables (i.e., avoidance goals and avoidance orientations) and the hypothesized mediator variables (i.e., perceived controlledness and perceived competence) were examined. For perceived competence, the average ratings of perceived competence at Time 1 and Time 2 were used (for the same procedure, please see Elliot, Sheldon, & Church, 1997). The Approach and Avoidance Goals 48 perceived controlledness ratings were obtained only at Time 1, thus, the analyses were done only once. Second Path Mediational Analysis #1: The Relationship between the Hypothesized Mediator Variables (Perceived Competence & Perceived Controlledness) and Avoidance Goals at Time 2 There was a marginally negative relationship between avoidance goals and perceived competence at Time 2 for Canadian (B = -.59, beta = -.34, t = -1.88, p = .07), however, Japanese and Mexicans did not show such relations (B = -.18, beta = -.13, t = -.75, p >.05 for Japanese; B = .23, beta = .14, t = .66,p>.05 for Mexicans). There was a positive relationship between avoidance goals and perceived controlledness for Japanese participants (JB = 3.20, beta = .52, t = 5.00,/? < .0001) while no such relations were found for Canadians or Mexicans (B = 1.15, beta = .20, t = 1.35,/? > .05, B = 1.87, beta = .18, t = .95, p > .05, respectively). A s stated in the previous section, the perceived controlledness index was computed by multiplying external ratings ("Because somebody else wants you to or because the situation demands it") by 2 and added to their introjected ratings ("Because you would feel ashamed, guilty, or anxious i f you didn't"). It is the degree to which individuals pursue their goals because they feel pressured to do so from others or situations. Thus, it can be said that Japanese people with a higher number of avoidance goals tend to choose goals because they feel socially or externally pressured to do so. Second Path Mediational Analysis #2: The Relationship between the Hypothesized Mediator Variables (Perceived Competence & Perceived Controlledness) and Avoidance Orientations (BIS) at Time 2 The analyses revealed that there was a significant negative relationship between BIS and perceived competence for Canadians (B = -.76, beta = -A\,t = -2AO, p < .05), and there was a Approach and Avoidance Goals 49 marginally significant negative relationship between BIS and perceived competence for Japanese (B - -.52, beta = -.32, t = -2.01,p = .052) while there were no such relations for Mexicans (B = .60, beta = .37, t= .35,p> .05). The analyses revealed that there was a marginally positive relationship between avoidance goals and perceived controlledness for Canadian and Japanese participants (B = 1.32, beta = .24, f = 1.71,/? = .09; B = 1.52, beta = .22, t= 1.91,/? = .06, respectively) while no such relations were shown for Mexicans (B = .71, beta = .07, t = .31,p> .05). The results were similar to the relations with avoidance goals. Summary for Second Path Mediation Analyses The above analyses showed that avoidance goals were related to perceived controlledness only for Japanese; avoidance goals were not related to perceived competence at Time 2 for all cultures; avoidance orientations were negatively related to perceived competence at Time 2 only for Canadians. Based on the results above, for the next analysis, the relationships between perceived controlledness and the outcome measures (i.e., psychological well-being, physical health, and interpersonal relationship measures) at Time 2 were examined while avoidance goals were controlled for Japanese. In addition, the relationships between perceived competence and the outcome variables at Time 2 were examined while avoidance orientations (BIS) were controlled for Canadians. Sobel tests were conducted to test the mediation effects of perceived controlledness and perceived competence (Preacher & Leonardelli, 2004). The direct relations between the outcome variables and the predictor variables were also calculated for the above relations. Approach and Avoidance Goals 50 Mediation Analyses: The Relationship between Perceived Controlledness and the Outcome Variables, with Avoidance Goals Controlled The hypothesized mediational model for perceived controlledness between avoidance goals and Time 2 outcomes for Japanese were not established for the following outcome variables (i.e., the well-being composite, positive affect, negative affect, satisfaction with life, general good feelings, physical symptoms, semester health, loneliness, and friendship satisfaction). Mediation Analyses: The Relationship between Perceived Controlledness and the Outcome Variables, with Avoidance Goals Controlled Similarly, the hypothesized mediational model for perceived competence between avoidance goals and Time 2 outcomes for Canadians were not established for the following outcome variables (i.e., the well-being composite, positive affect, negative affect, satisfaction with life, general good feelings, physical symptoms, semester health, loneliness, and friendship satisfaction). However, an unexpected marginal suppression effect of perceived competence was observed in the relationship between BIS and satisfaction with life. This indicates that perceived competence is masking the true relationship between BIS and satisfaction with life. The overall model was significant, .F(4,26)= 9.94, p < .0001. Perceived competence was a significant predictor of satisfaction with life (B = .25, p < .05). The unstandardized regression coefficient for BIS marginally increased when perceived competence was included (from B = .20 to B = .39, Z = -1.68, p = .09). The unstandardized regression coefficient for BIS was marginally significant after adding perceived competence to the regression equation with gender and satisfaction with life at Time 2 in the equation as a covariate (p = .08). Summary for Mediation Analyses Approach and Avoidance Goals 51 In summary, the above mediation analyses show that no mediation relations were established for perceived controlledness or perceived competence. However, there was a marginal partial suppression effect of perceived competence for the relations between BIS and satisfaction with life at Time 2 for Canadians. Supplementary Analyses Supplementary Analyses 1: The Relationship between Avoidance Goals and the Goal Variables (Time 2) A series of multiple regression analyses was conducted to investigate whether avoidance goals were systematically related to any of the following goal variables: perceived goal progress, goal social desirability, progress satisfaction, importance, competence expectancy, intended effort, and the negative emotions they would experience if they did not succeed in achieving their goal. The predictor variables were gender, culture, avoidance goals, and the interaction terms for avoidance goals and cultures, accordingly. A significant relationship between avoidance goals and perceived goal progress was found: adding interaction terms to the model significantly increased the R square over and above the main effect terms (i.e., gender, culture, and avoidance goals), A = .06, AF(2,86) = 3.57, p < .05, indicating that there was a significant interaction effect of culture and avoidance goals on perceived goal progress at Time 2. The assessment for each cultural group showed that among Canadians, there was a negative relationship between avoidance goals and the perception of their perceived goal progress (B = -1.02, beta = -.50, t = -2.66, p< .01). Among Japanese and Mexicans, however, there were no relationships between avoidance goals and the perception of their perceived goal progress (B = -.03, beta = -.02, t = -A\,p> .05; B = .35, beta = .17, t = .94, p > .05, respectively), indicating that Canadian participants with a greater number of avoidance goals reported lower perceived goal progress at Time 2 while Japanese and Mexicans Approach and Avoidance Goals 52 do not demonstrate such results. Figure 8 presents the regression line for the relations. Table 7 presents the summary for culture main effects for goalvariables. Moreover, a significant interaction effect of culture and avoidance goals on participants' progress satisfaction was found: adding interaction terms to the model significantly increased the R square over and above the main effect terms (i.e., gender, culture, and avoidance goals), A = .06, AF(2,87) = 3.64, p < .05, indicating that there was a significant interaction effect of culture and avoidance goals on goal satisfaction at Time 2. Then the effects of avoidance goals on goal satisfaction within each cultural group were assessed. There was a negative relationship between avoidance goals and goal progress satisfaction for Canadians (B = -1.11, beta = -.53, t = -2.90,p < .01), whereas there were no relationships between avoidance goals and goal progress satisfaction among Japanese and Mexicans (B = .05, beta = .03, t = .18,/? > .05; B = .13, beta = .06, t= .36,p > .05, respectively). The results indicate that Canadian participants with a greater number of avoidance goals reported less satisfaction with their progress at the end of the semester, whereas Japanese and Mexicans did not show such relations. The regression line for the relations is presented in Figure 9. There were no significant interaction nor main effects between avoidance goals and other goal variables at Time 2 (A = .02, AF(2,87) = .46,/? < .05 for goal social desirability; B = .39, beta = .26, r = 1.30, p > .05 for Canadians; B = .09, beta = .06, t= .39, p> .05 for Japanese; B = -.13, beta = -.093, t = -.45, p > .05 for Mexicans; A = .01, AF(2,87) = .73, p < .05 for competence expectancy; B = . 