ReviewIntegrative psychological & behavioral science2025
Goals as Motives: Implications for Theory, Methods, and Practice.
Review in Integrative psychological & behavioral science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Examining performance changes using multiple goal setting with a focus on the SMART principle.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Emotional wellbeing in neurodivergent populations.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The concept of human goals is central to the study of psychology (i.e., motivation, behavior, and well-being), sociology (i.e., social structure, culture, and dynamics), education (i.e., setting objectives, student motivation, and growth strategies), management (i.e., leadership, employee motivation, productivity, organizational behavior), and economics (i.e., consumer and market behavior, decision making, labor relations), among others. Because it represents the ultimate desired destination that orients decisions and actions, it plays a central role in the theory and practice in these fields. Despite its centrality, the concept lacks theoretical consensus regarding its definition and distinctiveness from related concepts such as needs, motives, and values. Like these concepts, the goals literature suffers from the proliferation of both concepts and taxonomies, suggesting a need for a return to theoretical foundations. In this article, we advocate for a fundamental reconsideration of the concept of goals, anchoring it within a new psychological theory of human motivation based on first principles. The paper's primary contribution lies in demonstrating that the operational definitions utilized by academics and practitioners alike can be thought of as attempts to approach concepts of human motivation, specifically, emotional needs, without fully getting there. We review the leading definitions of human goals in the literature, concluding that they can be distilled to a fundamental set of human emotional needs, each associated with extensive literatures of their own. A comprehensive framework of 12 human emotional needs is introduced; it is argued that a comprehensive motivational framework offers significant advantages over current theoretical approaches, which tend to spin off an ever-expanding list of concepts. We consider the impact of embedding goals concepts within existing motivational constructs with clear benefits for: (a) theory development, (b) method development, and (c) practical applications, emphasizing the advantages of clear operational definitions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39862310What 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.