ArticlePDF Available

Abstract

Cross-cultural research documented two types of temporal culture governing the way individuals schedule tasks over time: clock-time, where individuals let an external clock dictate when tasks begin/end; and event-time, where tasks are planned relative to other tasks and individuals transition between them when they internally sense that the former task is complete. In contrast with this prior literature – that credits culture as the reason for variation in temporal norms – we show in two experiments that individuals choose clock- vs. event-time as a self-regulation strategy to achieve a regulatory goal (efficiency vs. effectiveness). A third experiment shows that this strategy enhances confidence and performance on a task. Participants solved significantly more math problems when their task scheduling (clock- vs. event-time) matched their regulatory state (promotion vs. prevention). Since clock-/event-time may both lead to superior performance, clock-time is not the single best way to organize productive activities in industrial societies—a result that counters a foundational principle of modern economics.
Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1665936
Clock Time versus Event Time 2
Running head: CLOCK TIME VERSUS EVENT TIME
Clock Time versus Event Time: Temporal Culture or Self-Regulation?
Tamar Avneta,
Anne-Laure Sellierb*
a: Yeshiva University, 215 Lexington, suite 421, New York, NY, 10016, USA, e-mail:
avnet@yu.edu
b: New York University, 40 West 4th street, suite 811, New York, 10012 NY, USA, e-mail:
asellier@stern.nyu.edu
Word count: 2311
*Corresponding author. Telephone: +1-212-998-05-53; Fax: +1-212- 995-4006. Both
authors equally contributed to this report. We thank Gonçalo Pacheco de Almeida and Tom
Meyvis for comments on previous versions of this report.
Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1665936
Clock Time versus Event Time 3
Abstract
Cross-cultural research documented two types of temporal culture governing the way individuals
schedule tasks over time: clock-time, where individuals let an external clock dictate when tasks
begin/end; and event-time, where tasks are planned relative to other tasks and individuals
transition between them when they internally sense that the former task is complete. In contrast
with this prior literature – that credits culture as the reason for variation in temporal norms – we
show in two experiments that individuals choose clock- versus event-time as a self-regulation
strategy to achieve a regulatory goal (efficiency vs. effectiveness). A third experiment shows that
this strategy enhances confidence and performance on a task. Participants solved significantly
more math problems when their task scheduling (clock- vs. event-time) matched their regulatory
state (promotion vs. prevention). Since clock-/event-time may both lead to superior performance,
clock-time is not the single best way to organize productive activities in industrial societies – a
result that counters a foundational principle of modern economics.
Keywords: Time organization; Task performance; Self-regulation.
Clock Time versus Event Time 4
Clock Time versus Event Time: Temporal Culture or Self-Regulation?
Time order events. It is a continuum on which activities occur in succession from past to
present to the future (Mifflin, 2010). This fundamental law of physics and social interaction
(Newton, 1687; Macey, 1994) finds distinct expressions in different societies. In particular,
cross-cultural research has documented two types of temporal culture governing the way
individuals schedule tasks over time (Lauer, 1981; Levine, 1997): 1) “clock-time,” where
individuals divide time into objective and quantifiable units, and let an external clock dictate
when tasks begin/end; and (2) “event-time,” where tasks are planned relative to other tasks, and
individuals transition from one to the next when they internally sense that the former task is
complete (Lauer 1981). Individuals in western societies mostly organize their day using clock-
time – breakfast at 8am, work from 9am to 5pm, dinner at 6pm. While the reliance on clocks can
be traced back to the use of sundials in ancient times, the importance of clock-time for
industrialized societies became full-blown with Taylorism, which advocated “one best way” to
achieve maximal performance on a task by defining a supposedly optimal, standard time that
should be spent on it (Taylor, 1911). To date, the superiority of the clock through its impact on
efficiency remains a foundational principle of modern economics. In spite of it, some cultures
and even some individuals within cultures still function in event-time: work begins after
breakfast ends, and dinner begins once individuals feel they should “call it a day” at work.
Anchoring on the clock to schedule activities still makes little sense to much of the world today
(Levine, 1997).