10, beta = .06, t = .29,p > .05 for Canadians; B = -.22, beta = -.07, / = -.87,/? > .05 for Japanese; B = -.01, beta = -.01, r = -.04,/? > .05 for Mexicans; A = .01, AF(2,87) = .73,/? < .05 for intended effort; B = -.59, beta = -.36, / = -1.77,/? = .08 for Canadians; B = .24, beta = .\5,t= .97, p > .05 for Japanese; B = .04, beta = .02, t= .12, p > .05 for Mexicans; A = .01, AF(2,87) = .73, p Approach and Avoidance Goals 53 < .05 for goal importance; B = -.06, beta = -.04, t- -.21,/? > .05 for Canadians; B = -.29, beta = -.22, / = -. 14,/? > .05 for Japanese; 5 = -.08, 6eta = -.06, / = -.28,/? > .05 for Mexicans; A = .01, AF(2,86) = .83,/? < .05 for negative emotions the would experience i f they did not succeed; B = -.07, beta = -.04, t = -. 19, p > .05 for Canadians; 5 = -.06, beta = -.04, f = -.25, p > .05 for Japanese; B = . 17, &eta = .11 , / = .50,/? > .05 for Mexicans). Supplementary Analyses 2: The Relationship between Avoidance Orientations (BIS) and the Goal Variables (Time 2) Similar to the above analyses, a series of multiple regression analyses was conducted to investigate whether avoidance orientations were systematically related to any of the following goal variables: perceived goal progress, goal social desirability, progress satisfaction, importance, competence expectancy, intended effort, and the negative emotions they would experience i f they did not succeed in achieving their goal. The predictor variables were gender, culture, BIS, and the interaction terms for BIS and cultures, accordingly. A significant interaction effect of culture and BIS on participants' satisfaction of their perceived goal progress was found: adding interaction terms to the model significantly increased the R square over and above the main effect terms (i.e., gender, culture, and BIS), A = .05, AF(2,87) = 3.19,/? < .05, indicating that there was a significant interaction effect of culture and BIS on goal satisfaction at Time 2. Then the effects of BIS on goal satisfaction within each cultural group were assessed. There was a negative relationship between BIS and the perception of their perceived goal progress for Japanese (B = -.68, beta = -2.87, t = -2.20,/? < .05), whereas there were no relationships between BIS and the perception of their perceived goal progress among Canadians and Mexicans (B = -.70, beta = -.30, t - -1.61,/? > .05; B = .50, beta = .2\,t= 1.26, p > .05, respectively). The results were different from the ones with avoidance goals in that instead of Canadians, now the Japanese showed the negative relations Approach and Avoidance Goals 54 between their perception of their goal progress and avoidance orientations. The results indicate that Japanese participants with a greater degree of avoidance orientations reported less satisfaction with their progress at the end of the semester, whereas Canadians and Mexicans did not show such relations. A significant relationship between BIS and perceived goal progress was found: adding interaction terms to the model significantly increased the R square over and above the main effect terms (i.e., gender, culture, and BIS), A = .07, AF(2,86) = 4.48,p < .05, indicating that there was a significant interaction effect of culture and BIS on perceived goal progress at Time 2. The assessment for each cultural group showed that among Canadians and Japanese, there was a negative relationship between BIS and the perception of their perceived goal progress (B = -1.05, beta = -.46, t = -2.45,p< .05; B = -.74, beta = -.33, t = -2.46,p < .05, respectively). Among Mexicans, however, there were no relationships between BIS and the perception of their perceived goal progress (B = .50, beta = .22, t = 1.30, p > .05), indicating that Canadian and Japanese participants with a greater number of BIS reported lower perceived goal progress while Mexicans do not demonstrate such results. The interactions of goal social desirability, importance, competence expectancy, intended effort, and the negative emotions they would experience i f they did not succeed in achieving their goal were not significant (A = .01, AF(2,87) = .46,/? > .05 for goal social desirability; A = .01, AF(2,87) = .55, p > .05 for importance; A = .01, AF(2,87) = .59, p > .05 for competence expectancy; A = .01, AF(2,87) = .38,/? > .05 for intended effort; A = .001, AF(2,86) = .41,/? > .05 for negative emotions) However, the main effects analyses revealed that among Canadians, there was a negative relationship between BIS and the importance of goals (B = -.61, beta = -.41, t = -2.00,/? < .05). Approach and Avoidance Goals 55 Among Japanese and Mexicans, however, there were no such relationships (B - -.29, beta = -.20, t = -1.34,/? > .05; B = -.20, beta = -.14, t = -.72,/? > .05, respectively), indicating that Canadian participants with a greater number of BIS reported that the goals that they were pursuing are important to them. Moreover, the main effects analyses revealed that among Japanese, there was a marginally negative relationship between BIS and the negative feelings of not achieving the goals (B = -.47, beta = -.27, t = -\J3,p = .09). Among Canadians and Mexicans, however, there were no such relationships (B = -. 19, beta = -. 11, t = -.51, p > .05; B = -. 10, beta = -.06, t = -.30,p > .05, respectively), indicating that Japanese participants with greater levels of avoidance orientations reported that they would feel bad i f they did not succeed in achieving their goals. Furthermore, the main effects analyses revealed that among Canadians, there was a significantly negative relationship between BIS and intended efforts (B = -.79, beta = -.43, t = -2.13,p < .05). Among Japanese, there was a marginally negative relationship between BIS and intended efforts (B = -.48, beta = -.26, t = -1.83,/? = .07). Among Mexicans, however, there were no such relationships (B = -.36, beta = -.20, t = -1.08,/? > .05), indicating that Canadian and Japanese participants with greater levels of avoidance orientations reported that they would try hard to achieve their goals at the beginning of the semester. Supplementary Analyses 5: The Relationship between the Motivational Orientation and Avoidance Goals Pearson product-moment correlations were computed to determine the relationship between BIS and B A S and avoidance goals. The result revealed a significant effect: high avoidance motivations were associated with a greater number of avoidance goals (r = .35,/? < .001). There was not a significant relationship between B A S and avoidance goals (r = -.07, p > .05). Approach and Avoidance Goals 5 6 Discussion The overall results demonstrated the negative relations between avoidance goals and outcomes at the end of semester for Canadians, null and positive relations for Japanese, and null relations for Mexicans. Specifically, the expected negative relations were observed between avoidance goals and psychological well-being at the end of semester for Canadians. It indicates that our current study replicated the study results of Elliot, Sheldon, and Church (1997) that avoidance goals were related to lower well-being longitudinally for North Americans. Therefore, it can be said that the methodology of the current study was sufficient to support past research findings and that avoidance goals are indeed detrimental to North Americans' psychological well-being. Furthermore, consistent with our predictions, the clear cultural differences in the effects of avoidance goals on the well-being outcomes were demonstrated such that avoidance goals were detrimental only to Canadians while they were not detrimental to Japanese and Mexicans. For health measures, there were differing effects of avoidance goals on health at Time 2 between Canadians and Japanese such that more avoidance goals were negatively related to health for Canadians whereas they were positively related to health for Japanese. The results support our argument that avoidance goals were functional and perhaps beneficial for Japanese individuals because it helps them making harmony with others and because avoidance goals were consistent with the Japanese cultural expectations. Moreover, the results for health measures supported the past research findings (Elliot & Sheldon, 1998) that avoidance goals and physical symptoms were positively related for North Americans. The positive relations between avoidance goals and physical symptoms at Time 2 were only shown in Canadian individuals. A s mentioned above, Japanese people showed the reversed pattern of negative relations, and Mexican people showed no Approach and Avoidance Goals 5 7 relations. Based on the results, it can be argued that the study may importantly suggest that the personality or dispositional tendency that are supposed to be associated with negative health (e.g., Type A personality; for reviews, see Davidson & Pennebaker, 1996) may not be so detrimental to individuals of different cultures. The results also imply that the relations between personality and health may differ across cultures. Although the results of physical symptoms measures replicated past findings, the results of semester health did not reach significance for Euro-Canadians. This may indicate that asking physical symptoms may be a better predictor for health. In the questionnaire, semester health was examined by asking the following question: "How was your physical health on the whole during the whole semester?" Participants responded through a Likert scale of 1 = not at all healthy, and 9 = very healthy. Perhaps the question may have been too general and broad for participants to accurately indicate their health status. Thus, it may be that the measure of physical symptoms is more useful for measuring health. Several researchers validated the utility of the physical symptoms scale (e.g., Emmons & King , 1988). The other health measures that were tested (i.e., alcohol consumptions, caffeine intake, doctor visits, exercise, and sleep) did not show any relation to avoidance goals for all cultures. Davidson and Pennebaker (1996) suggested three methods to examine health: (1) self-report measures; (2) biological measures; and (3) behavioral measures. The authors suggested that each measure possess distinct weaknesses. Although physical symptoms and health behavioral questions were assessed, both are self-report measures; therefore, it is important to obtain different health indicators such as the data from health care systems, absenteeism from work or school, and the objective evidence of illness. Moreover, the questions which were used in the current study for doctor visits may be improved. Recently, alternative health care, such as chiropractic and acupuncture, is popular, especially in the west side of North Approach and Avoidance Goals 58 America. Therefore, perhaps rewording of the question w i l l be needed, such as to, "How often did you see your health care providers, including medical doctors, chiropractors, and acupuncturists in the health centre on campus?" In this way, a more accurate measure of participants' health status may be obtained. In sum, the results for health were similar to that of psychological well-being and further validated the negative influence of avoidance goals for North Americans. The results also further support the notion that avoidance goals are not detrimental to Japanese and Mexicans. For interpersonal relationship outcomes, it was found that Canadians with more avoidance goals felt lonely and less satisfied with their friendship at the end of semester, while Japanese and Mexicans with more avoidance goals were not associated with loneliness or friendship satisfaction. It is noteworthy that the directions for Japanese people are opposite to those of Canadians for both loneliness and friendship satisfaction, and for loneliness, marginally significant positive relations among Japanese people were observed. It can be speculated that a clear, reversed pattern for interpersonal relationship for Japanese may be revealed when Japanese people who reside in Japan are examined. For Mexicans, no relations between avoidance goals and psychological well-being, health, or interpersonal relationships were obtained at Time 2. It is consistent with the prediction that Mexicans' high approach orientation and high avoidance orientation counteract each other such that their avoidance orientation would not be related in any way to well-being variables. The results showing that avoidance goals are related to lower satisfaction in interpersonal relationship for North Americans are consistent with the findings of past research (Frank & Brandstatter, 2002). In addition, although the current study did not investigate social goals specifically, for Canadians, the results were consistent with the findings of Gable (2000) that individuals who had high avoidant social orientation exhibited high loneliness. These findings, in conjunction with the interpersonal relationship results, suggests that there are deleterious relations Approach and Avoidance Goals 59 of pursuing avoidance goals for Canadian participants' interpersonal relationship status whereas Japanese and Mexicans do not have such relations. The reasons for the obtained results can be speculated as follows. Euro-Canadians who are more avoidant may avoid dealing with others because they want to avoid negative consequences. Therefore, they may fail to deepen their friendships. It in turn may have led to their lower friendship satisfaction and loneliness. On the other hand, Japanese and Mexican individuals with more avoidance goals may succeed in avoiding conflicts in the group and it in turn makes them feel the sense of fitting in to the society. Therefore, they do not feel lonely or dissatisfied with their friendship satisfaction. Although in the present study, the prediction that avoidance goals actually predicts less loneliness and greater friendship satisfaction for Japanese sample was not found, the direction of the results for Japanese participants are consistent with the predictions. It is quite possible that the predicted results w i l l be found when Japanese participants who live in Japan are examined. Although the relations between avoidance goals and lower interpersonal relationship satisfactions were established for Euro-Canadians in the current study, approach-avoidance goals specific in the social domain (e.g., similar to what Gable, 2000, investigated) were not examined. Thus, it is not yet clear whether Euro-Canadians with high avoidance goals also had high social avoidance goals, although it is quite likely that there is a strong relation between the amount of avoidance personal goals and the amount of social personal goals because both personal goals and social goals are derived from dispositional motivational orientations (Elliot & Sheldon, 1998). However, there is a possibility that the relations may differ across cultures. For example, for Canadians, individuals with a high number of avoidance goals may have less social avoidance goals, because goals are closely related to situational contexts, and in Canadian cultural contexts, Approach and Avoidance Goals 60 individuals may be required to be less avoidant in order to fit in to the societal norm of being approach-oriented. Additionally, Canadian individuals may be trained to be less avoidance-oriented in the social context. In Japan, on the other hand, people who are avoidance-oriented would also be likely to be socially avoidant because the cultural rules are established to be sensitive and respectful to others feelings. Therefore, it may be beneficial to examine the relations between social goals and personal goals across cultures. Furthermore, it is not clear exactly what mediated the relationship between avoidance personal goals and lower friendship satisfactions and greater loneliness for Canadians and no relationship for Japanese participants. It can be speculated that the feeling of fitting in to a group may mediate the relations between avoidance goals and interpersonal relationship outcomes for Japanese, and the feeling of incompetence or inadequacy may mediate the relations for Euro-Canadians as perceived autonomy and controlledness are important for well-being of North Americans (Elliot & Sheldon, 1997). Further investigations are needed to clarify the mediational relationships. Additionally, it is possible that the content of social avoidance may differ across cultures. For Canadians, socially avoidant may mean only to stay away from problems or difficult people, whereas for Japanese, socially avoidant may mean focusing on how others feel and trying not to deviate from the group norm. Therefore, it may be worthwhile to examine domain-specific approach-avoidance goals for interpersonal relationships to further investigate the mediational relationship between personal goals and social goals and the quality of avoidance goals across cultures. The patterns of the results with avoidance goals and with BIS were different such that avoidance goals predicted negative well-being more than the BIS. The relations between BIS and Approach and Avoidance Goals 61 outcomes were almost non-existent. Therefore, it can be argued that avoidance goals are better predictors of well-being outcomes than avoidance orientations. The reason why avoidance goals predict better than BIS may be that goals are more proximal regulators of behavior whereas motivational orientations are more distal regulators of behavior (Elliot & Sheldon, 1998). It may be that more proximal a regulator is, better it is to predict outcomes. In sum, the current study demonstrated that avoidance personal goals were related to a decrease in loneliness and friendship satisfaction for Euro-Canadians. This study extended the investigations to friendship satisfaction and loneliness, and the results revealed that avoidance goals at the beginning of a semester predicted loneliness and lower satisfactions in friendship at the end of the semester. For Japanese and Mexican participants, no relations between avoidance goals and interpersonal relationship outcomes were observed. Again, the null results for Japanese may have been attributed to the fact that the Japanese who were staying in Canada were examined instead of Japanese who lived in Japan. Prior to this study, little research has directly investigated avoidance personal goals specifically within the context of relationships. Frank and Brandstatter (2002) only examined the domain intimate relationship, and Gable (2000) only investigated the relations between social orientations and well-being. The present study was novel in that the relations between avoidance personal goals and loneliness and friendship satisfaction were investigated. For the mediational relations, Elliot and Sheldon (1998) demonstrated that adopting avoidance goals results in lower perceived competence and higher perceived controlledness for North Americans. However, the results from the current study failed to replicate those findings for Euro-Canadians. Specifically, the links between avoidance goals and perceived controlledness for Euro-Canadians or Mexicans were not established. Moreover, the links between avoidance goals Approach and Avoidance Goals 62 and perceived competence were not found for all the cultures that were examined. It was found that there was a marginal partial suppression effect of perceived competence for the relations between BIS and satisfaction with life at Time 2 for Canadians. This is somewhat contradictory to our