ArticleFrontiers in psychology2024
Individual differences in goal adjustment: convergence and divergence among three theoretical models.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- What Are You Waiting For?! Roles of Motivation, Goal Orientation, and Emotion Regulation in Explaining the Link Between ADHD and Procrastination.Journal of attention disorders · 2026Article
- Flexible Goal Adjustment Predicts Well-Being Before and After Retirement.Journal of aging research · 2026Article
- A feasibility trial of advance care planning for patients with terminal cancer in primary hospitals.BMC palliative care · 2025Article
- The power of self-forgiveness: the dual impact of shame on creativity.BMC psychology · 2025Article
- Goal adjustment processes as coping responses to a blocked goal: the sample case of ostracism.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Adaptation across the Lifespan: Towards a Processual Evolutionary Explanation of Human Development.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Individual differences in dealing with unattainable goals or resource-consumptive goal pursuit are conceptualized as goal adjustment processes in three theoretical approaches: accommodative coping ( Methods: The empirical study is based on a cross-sectional online survey ( Results: The conceptual analysis yields clear convergences, but also differences. Empirically, clear but partially non-redundant relationships between the concepts are found in structural equation models. Accommodative coping showed the strongest correlations with measures of well-being and cognitive emotion regulation. When all goal adjustment measures are included simultaneously as predictors of well-being, accommodation remains as the strongest predictor (and partly goal reengagement as well), while goal disengagement shows opposing relationships with most measures of well-being. Discussion: We discuss the lessons learnt from these findings and conclude by proposing future avenues to examine goal adjustment processes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.