Past cultural research has presented the tendency to rely on event-time versus clock-time
as a product of ingrained social norms (Levine, 1997). In contrast, we suggest that the choice
between event- and clock-time may be more than a cultural artifact. We propose that individuals
Clock Time versus Event Time 5
may adopt event- or clock-time as a self-regulatory strategy, and – as a result - show that both
event- and clock-time can lead to superior performance. How so? The main difference between
these ways of scheduling tasks is that the decision to move to the next task is based on an
internal cue in event-time versus an external cue in clock-time. We propose that this difference
allows individuals to better serve the motivational goals defined by their regulatory state. A
motivational theory consistent with the adoption of event- or clock-time is regulatory focus
theory (Higgins, 1987), which distinguishes between two self-regulation systems that foster
different patterns of exploration: prevention and promotion (Crowe & Higgins, 1997; Liberman,
Idson, Camacho, & Higgins, 1999). The prevention system focuses on avoiding undesirable end-
states, which triggers a drive to minimize mistakes, while the promotion system focuses on
approaching matches to desired end-states, which triggers a drive to do as well as possible on
tasks in order to maximize “hits” (Higgins, 1998).
When completing one of several tasks, the prevention system will encourage individuals
to work on it until they believe mistakes no longer exist, while promotion individuals will
persevere until they have reached the best possible outcome. To ensure they have avoided all
mistakes, prevention individuals can only rely on their internal sense: it is a more objective
assessment of performance than any external temporal cue, as the latter cannot indicate when
mistakes have been avoided or corrected. In contrast, promotion individuals cannot rely on their
internal sense with such confidence. Because there is always “room for improvement,” their
search for the best possible outcome may never end. In other words, their internal sense is a
subjective assessment of performance, and relying on it to decide when to end a task would be an
inefficient task-scheduling algorithm. For that reason, they should prefer a more objective cue of
their task-related progress, such as a clock, which ensures that both the present and the next task
Clock Time versus Event Time 6
get completed. In sum, we predict that individuals schedule tasks in event- versus clock-time
because it enhances their overall confidence and actual performance on tasks depending on their
regulatory state.
In two experiments, we tested the prediction that prevention-oriented individuals should
prefer to move from one state to the other only when they are internally reassured that the task is
complete, therefore striving to be more effective, while promotion-oriented individuals should
prefer to move from one state to the other only when they are externally probed to do so
therefore striving to be more efficient. A third experiment examines whether individuals actually
perform better on a task when their way of scheduling matches their regulatory state.
Experiment 1
Sixty-five online participants were presented with one of two task-organizing methods: a
to-do list (where tasks can be listed without a specific time frame) and a calendar (where tasks
can be arranged at specific times/dates) in a counterbalanced order. The to-do list (calendar)
reflected an event-time (clock-time) task framing. Participants were asked to (1) choose either
the to-do list method or the calendar method to organize 12 fictitious weekly tasks and (2)
explain the reason for their choice. Subsequently, they completed the General Regulatory Focus
Measure (GRFM, Lockwood, Jordan, & Kunda, 2002).
Using the GRFM, we calculated the discrepancy between the promotion and the
prevention score. Participants whose discrepancy score was negative (positive) were considered
as more prevention (promotion)-oriented (Appelt, Zou, Arora, & Higgins, 2009; Higgins, Roney,
Crowe, & Hymes, 1994).
We found a significant interaction of Task scheduling choice (to-do list vs. calendar) and
Regulatory focus (prevention vs. promotion), such that prevention-oriented participants chose the
Clock Time versus Event Time 7
to-do-list more often (68.2%), while promotion-oriented participants chose the calendar more
often (60.5%; χ2 = 4.78, p = .03, V = .27). To understand why, two independent judges coded
participants’ reasons for their choice (reliability = 89%). Generally, 83.33% of prevention
individuals reported effectiveness (i.e., doing tasks well) as the main reason for their choice,
whereas 88.46% of promotion individuals invoked efficiency (i.e., finishing tasks on time).
Results were also consistent with our predictions within each scheduling option: Among
participants who chose the to-do list, prevention-oriented participants were concerned with
effectiveness more than promotion-oriented participants (PPREV = 87% vs. PPROM = 23%; Z =
5.36, p < .001, r2 = .44). Among participants who chose the calendar, promotion-oriented
participants were concerned with efficiency more than prevention-oriented participants (PPROM =
44% vs. PPREV = 20%; Z =2.43 p < .01, r2 = .09).
Experiment 2
In Experiment 2, we wanted to replicate the results of Experiment 1and test the relation
between the preference for clock- versus event-time and self-regulation by manipulating self-
regulation instead of measuring it. In the beginning of the Holiday season, 47 undergraduates
(age = 20.3 years, 29 women) took part in a brief study in return for course credit. To prime a
promotion or a prevention focus, we had participants complete one of two versions of a
regulatory focus manipulation adapted from prior research (Freitas & Higgins 2002; Higgins et
al. 1994; Pham & Avnet 2004). The promotion version was titled “Hopes and goals across time
study” and requested participants to think about the hopes and goals they had in the past, write
them down and then report how these hopes/goals changed over time. The prevention version
was titled “Duties and obligations across time study” – participants were instructed to think
Clock Time versus Event Time 8
about the duties and obligations they had in the past, write them down and report how these
duties/obligations changed over time.