hypothesis. However, given the fact that the numbers of analyses have been computed, the result may be a Type 1 error, and the results were only marginally significant. The reasons for not supporting the past research (Elliot & Sheldon, 1998) that showed the mediation of perceived controlledness and perceived competence for Euro-Canadians may be a lack of power. In the current study, the same measures and methodologies that Elliot and Sheldon (1998) used was adopted; however, Elliot and Sheldon measured participants' perceived competence and controlledness every 3-4 weeks over a four month period. It is possible that the current study did not have the power to observe the mediational relations because the current study only examined two time points over the course of a semester. Markus and Kitayama (1994) claimed that the pursuit of culturally expected goals would lead to greater well-being. Thus, for people with more interdependent views of self, making harmony with others may feel good whereas for people with more independent views of self, uniqueness and self-importance would lead to positive emotions. Based on this supposition, it can be speculated that the mediators for the relations between avoidance goals and well-being may differ for Euro-Canadians and Japanese. In sum, none of the hypothesized mediational relationships were observed in the current study. Further investigations with more observations and more participants w i l l be needed to clarify the true mediational relations between avoidance goals and well-being outcomes across cultures. Approach and Avoidance Goals 63 Supplementary analyses showed that individuals with high avoidance motivations tend to have more avoidance goals. These results support the proposition that the motive to avoid negative outcomes promotes the pursuit of avoidance goals (Elliot & Sheldon, 1998). However, the results revealed that there were no relations between approach motivations and approach goals. It may be that, as discussed in earlier sections, the measurement for approach-avoidance orientations may need to be modified to accurately measure cultural-specific approach-avoidance motivational orientations. Summary In summary, it was predicted that the function of avoidance goal pursuit on well-being, health, and interpersonal relationships would differ between East Asians and North Americans. As in prior studies of avoidance goals and cultural effects of well-being, the current study results, on the whole, revealed a decreasing level of well-being in relation to avoidance goals among North Americans. In addition, the study expanded the investigations of the relations of avoidance goals to health and interpersonal relationship satisfactions, and detrimental effects for North Americans in these domains were found, whereas no effects of avoidance goals on well-being, health, and interpersonal satisfactions for Japanese and Mexicans were observed. The present study demonstrated that, consistent with the hypothesis, Japanese and Mexicans did not show negative effects of avoidance goals over the course of a semester. The current study demonstrated that the non-significant effects of well-being for avoidance goals extend to health and interpersonal relationships for East Asians and Mexican cultures, and the significant effects of well-being and health can extend to friendship satisfactions for Canadians at the end of semester. Although Elliot et al. (1997) suggested that avoidance goals were less Approach and Avoidance Goals 64 effective forms of regulation, this study offered the possibility that they were not universally detrimental. Being avoidant, Japanese people may sacrifice their positive emotions or mood in the short run in order to have a harmonious relationship in the long run. Consistent with this notion, Asakawa and Csikszentmihalyi (1998) found that Asian American students in grade school enjoyed their activity more when they were working on something that leads to their important future goals, whereas Caucasian American grade students enjoyed their activity more when they were working on something important to them at that moment. It may be that East Asians are socialized and taught to be avoidant in order to achieve a greater future success. If it is true, it is possible that East Asians are approach-oriented in broad domains such as career goals and relational harmony, and these broader domains may predict well-being, health, and interpersonal relationships differently. The results of the overall study may imply that the underlying meaning of having avoidance goals differs across cultures. For example, for North Americans, having avoidance goals may mean purely avoiding bad things. On the other hand, for East Asians, having avoidance goals may often mean avoiding bad things in order to make their social relationships better. In this sense, East Asians may be approach-oriented in social relations because sought end-results are positive. Further investigations are needed to examine this view. Moreover, this study may imply that cultural norms may have shaped the motivational orientations differently, and also the effects of pursuing goals are different because of cultural expectations. Furthermore, the current study results may imply that psychological well-being is related to culturally-consistent practices. It may be that being avoidant was not found detrimental for Japanese and Mexican participants because it is consistent with the situational features of Japanese Approach and Avoidance Goals 65 and Mexican cultures. Being approach-oriented is accepted in North America, because it is consistent with the cultural expectations. Therefore, being avoidant in Canada was detrimental for Euro-Canadians because it was opposed to the cultural expectations. It may be that being culturally consistent, they are more confident in themselves as well as feel connected with others, and that can lead to greater well-being. Consistent with this notion, Kitayama, Markus, and Kurokawa (2000) argue that being consistent with the norm of a cultural group enables individuals to be an active participant in the community, and that in turn leads them to feel the sense of well-being. Additionally, the researchers assert that culturally predominant patterns of behaviors are associated with well-being, and culturally inconsistent behaviors are associated with lower well-being. Similarly, Markus and Kitayama (1994) argued that good feelings for Japanese might require "an awareness and assurance of connection and interdependence" (p. 109). Therefore, Japanese people may feel greater well-being by avoiding negative consequences because that can lead to a harmonious relationship with others. Being avoidant and agreeable to others could be viewed more favorably in the Japanese social situation because that shows that a person is trying to maintain harmony with others. Heine et al. (1999) also suggest that fulfilling one's cultural values would lead to greater well-being. Therefore, it may be that the samples from Japan and Mexico were not affected by avoidance goals per se, but because avoidant individuals had the goals, attitude, and behaviors that were consistent with their cultural norms that were consistent with their cultural expectations. Further investigations are needed to explore the possibility. Finally, the results suggest that previous relations between avoidance goals and well-being among North Americans may indicate the costs of acting in culturally incongruent ways rather than any fundamental relations between avoidance and well-being. In other words, although speculative our data supports the argument that the reason for why past research has found the Approach and Avoidance Goals 66 relations between avoidance goals and lower well-being may have to do with cultural mismatch: North Americans with avoidance goals were acting against their cultural expectations or culturally normative behaviors. Limitations Several limitations of this study should be considered. First, as discussed in the earlier section, the findings from the current study may not generalize to Japanese and Mexicans who live in their native countries because the Japanese and Mexican participants were exchange students who were wil l ing to come to Canada. The Japanese and Mexican participants in the current study may be more approach- and less avoidance-oriented than individuals who live in their native countries. This may have affected the current study results. Second, similarly, there may be a selection bias for the Japanese and Mexican participants. The Japanese and Mexican participants were recruited at their orientations when they first arrived to U B C . Some students agreed to participate and some did not. People who participated in the study and individuals who did not participated in the study may differ in some ways in terms of motivational states. For example, individuals who participated in the study may have had lower in anxiety (i.e., lower avoidance) and individuals who did not participate may have had high anxiety (i.e., high avoidance) because they were nervous about beginning the new semester in new place; thus, they may not have participated. Therefore, the current study may have failed to include some highly avoidant participants, and it may have affected the results in some unpredicted way. Third, in this study, participants were asked about their psychological well-being, health, and interpersonal relationship during the past two weeks at the beginning of the semester while they were on summer break and then again at the end of the semester. However, it is not yet clear i f similar patterns of results could be obtained when the same study at