Goal Setting

An updated meta-analysis of the primed goal-organizational behaviour relationship

Abstract

Environmental cues (e.g. achievement-related words and pictures) can prime/activate, in the absence of awareness, a mental representation of importance stored in memory. Chen et al.'s 2021 Applied Psychology: An International Review70, 216–253. (doi:10.1111/apps.12239) meta-analysis revealed a moderate, significant overall effect for the goal priming-organizational behaviour relationship, with three moderators identified: context-specific versus a general prime, prime modality (i.e. visual versus linguistic) and experimental setting (field versus laboratory). An independent researcher found that their finding was negligibly affected by a publication bias. Shanks & Vadillo (2021), Royal Society Open Science8, 210544. (doi:10.1098/rsos.210544) (field: k = 13, N = 683, d = 0.64), questioned Chen et al.'s conclusion regarding the effect size found in field studies (field: k = 8, N = 357, d = 0.68). In this paper, we discussed Shanks & Vadillo's selection of additional field experiments that led to their conclusion of a publication bias. We updated Chen et al.'s meta-analysis to include relevant studies conducted since that study's publication. The present meta-analysis reproduced the original findings in Chen et al. (field: k = 11, N = 534, d = 0.67). The updated findings are consistent with: (i) laboratory findings, (ii) the findings obtained in field experiments on consciously set goals and (iii) goal setting theory (Latham & Locke, 2018 In Handbook of industrial, work & organizational Psychology, vol. 1 (eds D Ones, N Anderson, C Viswesvaran, H Sinangil), pp. 103–124).
Guy Itzchakov, Kenneth G. DeMarree
|
Attitudes
Interpersonal contexts can be complex because they can involve two or more people who are interdependent, each of whom is pursuing both individual and shared goals. Interactions consist of individual and joint behaviors that evolve dynamically over time. Interactions are likely to affect people’s attitudes because the interpersonal context gives conversation partners a great deal of opportunity to intentionally or unintentionally influence each other.
Keep reading
Rave R , Itzchakov G , Weinstein N , Moin T
|
Listening
What does it mean to listen, and what enables people to do it well? This study examines the cultural foundations, conditions, expressions, and outcomes of listening through a qualitative analysis of 20 semi-structured interviews with Israeli participants. Using reflexive thematic analysis, we identified five interrelated themes showing how listening is shaped by relational closeness, emotional safety, internal motivation, behavioral expression, and emotional impact. Participants described listening as an intentional and emotionally effortful process, grounded in trust, cultural norms, and personal willingness to remain present. It was experienced not only through visible behaviors but through authentic emotional presence and attunement. Crucially, listening was described as the most vulnerable and most revealing in contexts of conflict, emotional strain, or power asymmetries, where relational and ethical demands intensify. These findings highlight listening as a culturally situated, interpretive practice shaped by collective norms, emotional intensity, and social hierarchy. This study contributes to context-sensitive models of listening with implications for interpersonal relationships, organizational leadership, and intercultural communication, particularly in high-conflict or culturally diverse environments where listening serves as a key relational and managerial resource.
Keep reading