After completing this first task, all participants were presented with the description of a
fictitious new service that allegedly had been developed by fellow students and was going to be
launched the following week. The core service consisted of the help of a personal shopper during
customers’ Holiday shopping, who would advise and assist them in achieving their shopping
goals. Participants were told that the service providers were thinking of creating one of two
platforms for this service: a first option was to hire the personal shopper for a chosen number of
hours, which the service estimated would allow the purchase of a certain number of appropriate
gifts (i.e., the service would follow a clock-time schedule). A second option involved hiring the
assistance of the personal shopper for as long as it took to purchase the gifts customers would be
most satisfied with (i.e., the service would follow an event-time schedule). Further, participants
read that it took around half an hour to find an appropriate gift on average. Thus, for the first
option, it would take around 5 hours to purchase 10 gifts. For the second option, there was no
time limit but participants were assured they would get the “perfect” gifts. Participants were
asked to report which of the two options they would prefer, assuming the cost of these options
would be the same.
Similar to the results in Experiment 1, we found that participants were more likely to
choose the perfect gift option in the prevention condition (83.33%) than in the promotion
condition (48%) while participants were more likely to choose the per hour option in the
promotion condition (52.17%) than in the prevention condition (16.7%; χ2 = 6.59, p = .01, V =
.37).
Clock Time versus Event Time 9
Together, Experiments 1 and 2 show that individuals choose event- versus clock-time
because of motivational goals (effectiveness vs. efficiency) that are consistent with their
regulatory state (prevention vs. promotion). These results offer preliminary support to our
hypothesis that prevention individuals prefer being more effective and therefore use a method
that allows them to move to the next task based on an internal cue, while promotion individuals’
prefer to be more efficient and therefore use a method that allows them to move to the next task
based on an external cue such as the clock. A critical question, then, is whether in addition to
using task scheduling as a self-regulation strategy, the adoption of event- versus clock-time can
also enhance individuals’ actual performance. Experiment 3 directly addresses this question. We
exposed participants in different chronic regulatory states to math problems for which there is
only one correct solution, and forced them to adopt an event-time or a clock-time strategy while
working on the problems. We expected that the fit between the adoption of an event- versus a
clock-time strategy and a prevention versus a promotion focus would both enhance individuals’
confidence that they performed better at solving the problems as well as help individuals actually
solve more problems correctly.
Experiment 3
Seventy-nine online participants reported their chronic regulatory focus using the
Regulatory Focus Questionnaire (RFQ; Higgins et al., 2001) before they solved eight GMAT
math problems. We manipulated the reliance on event-time versus clock-time by telling
participants that they would be rewarded on either the amount of questions completed correctly
(an event-time strategy) or the quantity of questions completed within 20 minutes (a clock-time
strategy). All participants were stopped after 20 minutes. We measured participants’ confidence
in their performance by averaging responses to how many questions they estimated they solved
Clock Time versus Event Time 10
correctly, and how confident they were that they did well (centered: -3.5=not at all; 3.5=very, r =
.89). We also tracked the number of correct answers to the problems. A negative (positive)
discrepancy between the prevention and the promotion RFQ scores suggested a prevention
(promotion) orientation (Appelt, Zou, Arora, & Higgins, 2009; Higgins, Roney, Crowe, &
Hymes, 1994).
Results showed a significant interaction between Regulatory focus (prevention vs.
promotion) and Task scheduling strategy (event-time vs. clock-time) on participants’ confidence
in their performance, F(1,75) = 10, p < .002, r2 = .11 (see Table 1). Prevention participants
reported higher confidence in their performance when using event-time rather than clock-time
(MEVENT = .6 vs. MCLOCK = -.5, F(1, 75) = 4.82, p < .04, r2 = .12), and the reverse occurred for
promotion participants (MEVENT = -.73 vs. MCLOCK = .19, F(1,75) = 5.19, p < .03, r2 = .12).
Focusing on participants’ actual performance, we also found a significant interaction between
Regulatory focus and Task scheduling strategy, F(1,75) = 10.83, p < .002, r2 = .12. Prevention
participants also actually provided more correct answers when using event-time rather than
clock-time (MEVENT = 4.14 vs. MCLOCK = 2.53; F(1, 75) = 8.06, p < .008, r2 = .13), while the reverse
occurred for promotion participants (MEVENT = 2.47 vs. MCLOCK = 3.48, F(1, 75)= 3.60, p < .06, r2
= .05).