different time points are Approach and Avoidance Goals 67 reexamined. For example, i f the study is conducted in the middle of the semester and ask about their well-being status at the end of a semester, different patterns of well-being may be observed. Fourth, because self-report measures were used, social desirability may have affected how participants responded across cultures. Thus, it is important to have multiple measures to obtain convergent evidence. Fifth, there was a high rate of attrition in the study. For all cultural groups, more than a third of participants did not participate in the follow-up study. Only 34 of 52 Euro-Canadians, 40 of 72 Japanese participants, and 24 of 37 Mexican participants completed the follow-up questionnaires. The large attrition is not ideal for a powerful statistical analysis. Rigorous efforts were made to invite participants to come to the follow-up study; however, having the participants come in for the follow-up study was challenging. In the current study, fewer males participated in the follow-up than did females. Greater efforts should be made to insure the participation of male students. In the future, perhaps the Internet can be used for the follow-up assessment. It may decrease the hassle of returning to the laboratory. Alternatively, the study packet can be sent to participants directly and they can just complete it at their convenience at home and send it back to us with a posted envelope. In any case, it is important to improve the number of participants for the follow-up assessment to raise statistical power. Finally, caution must be taken not to make inferences about causal relationships from the correlational data. This study is correlational in nature; therefore, it is possible that lower psychological well-being led to greater avoidance of negative outcomes for North Americans. Future Directions A study is being planned for the near future that w i l l compare Euro-Canadians and Japanese, each in their respective native countries. The study is aimed at clarifying the results of Approach and Avoidance Goals 68 current study, especially the relations between avoidance goals and positive outcomes for Japanese participants. B y using Japanese who live in their native country, beneficial relations between avoidance goals and well-being are expected to be found. Theories of well-being claim that social ties with others are an important part of health and well-being (e.g., Deci & Ryan, 1985; Ryff, 1995). Similarly, Kitayama, Markus, and Kurokawa (2000) claim that well-being comes from more societal harmony for Japanese whereas from independence for North Americans. Based on the research findings, the prediction that the social satisfaction may be a mediational variable between avoidance goals and psychological and physical well-being could be tested. Additionally, different measures of approach-avoidance motivations could be used. Higgins, Shah and Friedman (1997) used a computer measure of promotion-prevention focus. Alternatively, a measure of approach-avoidance orientation, which is reliable and valid across cultures, could be developed. Similarly, different measures of well-being and interpersonal relationships could be used to examine whether consistent results can be obtained. As a new direction, a diary study investigating the effects of approach and avoidance goals across Canadians and Japanese cultures is in preparation. In the study, participants w i l l be asked to list either approach or avoidance goals every day for two weeks. A t the beginning and the end of the two weeks, well-being and health measures wi l l be recorded. It is predicted that Euro-Canadian participants who wrote avoidance goals w i l l experience detrimental effects, whereas Japanese participants who wrote avoidance goals w i l l experience no detrimental effects. In this study, approach and avoidance goals w i l l be manipulated, thus, it attempts to reveal a causal relationship between avoidance goals and well-being and health. Approach and Avoidance Goals 69 In addition, the use of approach-avoidance message framing to examine the effects of these messages on health behaviors is also in preparation. In this study, framing of a health fact (e.g., the use of sunscreen to prevent skin cancer) is planned in either an approach or avoidance message style. It is predicted that activations of certain regulations by using approach or avoidance message framing can activate certain emotions, and it can lead to more or less health behaviors across cultures. Based on previous research findings (e.g., Rothman, Salovey, & Antone, 1993), it is predicted that approach message framing would lead to the use of suggested health behaviors for North Americans, whereas avoidance message framing would lead to the use of suggested health behaviors for East Asians. Moreover, it may be interesting to examine bilingual people to see i f language affects approach-avoidance tendencies. It may be that East Asian languages prime participants to be more avoidance-oriented, whereas English may prime participants to be more approach-oriented. In conclusion, the results that Elliot et al. (1997) found in North American individuals were not found in Japanese and Mexicans in the current study. This suggests these are not functional universals. Importantly, the study demonstrated that the negative relations between avoidance goals and well-being, health, and interpersonal relationships shown in Canadian people do not exist in Japanese or Mexicans. It also implies that culture shapes motivations and the effects of making goals. This raises the possibility that behaving culturally normative ways may be associated with good outcomes. Further research is necessary to extend these findings. More research wi l l complement and contribute to the existing literature on psychological differences across cultures, as well as offer integration among the cultural psychology literature, research on personal motivations, and research on health and well-being. Approach and Avoidance Goals 70 References Amodio, D. M . , Shah, J. Y . , & Sigelman, J. (2004). Implicit regulatory focus associated with asymmetrical frontal cortical activity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 225-232. Asakawa, K . , & Csikszentmihalyi, M . (1998). The quality of experience of Asian American adolescents in activities related to future goals. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 27, 141-163. Atkinson, J. W. , & Li twin , G . H . (1960). Achievement motive and test anxiety conceived as motive to approach success and motive to avoid failure. Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology, 60, 52-63. Briley, D . A . , & Wyer, R. S. (2002). The effect of group membership salience on the avoidance of negative outcomes: Implications for social and consumer decisions. Journal of Consumer Research, 29, 400-415. Brunstein, J. C. (1993). Personal goals and subjective well-being: a longitudinal study. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 65, 1061-1070. Brunstein, J. C. , Schultheiss, O. C , & Grassman, R. (1998). Personal Goals and Emotional Well-Being: The Moderating Role of Motive Dispositions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75,494-508. Carver, S. C , & White, T. L . (1994). Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: The B I S / B A S scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 319-333. Coan, J. A . , & Al len , J. J. B . (2003). Frontal E E G asymmetry and the behavioral activation and inhibition systems. Psychophysiology, 40, 106-114. Approach and Avoidance Goals 71 Coats, E . J., Janoff-Bulman, R., & Alpert, N . (1996). Approach versus avoidance goals: differences in self-evaluation and well-being. PSPB, 22, 1057-1067. Davidson, R. (1993). Cerebral asymmetry and emotion: Conceptual and methodological conundrums. Cognition and Emotion, 7, 115-138. Davidson, R., Ekman, P., Saron, C , Senulis, J .A., Friesen, W . V . (1990). Approach-Withdrawal and Cerebral Asymmetry: Emotional Expression and Brain Physiology I. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 58, 330-341. Davidson, K . , & Pennebaker, J. (1996). Social psychosomatics. In E . T. Higgins & A . Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 102-130). New York: Guilford Press. Derryberry, D . , & Reed, M . A . (1994). Temperament and attention: orienting toward and away from positive and negative signals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 1128-1139. Diaz-Guerrero, R. (1967). Psychology of the Mexican. Austin: University of Texas Press. Diaz-Guerrero, R. (1979). The development of coping style. Human Development, 22, 320-331. Diaz-Guerrero, R. (1987). Historical sociocultural premises and ethnic socialization. In J.S. Phinney, & M . J . Rotheram (Eds.), Children's ethnic socialization: Pluralism and development (pp. 239-250). Newbury Park, C A : Sage. Diaz-Guerrero, R. (1993). Mexican Ethnopsychology. In U . K i m & J.W. Berry (Eds.), Indigenous psychologies: Research and experience in cultural context (pp. 44-55). Newbury Park, C A : Sage. Approach and Avoidance Goals 72 Diaz-Loving, R., & Draguns, J .G. (1999). Culture, meaning, and personality in Mexico and in the United States. In Y . - T . Lee, C. R. McCauley, & J. G . Draguns (Eds.), Personality and person perception across cultures (pp. 103-126). Mahwah, N J : Lawrence Erlbaum. Diener, E . (2000). Subjective Well-Being: The Science of Happiness and a Proposal for a National Index. American Psychologist, 55, 34-43. Diener, E . , Emmons, R., Larsen, J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction With Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71-75. Elliot, A . J. (1999). Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. Educational Psychologist, 34, 169-189. Elliot, A . J., Chirkov, V . I., K i m , Y . , & Sheldon, K . M . (2001). A cross-cultural analysis of avoidance (relative to approach) personal goals. Psychological Science, 12, 505-510. Elliot, A . J., & Church, M . A . (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 72, 218-232. Elliot, A . J., & Covington, M . V . (2001). Approach and avoidance motivation. Educational Psychology Review, 73,73-92. Elliot, A . J., & Sheldon, K . M . (1997). Avoidance achievement motivation: a personal goals analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 171-185. Elliot, A . J., Sheldon, K . M . , & Church, M . A . (1997). Avoidance personal goals and subjective well-being. PSPB, 23, 915-927. Elliot, A . J., & Sheldon, K . M . (1998). Avoidance personal goals and the personality - Illness relationship. Journal of personality and social psychology, 75, 1282-1299. Elliott, R., Friston, K . J., & Dolan, R. J. (2000). Dissociable neural responses in human reward systems. Journal of Neuroscience, 20,6159-6165. Approach and Avoidance Goals 73 Elliott, R., Frith, C. D. , & Dolan, R. J. (1997). Differential neural response to positive and negative feedback in planning and guessing tasks. Neuropsychologia, 35, 1395-1404. Emmons, R. A . (1986). Personal Strivings: A n Approach to Personality and Subjective Well-Being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1058-1068. Emmons, R. A . (1989). The personal striving approach to personality. In L . Pervin (Ed.), Goal concepts in personality and social psychology (pp. 87-126). Hillsdale, N J : Lawrence Erlbaum. Emmons, R. A . (1991). Personal strivings, daily life events, and psychological and physical well-being. Journal of Personality, 59, 453-472. Emmons, R. A . , & King , L . (1988). Conflict among personal strivings: Immediate and long-term implications for psychological and physical well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1040-1048. Fowles, D . C. (1988). Psychophysiology and psychopathology: a motivational approach. Psychophysiology, 25, 373-391. Fowles, D . C. (1994). A motivational theory of Psychopathology. In D . S. Wi l l i am (Ed.), Integrative Views of Motivation, Cognition, and Emotion. Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press. Frank, E. , & Brandstatter, V . (2002). Approach versus avoidance: Different types of commitment in intimate relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 208-221. Gable, S. L . (2000). Appetitive and aversive social motivation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Rochester. Gable, S. L , Reis, H . T., Elliot, A . J. (2000). Behavioral activation and inhibition in everyday life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 1135-1149. Approach and Avoidance Goals 74 Gray, J. A . (1987a). The psychology of fear and stress (2nd ed.). England: Cambridge University Press. Gray, J. A . (1987b). Perspectives on anxiety and impulsivity: A commentary. Journal of Research in Personality, 21, 493-509. Gray, J. A . (1994). Three fundamental emotion systems. In P. Ekman & R. J. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of emotion: Fundamental questions (pp. 243-247). New York: Oxford University Press. Hamamura,T., & Heine, S. J. (2005). Beyond cultural differences in self-enhancement: Reflections on East Asian "face" maintenance. Manuscript in preparation. Heine, S. J. (1999). Is there a universal need for positive self-regard? Psychological Review, 106, 766-94. Heine, S. J. (2005). Constructing good selves in Japan and North America. To appear in Culture and Social Behavior: The Tenth Ontario Symposium (pp. 115-143). Hillsdale, N J : Lawrence Erlbaum. Heine, S. J., Kitayama, S., Lehman, D . R., Takata, T., Ide, E . , Leung, C, & Matsumoto, H . (2001). Divergent Consequences of Success and Failure in Japan and North America: A n Investigation of Self-Improving Motivations and Malleable Selves. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57,599-615. Heine, S. J., & Lehman, D . R. (1997). The cultural construction of self-enhancement. A n investigation of group-serving biases. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 1268-1283. Heine, S. J., & Lehman, D . R. (1999). Culture, self-discrepancies, and self-satisfaction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 915-925. Approach and Avoidance Goals 75 Heine, S. J., Lehman, D . R., Peng, K . , & Greenholtz, J. (2002). What's wrong with cross-cultural comparisons of subjective Likert scales: The reference-group problem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 903-918. Heine, S. J., & Renshaw, K . (2002). Interjudge agreement, self-enhancement, and liking: Cross-cultural divergences. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 442-451. Heine, S. J., Takata, T., & Lehman, D. R.(2000). Beyond self-presentation: evidence for self-criticism among Japanese. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 71-78. Higgins, E . T. (1996). Emotional experiences: The pains and pleasures of distinct regulatory systems. In R. D. Kavanaugh, B . Zimmerberg, & S. Fein (Eds.), Emotion: Interdisciplinary perspectives (pp. 203-241). Mahwah, N J : Erlbaum. Higgins, E . T., Shah, J., & Friedman, R. (1997). Emotional responses to goal attainment: Strength of regulatory focus as moderator. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 515-525. '• Hofstede, G. (1983). Dimensions of national cultures in fifty countries and three regions. In J.B. Deregowski, S. Dziurawiec, & R . C . Annis (Eds.), Expiscations in cross-cultural psychology (pp. 335-355). Lisse, the Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger. Ji , L . , Peng, K . , & Nisbett, R. E . (2000). Culture, control, and perception of relationships in the environment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 943-955. John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The B i g Five Trait Taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L . A . Pervin, & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research (pp. 3-31). New York: Guilford. Kellner R. (1986). Illness attitude scales. In R. Kellner (Ed.), Somatization and Hypochondriasis (pp. 319-324). New York: Praeger-Greenwood Publishers. Approach and Avoidance Goals 76 Kitayama, S., Markus, H . R., & Kurokawa, M . (2000). Culture, Emotion, and Well-being: Good Feelings in Japan and the United States. Cognition and Emotion, 14, 93-124. Larsen, R. J., & Ketelaar, T. (1991). Personality and susceptibility to positive and negative emotional states. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 61, 132-140. Lee, A . Y . , Aaker, J. L . , & Gardner, W. L . (2000). The pleasures and pains of distinct self-construals: The role of interdependence in regulatory focus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 1122-1134. Loxton, N . J., & Dawe, S. (2001). Alcohol abuse and dysfunctional eating in adolescent girls: The influence of individual differences in sensitivity to reward and punishment. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 29, 455-462. Markus, H . R., & Kitayama, S. (1999). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. In R. F. Baumeister (Ed.), Self in social psychology (pp. 339-371). New York, N Y : Psychology Press. McClel land, D . C , Atkinson, J. W. , Clark, R. A . , & Lowel l , E . L . (1964). Toward a theory of motivation. In R. C. Teevan, & R. C. Birney (Eds.). Theories of Motivation in Personality and Social Psychology. New York: D . Van Nostrand Company, Inc. Mehrabian, A . (1976). Questionnaire measures of affiliative tendency and sensitivity to rejection. Psychological Reports, 38, 199-209. Miller , D . T., & Ross, M . (1975). Self-serving biases in the attribution of causality: Fact or fiction? Psychological bulletin, 82, 231-225 Morling, B . , Kitayama, S., & Miyamoto, Y . (2003). Cultural practicesemphasize influence in the United States and adjustment in Japan. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 311-323. Approach and Avoidance Goals 77 Mullen, B . , & Riordan, C.A.(1988). Self-serving attributions in naturalistic settings: A meta-analytic review. Journal of applied Social Psychology, 18, 3-22. Murray, S. L . , Holmes, J. G . , & Griffin, D . W. (1996). The benefits of positive illusions: Idealization and the construction of satisfaction in close relationships. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 70, 79-98. O'Doherty, J., Kringelbach, M . L . , & Rolls, E . T. (2001). Abstract reward and punishment representations in the human orbitofrontal cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 4, 95-102. Oishi, S., & Diener, E . (2001). Goals, Culture, and Subjective Well-Being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1674-1682. Pavot, W. , Diener, E . (1993). Review of the Satisfaction With Life Scale. Psychological Assessment, 5, 164-172. Preacher, K . J., & Leonardelli, G . J. (2001, March). Calculation for the Sobel test: A n interactive calculation tool for mediation tests [Computer software]. Available from http://www.unc.edu/~preacher/sobel/sobel .htm. Rothman, A . J., Salovey, P., & Antone, C. (1993). The influence of message framing on intentions to perform health behaviors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 408-433. Russell, D . W. (1996). U C L A Loneliness Scale (Version 3): Reliability, Validity, and Factor Structure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 66, 20-40. Ryan, R. M . , & Connell, J. P. (1989). Perceived Locus of Causality and Internalization: Examining Reasons for Acting in Two Domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 749-761. Sanchez-Burks, J., Nisbett, R. E . , & Ybarra, O. (2000). Cultural styles, relationship schemas, and prejudice against outgroups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 174-189. Approach and Avoidance Goals 78 Schneirla, T. C. (1959). A n evolutionary and developmental theory of biphasic processes underlying approach and withdrawal. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 7, 1-43. Sheldon, K . M . , & Elliot, A . J . (1998). Not all personal goals are personal: Comparing autonomous and controlled reasons for goals as predictors of effort and attainment. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 546-557. Sheldon, K . M . , & Kasser, T. (1995). Coherence and Congruence: Two Aspects of Personality Integration. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 531-43. Singelis, T. (1994). The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 580-591. Shrout, P. E . , & Bolger, N . (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7, 422-445. Swann, W . B . , Jr., Stein-Seroussi, A . , & Giesler, R. B . (1992). Why people self-verify. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 392-401. Takagi, K . , Beals, K . P., & Gable, S. (2002). Approach and avoidance motives in disclosing positive and negative selfrelevant information. Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Los Angeles. Thompson, S. C , Sobolew-Shubin, A . , Galbraith, M . E . , Schwankovsky, L . , & Cruzen, D . (1993). Maintaining perceptions of control: Finding perceived control in low-control circumstances. Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 64, 293-304. Tomaka, J., & Palacios-Esquivel, R. L . (1997). Motivational systems and stress-related cardiovascular reactivity. Motivation and Emotion, 21, 275-296. Approach and Avoidance Goals 79 Watson, D. , Clark, L . A . , & Tellegen, A . (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of Positive and Negative Affect: The P A N A S Scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070. Watson, D. , & Pennebaker, J. (1989). Health complaints, stress, and distress: Exploring the central role of negative affectivity. Psychological Review, 96, 234-254. Watson, D. , & Tellegen, A . (1985). Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 219-235. Watson, D. , & Tellegen, A . (1999). The two general activation systems of affect: structural findings, evolutionary considerations, and psychobiological evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 7(5,820-838. Weisz, J. R., Rothbaum, F. M . , & Blackburn, T. C. (1984). Standing out and standing in: The psychology of control in America and Japan. American Psychologist, 39, 955-969. Approach and Avoidance Goals 80 Table l a : Means and Standard Deviations for the Ma in Variables Japanese European-Canadians Mexicans Avoidance Goals 2.33a 2.18 1.86b (.72) (.62) (.71) Beginning-of-Semester -.34a .30b 1.00c Well-Being Composite (.96) (.75) (.64) End-of-Semester -.39a -.17ab .88c Well-Being Composite (.85) (1.00) (.73) Beginning-of-Semester 2.51ac 1.46b 1.78bc Negative Affect (.80) (.58) (.57) End-of-Semester 2.34ac 1.52b 1.70bc Negative Affect (.87) (.74) (.54) Beginning-of-Semester 30.10 32.29 35.54 Physical Symptoms (15.32) (12.61) (17.73) End-of-Semester 35.63 39.55 34.92 Physical Symptoms (14.21) (14.95) (17.60) Semester Health 6.09a 7.21 7.83b (2.39) (1.24) (1.24) Note. Standard deviations are reported in parentheses. Rows with different letters are significant atp < .05. Approach and Avoidance Goals 81 Table l b : Means and Standard Deviations for the Main Variables Japanese European-Canadians Mexicans Beginning-of-Semester 1.90 1.99 1.93 Loneliness (.41) (.39) (.45) End-of-Semester 1.87 2.00a 1.70b Loneliness ' (.40). (.49) (.36) Beginning-of-Semester 3.94 4.02 4.12 Friendship Satisfaction (.68) (.62) (.74) End-of-Semester 3.70 3.90 4.14 Friendship Satisfaction (.60) (.88) (.67) Neuroticism 3.37a 2.53bc 2.28c (.62) (.75) (.61) Hypochondriasis 2.66a 2.20b 2.69a (.68) (.60) (.57) Beginning-of-Semester 3.90a 3.75 3.54b BIS (.65) (.65) (.68) End-of-Semester 3.79 3.86 3.75 BIS (.79) (.70) (.75) Note. Standard deviations are reported in parentheses. Rows with different letters are significant atp < .05. Approach and Avoidance Goals 82 Table l c . Means and Standard Deviations for the Main Variables Japanese European-Canadians Mexicans Beginning-of-Semester 3.78 3.67a 4.00b B A S (.53) (.49) (.49) End-of-Semester 3.77a 3.71ab 4.15c B A S (.55) (.42) (•47) Perceived Competence 4.63a 5.37b 6.33c (1.09) (1.12) (1.20) Perceived 8.94a 11.54b 11.30bc Controlledness (4.43) (3.57) (6.04) Perceived Goal Progress 5.05a 5.19ab 6.58c (1.23) (1.56) (1.39) Perceived Goal Progress 4.48a 5.03ab 6.35c Satisfaction (1.27) (1.58) (1.28) Note. Standard deviations are reported in parentheses. Rows with different letters are significant atp < .05. Approach and Avoidance Goals 83 Table 2a. Common Approach Goals for Japanese Sample Approach Goals People Stated Improve English abilities 37 Make many new friends 37 Take care of my health 12 Become friends and have good communication with my room 11 mate Become independent 10 Exercise 9 Think positively 9 Enjoy daily life 9 Cook for myself 8 Speak English in situations 8 Be more proactive 8 Have a balance between studies and having fun 7 Go traveling and visit local tourist attractions 7 Save money 7 Become more challenging 6 Improve my T O E F L score 6 Have a regular daily schedule 6 Have good communication with people 6 Take part in activities 5 Broaden my horizons 4 Maintain the relationship I have with my boyfriend/girlfriend 3 Maintain bodyweight 2 Lose weight 2 Live each day fully 2 Approach and Avoidance Goals 84 Table 2b. Common Avoidance Goals for Japanese Sample Avoid Goals People Stated Do not gain weight 22 Do not speak Japanese 7 Do not spend too much time in my room 7 Do not over spend 6 Do not be influenced by others 5 Do not get sick 3 Do not live each day so I w i l l regret it 3 Do not depend on others 3 Do not lose touch with my friends in Japan 2 Do not spend too much time with Japanese friends 2 Do not waste away the day 2 Approach and Avoidance Goals 85 Table 2c. Common Approach Goals for Canadian Sample Approach Goals People Stated Make more friends 70 Keep up to date with studying 69 Exercise 69 Do well in school 69 Be more organized 61 Maintain close relationships/friendships 53 Be in shape/fit 53 Eat healthy 49 Get high grades 46 Spend time with family 36 Sleep enough 32 Balance my time 31 Make/save money 28 Spend time on/improve skil l or hobby 25 Be more social 24 Get a job 20 Get a volunteer job 19 Join clubs at U B C 19 Be neat 14 Be more involved on campus/community 14 Read more 13 Be good/helpful to others 12 Be more easygoing 10 Build relationship with religion/God 9 Be more active 9 Positive thinking 9 Be committed in relationships 8 Be more humble 8 Make time for relaxing 8 Be more patient 8 Independence 8 Advance career 8 Spend time with partner 8 Improve English skills 8 Approach and Avoidance Goals 86 Table 2d. Common Avoidance Goals for Canadian Sample Avoid Goals People Stated Avoid procrastination 65 Lose weight 25 Avo id wasting time on M S N , T V , phone 19 Avoid weight gain 18 Avoid laziness 14 Avoid wasting money/shopping 13 Avoid partying/clubbing 11 Avo id junk food 7 Avoid being lonely 7 Avoid doing poorly in school 6 Avoid being late 5 Avo id stress 5 Watch less T V 5 Spend less money 5 Avoid smoking 4 Avoid cramming 4 Avo id being shy 4 Avo id conflict with family 4 Avo id drinking too much 3 Avo id distractions 3 Avo id getting upset 3 Avo id coffee 3 Avo id skipping classes 3 Avo id thinking too much 3 Approach and Avoidance Goals 87 Table 2e. Common Approach Goals for Mexican Sample Approach Goals People Stated Make good friends 28 Exercise more 20 Be a good student 18 Get good grades 17 Be more organized 15 Develop English skills 13 Be healthy 11 Be more social 10 Read more 9 Work to become more independent 8 Personal development 5 Study more 5 Get to know Canada 4 Be more responsible 4 Know other cultures 4 Be on time 4 Be outstanding at work 3 Be more patient 3 Keep in touch with people in Mexico 3 Learn how to cook 3 Weight loss 3 Be more mature 3 Approach and Avoidance Goals 88 Table 2f. Common Avoidance Goals for Mexican Sample Avoid Goals People Stated A v o i d weight gain 11 A v o i d being lonely 6 A v o i d getting bad grades 3 Avoid laziness 2 Avoid overspending money 2 Avoid losing contact with family 1 Avoid failing courses 1 Avoid distracting myself 1 Avoid worry 1 A v o i d cigarettes 1 Avoid missing Mexico 1 Avoid procrastination 1 Avoid doing crazy things 1 Avoid anger 1 Approach and Avoidance Goals 89 Table 3 a. Betas for the Relationships Between Avoidance Goals and the Psychological Well-Being, Health, and Interpersonal Relationship Variables Controlling for Gender, the Target Variable at Time 1, Culture, and the Interaction between Culture and Avoidance Goals Dependent Variable Japanese European-Canadians Mexicans End-of-Semester Well-Being Composite -.12ab -.46***b .06a End-of-Semester Positive Affect .04 .10 .19 End-of-Semester Negative Affect End-of-Semester Satisfaction with Life .06a -.16 .42**b .29 -.07a .05 End-of-Semester General Good Feelings End-of-Semester Physical Symptoms End-of-Semester Physical Symptoms Neuroticism Controlled .05 -.14a .15a -.48" .38**b .37**b .07 .06ab .05ab End-of-Semester Physical Symptoms Hypochondriasis Controlled -.15a .37**b .06ab Note. Rows with different letters are significant atp < .05. *p < .10, **p < .05, ***p < .01, ****p < .001: significance of main effects within culture. Approach and Avoidance Goals 90 Table 3b. Betas for the Relationships Between Avoidance Goals