OBJECTIVES: This meta-analysis quantified associations between goal disengagement and goal reengagement capacities with individuals' quality of life (i.e., well-being and health). METHODS: Effect sizes (Fisher's Z'; N = 421) from 31 samples were coded on several characteristics (e.g., goal adjustment capacity, quality of life type/subtype, age, and depression risk status) and analyzed using meta-analytic random effects models. RESULTS: Goal disengagement (r = 0.08, p < 0.01) and goal reengagement (r = 0.19, p < 0.01) were associated with greater quality of life. While goal disengagement more strongly predicted negative (r = -0.12, p < 0.01) versus positive (r = 0.02, p = 0.37) indicators of well-being, goal reengagement was similarly associated with both (positive: r = 0.24, p < 0.01; negative: r = -0.17, p < 0.01). Finally, the association between goal disengagement and lower depressive symptoms (r = -0.11, p < 0.01) was reversed in samples at-risk for depression (r = 0.08, p = 0.01), and goal disengagement more strongly predicted quality of life in older samples (B = 0.003, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: These findings support theory on the self-regulatory functions of individuals' capacities to adjust to unattainable goals, document their distinct benefits, and identify key moderating factors.
OBJECTIVES: This meta-analysis quantified associations between goal disengagement and goal reengagement capacities with individuals' quality of life (i.e., well-being and health). METHODS: Effect sizes (Fisher's Z'; N = 421) from 31 samples were coded on several characteristics (e.g., goal adjustment capacity, quality of life type/subtype, age, and depression risk status) and analyzed using meta-analytic random effects models. RESULTS: Goal disengagement (r = 0.08, p < 0.01) and goal reengagement (r = 0.19, p < 0.01) were associated with greater quality of life. While goal disengagement more strongly predicted negative (r = -0.12, p < 0.01) versus positive (r = 0.02, p = 0.37) indicators of well-being, goal reengagement was similarly associated with both (positive: r = 0.24, p < 0.01; negative: r = -0.17, p < 0.01). Finally, the association between goal disengagement and lower depressive symptoms (r = -0.11, p < 0.01) was reversed in samples at-risk for depression (r = 0.08, p = 0.01), and goal disengagement more strongly predicted quality of life in older samples (B = 0.003, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: These findings support theory on the self-regulatory functions of individuals' capacities to adjust to unattainable goals, document their distinct benefits, and identify key moderating factors.
Authors: Kathleen E Bickel; Cari Levy; Edward R MacPhee; Keri Brenner; Jennifer S Temel; Joanna J Arch; Joseph A Greer Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2020-05-21 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Iris Ka-Yi Chat; Robin Nusslock; Daniel P Moriarity; Corinne P Bart; Naoise Mac Giollabhui; Katherine S F Damme; Ann L Carroll; Gregory E Miller; Lauren B Alloy Journal: Brain Behav Immun Date: 2021-03-09 Impact factor: 7.217