Discussion
Our findings reveal that individuals schedule tasks in event- or clock-time as a method of
achieving a regulatory goal (effectiveness vs. efficiency) and enhancing performance. Our
participants felt confident and accurately anticipated that the scheduling of their activities using
event- or clock-time would enhance their task performance depending on their regulatory state.
This research makes three contributions to the literatures on time and self-regulation.
Clock Time versus Event Time 11
First, the distinction between event- and clock-time cannot be considered as a mere cultural
artifact. Even within a clock-time society, such as the United States for example, individuals’
maximal performance of a task will vary depending on their regulatory state. Our second
contribution is that we document how different regulatory foci – prevention versus promotion -
trigger a preference for event- versus clock-time respectively. This insight adds to the prior
research showing that goal pursuit does not occur in a temporal vacuum. Regulatory states
profoundly shape temporal aspects of goal pursuit, whether it is the timing of goal pursuit
(Freitas, Liberman, Salovey & Higgins, 2002), the interpretation of time elapsing during goal
pursuit (Sellier & Chattopadhyay, 2009), or the timing of the movement from one state to
another during goal pursuit (Avnet & Higgins, 2003). We find that regulatory states also cause us
to arrange our activities on the time continuum differently in order to get closer to desired end-
states.
Finally and importantly, our findings suggest that both event- and clock-time can lead to
superior performance. Hence, in contrast with what decades of economics research have been
advocating, clock-time may not always be the “one best way” to organize activities in modern
industrial societies.
Clock Time versus Event Time 12
References
Appelt, K., Zou, X., Arora, P., & Higgins, E. T. (2009). Regulatory fit in negotiation: Effects of
"prevention-buyer" and "promotion-seller" fit. Social Cognition, 27(3), 365-385.
Avnet, T., & Higgins, E.T. (2003). Locomotion, assessment, and regulatory fit: Value transfer
from "how" to "what". Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 525-530.
Crowe, E., & Higgins, E. T. (1997). Regulatory focus and strategic inclinations: Promotion and
prevention in decision-making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,
69(2), 117-132.
Freitas, A.L., & Higgins, E.T. (2002). Enjoying goal-directed action: The role of regulatory fit.
Psychological Science, 13, 1-6.
Freitas, A. L., Liberman, N., Salovey, P., & Higgins, E.T. (2002). When to begin? Regulatory
focus and initiating goal pursuit. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(1), 121-
130.
Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review,
94(July), 319-340.
Higgins, E. T. (1998). Promotion and prevention: Regulatory focus as a motivational principle.
Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 1-46.
Higgins, E. T., Roney, C. J. R., Crowe, E., & Hymes, C. (1994). Ideal versus ought predilections
for approach and avoidance: Distinct self-regulatory systems. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 66(2), 276-286.
Lauer, R. (1981). Temporal man: The meaning and uses of social time. New York: Praeger.
Levine, R. (1997). A geography of time: The temporal misadventures of a social psychologist, or
how every culture keeps time just a little bit differently. New York: Basic Books.
Clock Time versus Event Time 13
Liberman, N., Idson, L. C., Camacho, C. J., & Higgins, E. T. (1999). Promotion and prevention
choices between stability and change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
77(6), 1135-1145.
Macey, S. L. (1994). Encyclopedia of time. New York: Garland Publishing, Inc.
Newton, I. (1687). Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica. London.
Pham, M.T. & Avnet, T. (2004). Ideals and oughts and the weighting of affect versus substance
in persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(4), 503-518
Sellier, A.-L., & Chattopadhyay, A. (2009). Valuing time: Moderate download times can
improve goal pursuit. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(2), 236-245.
Taylor, F. W. (1911). The principles of scientific management: Harper & Brothers.
... In fact, the widespread establishing of clock-timing in western societies is considered both a requirement for and consequence of industrialization (Avnet & Sellier, 2011, Thompson, 1967. Although it is known that some hired labor as early as in the 14 th century has been paid and measured in time-units (Birth, 2012;Le Goff, 1982), most traditional work was Culture or Context: scheduling style and situational context. ...
... However, some literature concerning this topic suggests that living in an environment prone to one scheduling style means that individuals typically develop the according scheduling style as a relatively stable and to some degree dominant personal trait (Levine, 1997) while younger research has demonstrated that people switch between scheduling styles in reaction to demands in a situational context, emphasizing that scheduling style is not merely a cultural artifact (Avnet & Sellier, 2011;Sellier & Avnet, 2014). Since comparative cross-cultural-studies investigating scheduling styles are still missing it remains unclear whether this responsive flexibility of scheduling is just 'on top' of personal traits shaped by culture or whether scheduling styles are actually relatively equal across culturesat least under similar situational demands. ...