and the Psychological Well-Being, Health, and Interpersonal Relationship Variables Controlling for Gender, the Target Variable at Time 1, Culture, and the Interaction between Culture and Avoidance Goals Dependent Variable Japanese European- Mexicans Canadians Semester Health -.34*b .08ab Semester Health -.43**b .02ab Neuroticism Controlled Semester Health -.28b .10ab Hypochondriasis Controlled End-of-Semester -.15 -.27 .10 Sleep Quality End-of-Semester .23 -.04 -.11 Alcohol Consumptions End-of-Semester -.03 .13 .11 Caffeine Intake End-of-Semester .05 -.08 -.04 Doctor Visits End-of-Semester -.04 - -.04 -.11 Exercise End-of-Semester -.22a .46***b .09bc Loneliness End-of-Semester .12a -.64**b .09a Friendship Satisfaction Goal Satisfaction .03a -.53***b .06a Perceived Goal Progress -.08a .15a Note. Rows with different letters are significant atp < .05. *p < .10, **p < .05, ***p < .01, ****p < .001: significance of main effects within culture. Approach and Avoidance Goals 91 Table 4. Summary Table for M a i n Results at Time 2 for Avoidance Goals (the Relationships Between Avoidance Goals and the Psychological Well-Being, Health, and Interpersonal Relationship Variables Controlling for Gender, the Target Variable at Time 1, Culture, and the Interaction between Culture and Avoidance Goals) Relations with Avoidance Japanese European- Mexicans Goals Canadians Psychological Well-Being 0 - 0 Physical Health + - 0 Interpersonal Relationship + - 0 Note. 0 = no relationship; + = positive relationship; - = negative relationship (Positive relationship means positive outcomes, and negative relationship means negative outcomes) Approach and Avoidance Goals 92 Table 5a. Summary Table for Cultural Differences (Interaction Effects) for M a i n Outcome Variables Relations with Avoidance Avoidance Goals T2 BIS T2 Goals at Time 2 Psychological Well-Being Well-Being Composite +* 0 Positive Affect 0 0 Negative Affect +** 0 Satisfaction with Life 0 +**** General Good Feelings +* 0 Physical Health Physical Symptoms +** 0 With Neuroticism +** 0 With Hypochondriasis +** 0 Semester Health +*** 0 With Neuroticism +*** 0 With Hypochondriasis +*** 0 Sleep 0 0 Alcohol Consumptions 0 0 Caffeine Intake 0 0 Doctor Visits 0 0 Exercise 0 0 Interpersonal Relationship Loneliness +*** 0 Friendship Satisfaction +*** +* Note. 0 = no interactions; + = interactions; T2 = Time 2. *p < .10, **p < .05, ***p < .01, ****p < .001: significance of interactions. Approach and Avoidance Goals 93 Table 5b. Summary Table for Cultural Differences (Interaction Effects) for Mediational and Goal Variables Relations with Avoidance Avoidance Goals T2 BIS T2 Goals at Time 2 Mediational Variables Perceived Competence 0 +**** Perceived Controlledness n/a n/a Goal Variables External n/a n/a Introjected n/a n/a Perceived Goal Progress +** +** Goal Social Desirability 0 0 Progress Satisfaction +** +** Importance 0 0 Competence expectancy 0 0 Intended effort 0 0 Negative Emotions 0 0 Note. 0 = no interactions; + = interactions; T2 = Time 2. *p < .10, **p < .05, ***p < .01, ****p < .001: significance of interactions. The scores of perceived competence at Time 2 were computed by averaging the ratings of perceived competence at Time 1 and Time 2 Approach and Avoidance Goals 94 Table 6a. Summary Table for Within Culture Main Effects Analyses Results Outcome Variables (the Relationships Between Avoidance Goals and the Outcome Variables at Time 2 Relations with Avoidance Goals Japanese European-Canadians Mexicans Psychological Well-Being Well-Being Composite Positive Affect Negative Affect Satisfaction with Life General Good Feelings Physical Health Physical Symptoms With Neuroticism With Hypochondriasis Semester Health With Neuroticism With Hypochondriasis Sleep Alcohol Consumptions Caffeine Intake Doctor Visits Exercise Interpersonal Relationship Loneliness Friendship Satisfaction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _)-*** -).##* -)_*** 0 0 0 0 0 0 _** _** 4 - * * • - ( -** _* _** 0 0 0 0 0 0 -)-*** _* * * * 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Note. 0 = no relationship; + = positive relationship; - = negative relationship (Statistical Relationship). *p < .10, **p < .05, ***p < .01, ****p < .001: significance of main effects. Approach and Avoidance Goals 95 Table 6b. Summary Table for Within Culture Ma in Effects Analyses Results Outcome Variables (the Relationships Between Avoidance Orientations and the Outcome Variables at Time 2) Relations with Avoidance Orientations (BIS) Japanese European-Canadians Mexicans Psychological Well-Being Well-Being Composite Positive Affect Negative Affect Satisfaction with Life General Good Feelings Physical Health Physical Symptoms With Neuroticism With Hypochondriasis Semester Health With Neuroticism With Hypochondriasis Sleep Alcohol Consumptions Caffeine Intake Doctor Visits Exercise Interpersonal Relationship Loneliness Friendship Satisfaction 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Note. 0 = no relationship; + = positive relationship; - = negative relationship (Statistical Relationship). *p < .10, **p < .05, ***p < .01, ****p < .001: significance of main effects. Approach and Avoidance Goals 96 Table 7a. Summary Table for Within Culture Main Effects Analyses Results for Goal Variables (the Relationships Between Avoidance Goals and the Goal Variables at Time 2) Relations with Avoidance Goals Japanese European-Canadians Mexicans Mediational Variables Perceived Competence T2 Goal Variables Perceived Goal Progress Goal Social Desirability Progress Satisfaction Importance Competence expectancy Intended effort Negative Emotions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _* 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Note. 0 = no relationship; + = positive relationship; - = negative relationship (Statistical Relationship). *p < .10, **p < .05, ***p< .01, ****p < .001: significance of main effects. T l = Time 1 T2 = The average ratings of Time 1 and Time 2 Approach and Avoidance Goals 97 Table 7b. Summary Table for Within Culture Ma in Effects Analyses Results for Goal Variables (the Relationships Between Avoidance Orientations (BIS) and the Goal Variables at Time 2) Relations with Avoidance Japanese European- Mexicans Orientations (BIS) Canadians Mediational Variables Perceived Competence T 2 _*** _** +** Goal Variables Perceived Goal Progress _** 0 Goal Social Desirability 0 0 0 Progress Satisfaction _** 0 0 Importance 0 _* 0 Competence expectancy 0 0 0 Intended effort _* _** 0 Negative Emotions _* 0 0 Note. 0 = no relationship; + = positive relationship; - = negative relationship (Statistical Relationship). *p < .10, **p < .05, ***p < .01, ****p < .001: significance of main effects. T l =Time 1 T2 = The average ratings of Time 1 and Time 2 Approach and Avoidance Goals 9 8 Figure 1. The Regression Line for the Well-Being Composite at Time 2 Predicted by Avoidance Goals Controlling for the Well-Being Composite at Time 1, Gender, Culture, and the Interaction of Culture x Avoidance Goals. W e l l - B e i n g C o m p o s i t e - • — C a n a d i a n s * — J a p a n e s e M e x i c a n s T h e D e g r e e o f A v o i d a n c e Approach and Avoidance Goals 99 Figure 2. The Regression Line for Negative Affect at Time 2 Predicted by Avoidance Goals Controlling for Negative Affect at Time 1, Gender, Culture, and the Interaction of Culture x Avoidance Goals. Approach and Avoidance Goals 100 Figure 3 . The Regression Line for General Good Feelings at Time 2 Predicted by Avoidance Goals Controlling for General Good Feelings at Time 1, Gender, Culture, and the Interaction of Culture x Avoidance Goals. 91 M c 13 CD • o o o a 0) c a 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 -0.5 -1 G e n e r a l G o o d F e e l i n g s 0 1 2 3 A 5 6 T h e D e g r e e o f A v o i d a n c e - • — C a n a d i a n s • * — J a p a n e s e M e x i c a n s Approach and Avoidance Goals 101 Figure 4. The Regression Line for Physical Symptoms at Time 2 Predicted by Avoidance Goals Controlling for Physical Symptoms at Time 1, Gender, Culture, and the Interaction of Culture x Avoidance Goals. Physical Symptoms The Degree of Avoidance Approach and Avoidance Goals 102 Figure 5. The Regression Line for Semester Health at Time 2 Predicted by Avoidance Goals Controlling for Semester Health at Time 1, Gender, Culture, and the Interaction of Culture x Avoidance Goals. Semester Health ••— Canadians • — Japanese Mexicans 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 The Degree of Avoidance Approach and Avoidance Goals 103 Figure 6. The Regression Line for Loneliness at Time 2 Predicted by Avoidance Goals Controlling for Loneliness at Time 1, Gender, Culture, and the Interaction of Culture x Avoidance Goals. L o n e l i n e s s T h e D e g r e e o f A v o i d a n c e Approach and Avoidance Goals 104 Figure 7. The Regression Line for Friendship Satisfaction at Time 2 Predicted by Avoidance Goals Controlling for Friendship Satisfaction at Time 1, Gender, Culture, and the Interaction of Culture x Avoidance Goals. F r i e n d s h i p S a t i s f a c t i o n 4 _ 4 i T h e D e g r e e o f A v o i d a n c e Approach and Avoidance Goals 105 Figure 8. The Regression Line for Perceived Goal Progress at Time 2 Predicted by Avoidance Goals Controlling for Perceived Goal Progress at Time 1, Gender, Culture, and the Interaction of Culture x Avoidance Goals. Approach and Avoidance Goals 106 Figure 9. The Regression Line for Goal Satisfaction at Time 2 Predicted by Avoidance Goals Controlling for Gender, Culture, and the Interaction of Culture x Avoidance Goals. Goal Satisfaction The Degree of Avoidance 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0092217/manifest

Comment

Related Items