... The aim of this work was to take a closer look at the nature of scheduling styles by targeting the question whether the way of structuring things is mainly influenced by the culture people live in resulting in rather stable personality traits or is relatively flexible, rather depending on momentary contextual factors people experience in their daily life. Previous research has shown that people are able to adapt their scheduling styles to their situational needs in experimental studies (Avnet & Sellier, 2011). Following this work, we expected context rather than culture to be decisive: dependent work with fixed working hours as a prototypical environment offering little control over processes and a high need for synchronization was expected to be associated with clock-timing. ...
Article
Previous literature suggested that different countries and regions are associated with different temporal cultures resulting in according scheduling styles: people in anglo-european countries supposedly plan and structure their life predominantly according to the clock (clock time orientation) while people in some other parts of the world are more prone to live their lives in disregard of clock time but follow inner needs and/or the structure given by the events that happen in their lives (event time orientation). However, recent research shows that scheduling styles are also adaptive responses to situational demands and event and clock timing are associated with different experiences of control. Transferring these findings to a cross-cultural setting, we investigated whether situational context is the predominant factor explaining the application of different scheduling styles. To this end, we used a mixed-methods approach with semi-structured interviews exploring whether participants from Uganda and Germany (employees with fixed working hours) differ in the level to which they structure their narratives of daily routines of time associated with work primarily in reference to the clock while recounting free time predominantly in reference to events and/or inner needs. Our data, processed using qualitative content analysis, show this pattern for the participants from both countries. Overall interviewees from Germany do not refer to the clock more often than their Ugandan counterparts. This suggests that individuals’ scheduling styles reflect intersituational adaptations to a given demand for synchronization rather than being kind of a strong cultural imprint on individuals.
... Event timers rely on their volition to schedule their activities and use their internal sense of time to start and end their activities. These two scheduling styles can be held stably at the dispositional level (Avnet & Sellier, 2011). For instance, people's cultural norms affect their reliance on different scheduling styles. ...
... Adopting one scheduling style vs. the other also affects peoples' task motivation strategies, thereby impacting their behavior. Since event timers transition from one task to another when they feel internally assured that it is complete, they focus on the effectiveness of their task performance by performing it to the best of their abilities (Avnet & Sellier, 2011). Since clock timers transition from one task to another when they receive a signal from an external clock, they focus on the efficiency of their task performance by completing their tasks on time. ...
... D. Rai et al. & Sellier, 2011) Note: These items were used in Study 1 and 2. For Study 3 and 4, we develop scales that were adapted from these items. ...
Article
This research investigates the influence of scheduling styles on consumers' evaluation of time-limited promotions. We find that consumers who rely on an external clock to manage their activities (i.e., clock timers) evaluate a time-limited promotion negatively because they perceive the length of the time frame of the promotion to be insufficient to take advantage of the promotion. However, consumers who rely on an internal sense to manage their activities (i.e., event timers) evaluate a time-limited promotion positively because they perceive the length of the time frame of the promotion to be long enough to take advantage of the promotion. We also find that clock timers have a positive evaluation of the time-limited promotion when the promotion is advertised with an expansive frame (e.g., Anytime between 4 pm and 6 pm) rather than a restrictive frame (e.g., Only between 4 pm and 6 pm).
... Individuals also have their own temporal personality (e.g. when an individual will schedule his/her tasks). They will follow their own temporal personality while doing so (Avnet and Sellier, 2011). Although our perception of time is influenced by our culture, it is also formed by our own individual temporal personality. ...
Article
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify, classify and analyse temporality in information systems development (ISD) literature. Design/methodology/approach The authors address the temporality and ISD research gap by using a framework – which classifies time into three categories: conceptions of time, mapping activities to time and actors relating to time. The authors conduct a systematic literature review which investigates time in ISD within the Senior Scholars' Basket, Information Technology & People (IT&P), and top two information systems conferences over the past 20 years. The search strategy resulted in 9,850 studies of which 47 were identified as primary papers. Findings The results reveal that ISD research is ill equipped for contemporary thinking around time. This systematic literature review (SLR) contributes to ISD by finding the following gaps in the literature: (1) clock time is dominant and all other types of time are under-researched; (2) contributions to mapping activities to time is lacking and existing studies focus on single ISD projects rather multiple complex ISD projects; (3) research on actors relating to time is lacking; (4) existing ISD studies which contribute to temporal characteristics are fragmented and lack integration with other categories of time and (5) ISD methodology papers lack contributions to temporal characteristics and fail to acknowledge and contribute to time as a multifaceted interrelated concept. Originality/value This work has developed the first SLR on temporality in ISD. This study provides a starting point for ISD researchers and ISD practitioners to test commonly held temporal assumptions of ISD researchers and practitioners.
... That is, we locate the meeting from an event-time perspective. Whereas clocktime refers to seconds, minutes, hours, dates, etc. that are conventionally used to compartmentalize everyday life and organizational functioning, event-time refers to the ordering and sequencing of activities (including meetings) arising from their inherent relationships rather than their mere chronological sequencing according to clock-time (Avnet & Sellier, 2011). This means that although the meeting is located after the formal meeting, it can be delayed up to a few days-the important thing is that it serves the purpose of making sense of this specific formal meeting (see the section on "why does it take place?" for more on this purpose). ...
Article
Full-text available
This article offers initial theorizing on an understudied phenomenon in the workplace: the meeting after the meeting (MATM). As an informal and unscheduled event, the MATM takes place outside managerial control and has potentially far-reaching consequences. However, our current knowledge of the MATM relies primarily on practitioner observations, and conceptual work that integrates the MATM into the larger meeting science literature is missing. This article fills this gap by outlining key defining features of the MATM that can be used to structure future research. Moreover, and based on theorizing concerning the affect-generating nature of meetings, we develop an affect-based process model that focuses on the antecedents and boundary conditions of the MATM at the episodic level and shines light on meetings as a sequential phenomenon. Plain Language Summary This article sheds light on an understudied but rather common phenomenon in the workplace: The meeting after the meeting (MATM). Defined as an unscheduled, informal and confidential communication event, the MATM has the potential to create new structures in everyday organizational life. Yet, our current knowledge of this particular meeting type is very limited and largely based on anecdotal accounts by practitioners. To guide future research, this article first outlines key features of the MATM, focusing on when the MATM occurs, where it takes place, how it takes place, why it takes place, and who is involved in the MATM. Next, this article presents an affect-based process model of the MATM. To this end, antecedents and boundary conditions at the episodic level are outlined, highlighting that meetings should be seen as interconnected, sequential events.
... Similarly, Sellier and Avnet (2014) found that people who adopt event-time scheduling savor their emotions more than those who adopt clock-time. As another intriguing consideration, since event-time scheduling requires reflecting on internal states to decide on the transition from one activity to another (Avnet & Sellier, 2011), it might boost people's mindfulness, which can strengthen private self-focus (Cornil, 2017;Creswell, 2017;van de Veer et al., 2016). In addition, research on time perception suggests that individuals who attend events are more likely to use their personal feelings to estimate the duration of events (Tse et al., 2004), which also suggests a link between event-timing and attention to one's private self. ...
Article
Consumers often need to schedule different activities. While consumers who adopt a clock‐time scheduling style decide when to transition from one activity to the next according to external temporal cues (e.g., clock), those who adopt an event‐time scheduling style tend to perform each activity until they feel internally that it is completed. This research showed that consumers’ scheduling style (clock‐time vs. event‐time) could influence their satiation with repeated consumption. Four studies involving actual consumption across various domains (e.g., music, artwork, food) demonstrated that an event‐time scheduling style leads to more rapid satiation with repeated consumption than a clock‐time scheduling style because event‐timers (vs. clock‐timers) have higher private self‐focus. The results further revealed that the satiation effect of scheduling style is mitigated when consumers are distracted from their private self or informed of additional sensitization cues in the consumption stimuli.
... 25 "una incompatibilidad fundamental de dos conceptos del tiempo: (1) el tiempo del campo, de las pasiones humanas, y de la naturaleza, medido por los ciclos del sol y (2) el tiempo urbano, el del rey y la corte, medidos por relojes que deben sincronizarse con el reloj de palacio" (203). from one to another when there is an inner conviction of the conclusion of a given task (Avner and Sellier, 2011). Event-time is the model used in the Christian history of time, in which events differentiate the ages of the three laws (natural, written, and law of grace), and it is the events contained within, rather than the duration, that marks each period. ...
Article
Full-text available
Time processing is a fundamental subject in cognitive sciences and neuroscience. Current research is deepening how our brains process time, revealing its essential role in human functionality and survival. In his autos sacramentales , Early Modern Spanish playwright Pedro Calderón de la Barca portrays the relationships between human inner workings and the Christian concept of time. These plays portray the experience of the present, the perception of the flow of time, the measure of time raging from seconds to eternity, and the mental travel necessary to inhabit the past and future with the help of memory and imagination. Calderón explores how the dramatic form can portray all these temporal phenomena and how that portrait of time can constrain the dramatic structure. The different parts of the brain in charge of executive decisions, projections, memories, computation, and calibration are the basis that leads these characters to make the choices that will take them to the future they have cast for themselves. This paper analyzes how the processes that Calderón ascribed to the soul of his characters in the 17th century relate to ongoing cognitive and neuroscientific findings.
Article
Scheduling is essential for the pursuit of everyday goals. Individual differences in scheduling are known as scheduling styles. Two subtypes of scheduling styles, clock-time style (based on time) and event-time style (based on progress), have recently been focused on as being related to individual differences in self-control. This study developed the Japanese version of the Task Scheduling Questionnaire (TSQ) for assessing people’s trait-like scheduling styles. We conducted three studies to examine the relationship between scheduling styles and university students’ pursuit of academic goals. Studies 1 and 2 surveyed university and high school students. The results indicated that the Japanese version of the TSQ had good reliability and validity. Study 3, using the Japanese version of the TSQ, revealed that the event-time style was positively associated with academic engagement, learning behavior, and university students’ academic performance. In contrast, the clock-time style was not associated with academic indicators. We have discussed the limitations of this study and the relationship between clock-time style and everyday goal pursuit.
Article
The success of IS change implementation on the operational level is surrounded by challenges that mainly concern cross‐departmental management and people issues involved in the implementation process. Different organizational departments are entrained to different temporal structures that shape the temporal context of business and IT (B‐IT) communication. Through reflexive thematic analysis, and semi‐structured interviews with 32 business and IT professionals from 7 banking and 2 telecom corporations in North Macedonia, we identify the key time dimensions and temporal events affecting B‐IT communication. We propose a new construct, temporal B‐IT social alignment, and we define it as B‐IT‐SU (shared understanding) of cross‐departmental temporal structuring that enables and constrains the B‐IT communication in the process of translating business demands into IT requirements on the operational level. Findings show that establishing strong structural linkage through interface actors mitigates only some of the challenges in IS implementation resulting from different temporal aspects. Furthermore, we found that the identified time dimensions as well as entrainment to different temporal structures and events have a significant impact on achieving B‐IT‐SU and B‐IT‐SA (shared agreement). We advance the view of B‐IT social alignment, and we synthesize lessons that can be learned from this study that have practical implications.
Article
This article examines a forward-deployed US Army unit in Eastern Europe. Drawing from military sociology, the theoretical framework used to study this unit focused primarily on factors of boredom and the fragmentation model of organizational culture. The methodological approach was mixed, including interviews and participant and non-participant observations of the deployed soldiers and military civilians. The research explored unit members’ perceptions about unit leadership, quality of life, communication with loved ones, the mission, work roles, interactions with the local foreign military and civilians, and unit diversity. The findings contribute to a nuanced understanding of the relationship between military boredom and fragmentation. Overall, we found some ambiguity regarding some parts of soldiers’ lives—including an unclear understanding regarding the nature of the mission. The study also found low to moderate levels of boredom across five domains: underutilization, cultural deprivation, lack of privacy, isolation, and time and space reorientation. Although in most cases the level of boredom related to perceived ambiguity (less boredom usually meant less perceived ambiguity), in some cases an inverse relationship was identified. We conclude that future studies should determine whether our findings apply to newer forward-deployed contexts in Eastern Europe and elsewhere.
Chapter
This chapter focuses on clock time and its role in organizing social life and organizational life. Clock time, rooted in Newtonian physics, stands for temporal realism. From a temporal realist perspective, time is viewed as real, objective, and measurable, while temporality concerns such objective features of time as tempo, speed, duration, frequency, acceleration, timing, etc. In this chapter, I give a short overview of the emergence of global standardized clock time and its merits as a tool for organizing. I will continue with some of the less positive aspects of the relationship between clock time and the views of reality. I will discuss the importance of clock time in organizations emphasizing its role in coordinating, synchronizing, and entraining activities with different temporal cycles. I discuss some of the potential negative aspects of an unbalanced emphasis on clock time, such as speed, time compression or intensification, and chrono-centrism. Finally, I underline some limitations of clock time that may arise if applied in social life. Keywords: clock time, standardized time, temporal realism, chronological/chronometric time, entrainment, time pressure
Article
Full-text available
We propose that the psychological effects of performing the buyer versus the seller role in a negotiation depend on regulatory fit (Higgins, 2000) with the demands of the role. When the negotiation emphasizes price, buyers want to pay only what is necessary (minimize monetary loss), which fits prevention focus concerns, whereas sellers want to attain as much money as possible (maximize monetary gain), which fits promotion focus concerns. Study 1 used a hypothetical price negotiation and found that planned demand was greater in the focus-role fit conditions (prevention-buyer; promotion-seller) than in the nonfit conditions. In Study 2, a real price negotiation, buyers adopted a nonloss/loss frame whereas sellers adopted a gain/nongain frame. Negotiators in the focus-role fit conditions subjectively experienced fit, had more demanding opening offers, and, when paired with another negotiator in focus-role fit, impassed more often. Extensions and applications of focus-role fit are discussed.
Article
Full-text available
The authors propose that a prevention focus fosters preferences to initiate action earlier than does a promotion focus. Data from four studies either measuring or manipulating regulatory focus support this proposal. Participants in a prevention focus pre-ferred initiating academic (Studies 1 and 2) and nonacademic (Study 3) actions sooner than did participants in a promotion focus. Participants working through a set of anagrams solved those that were prevention framed before those that were promo-tion framed (Study 4). Moreover, regulatory focus and perceived task valence each accounted for unique variance in partici-
Article
Full-text available
Two situations involving choice between stability and change were examined: task substitution, which deals with choosing between resuming an interrupted activity and doing a substitute activity, and endowment, which deals with choosing between a possessed object and an alternative object. Regulatory focus theory (E. T. Higgins, 1997, 1998) predicts that a promotion focus will be associated with openness to change, whereas a prevention focus will be associated with a preference for stability. Five studies confirmed this prediction with both situational induction of and chronic personality differences in regulatory focus. In Studies 1 and 2, individuals in a prevention focus were more inclined than individuals in a promotion focus to resume an interrupted task rather than do a substitute task. In Studies 3–5 individuals in a prevention focus, but not individuals in a promotion focus, exhibited a reluctance to exchange currently possessed objects (i.e, endowment) or previously possessed objects. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Article
Regulatory fit is experienced when people pursue a goal in a manner that sustains their regulatory orientation. Previous research on promotion and prevention orientations has found that regulatory fit increases people’s perception that a decision they made was “right,” which in turn transfers value to the decision outcome, including being willing to pay more for a product than those who chose the same product without regulatory fit (Higgins, 2000; Higgins et al., in press). We predicted that the effect of regulatory fit on monetary value could be generalized to locomotion and assessment orientations. Participants were willing to pay over 40% more for the same book-light when it was chosen with a strategy that fit their regulatory orientation (assessment/“full evaluation”; locomotion/“progressive elimination”) than when it was chosen with a non-fit strategy.
Article
If your present desk dictionary is a dog-eared, coffee-stained relic that doesn't have entries for hard copy, reggae, or Watergate and thinks a mouse is a small rodent and nothing more, you're due for an update and an upgrade. Anyone who purchases an English dictionary in this last decade of the 20th century expects it to supply definitions not only for standard, formal English words but also for colloquialisms, slang expressions, contemporary catch phrases, and technical terms, along with authoritative data on word origins, hints as to usage and points of grammar, and basic information about noteworthy persons and places. All of this and more comes packaged in an attractive and convenient format in the third edition of The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language.The range of material defined or explained is truly encyclopedic. Alphabetic entries in the body of the dictionary identify hundreds of persons, from Mata
Article
The hedonic principle that people approach pleasure and avoid pain has been the basic motivational principle throughout the history of psychology. This principle underlies motivational models across all levels of analysis in psychology from the biological to social. However, it is noted that the hedonic principle is very basic and is limited as an explanatory variable. Almost any area of motivation can be discussed in terms of the hedonic principle. This chapter describes two different ways in which the hedonic principle operates—namely, one with a promotion focus and other with a prevention focus. These different ways of regulating pleasure and pain, called “regulatory focus,” have a major impact on people's feelings, thoughts, and actions that is independent of the hedonic principle per se. The chapter also presents some background information about another regulatory variable, called the “regulatory reference.” A self-regulatory system with a positive reference value essentially has a desired end state as the reference point.
Article
This research examines how the length of time for which a goal is interrupted affects goal pursuit, in an online context. Goal interruption duration in the form of long download time duration has been identified as a significant impediment to electronic commerce. It is believed that a faster download time is always better to motivate web users to keep surfing. We challenge this belief. In three studies, we find that, under certain circumstances, longer rather than shorter download times motivate web users to keep surfing longer. The counterintuitive pattern of effects can be explained by web users' fit experiences (Higgins, 2000) while surfing. In particular, our findings suggest that when online surfing “feels right”, web users think that online information is right.