Access to this full-text is provided by Frontiers.
Content available from Frontiers in Psychology
This content is subject to copyright.
ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE
published: 08 July 2014
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00722
Why are people with high self-control happier? The effect
of trait self-control on happiness as mediated by regulatory
focus
Tracy T. L. Cheung*, Marleen Gillebaart, Floor Kroese and Denise De Ridder
Self-Regulation Lab, Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
Edited by:
Franz J. Neyer,
Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena,
Germany
Reviewed by:
John F. Rauthmann,
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin,
Germany
Michael Dufner, University of Leipzig,
Germany
*Correspondence:
Tracy T. L. Cheung, Self-Regulation
Lab, Department of Clinical and
Health Psychology, Utrecht University,
PO BOX 80.140, 3508TC Utrecht,
Netherlands
e-mail: t.t.l.cheung@uu.nl
Background: While self-control has often been related to positive outcomes in life such as
higher academic achievements and better health, recent insights reveal that people with
high trait self-control (TSC) may even experience greater life satisfaction or happiness.
Objective: The current study further scrutinizes this potential association between TSC
and happiness, and examines how regulatory focus, defined as the way people frame and
direct their goal pursuit strategies, plays a role in this relationship. Accordingly, the present
study examines the mediating role of regulatory-focus (promotion and prevention focus)
on the relationship between TSC and happiness.
Method: Data was collected from 545 individuals (65.9% female, Mage =27.52 years)
regarding their TSC, regulatory focus, and happiness.
Results: Mediation analyses demonstrate that TSC positively predicts happiness, while
this effect was partially mediated by relatively more promotion focus and less prevention
focus.
Conclusion: Results suggest that people with higher TSC are happier possibly because
they are: (1) more promotion-focused on acquiring positive gains thereby facilitating more
approach-oriented behaviors, and (2) less prevention-focused on avoiding losses thereby
reducing avoidance-oriented behaviors. These findings are relevant for topical scientific
debates regarding the underlying mechanisms of self-control regarding initiatory and
inhibitory behaviors.
Keywords: trait self-control, regulatory focus, promotion, prevention, happiness
INTRODUCTION
Self-control is defined as the capacity to alter and regulate pre-
dominant response tendencies resulting in the inhibition of
undesirable behaviors while promoting desirable ones to sup-
port the pursuit of long-term goals (de Ridder et al., 2012). On
a dispositional level, trait self-control (TSC) is a basic temper-
ament forming the core of personality as it develops (Rothbart
et al., 2000), and research has also consistently shown higher
TSC to be associated with more positive outcomes in life such
as higher academic achievement, better health, more interper-
sonal success, and less maladaptive adjustments (Tang ney et al.,
2004). As such, self-control has been heralded as an evolutionary
trait to ensure adaptation and survival (Baumeister et al., 2007).
Nonetheless, while substantial research has shown the long-term
beneficial effects of TSC on various domains of life, much less
is known about its relation to happiness. As a central tenet of
self-control involves the trade-off between relishing immediate
gratifications and achieving long-term goals, it is interesting to
know where happiness stands in this transaction – how does
TSC affect happiness and why? The present research examines
the relationship of TSC and happiness and introduces different
ways of framing goal pursuit (regulatory focus, Higgins, 1997)
as a potential mediator in this relationship. With this research
we aim to contribute to the currently limited understanding
of the relationship between TSC, goal pursuit framing, and
happiness.
Although it is apparent that people with higher TSC are more
successful in life, are they also happier? One could imagine that
constantly self-regulating according to morals, standards, and
social expectations would result in living a dull, mundane, and
joyless life. Lending support to this speculation, emotion regula-
tion research has shown that indeed individuals with high TSC
experience less momentary affect, inhibited expression of spon-
taneity and extraversion (Zabelina et al., 2007), as well as limited
emotional intensity on a day-to-day basis (Layton and Muraven,
2014). Accordingly, these findings would speculate that having a
high disposition of TSC might hold people back from experiencing
happiness to the fullest in life.
However, Hofmann et al. (2013) have recently ruled out this
speculation by revealing that individuals with higher TSC are not
only happier in that they experience greater life satisfaction, they
also do not need to self-regulate as often as one may think. Indeed,
while having to forego an immediate pleasure for a distant, long-
term goal may not be a pleasant emotional experience, findings
indicate that people high in TSC generally experience problem-
atic desires on fewer instances, and are therefore less prone to
www.frontiersin.org July 2014 |Volume 5 |Article 722 |1
Cheung et al. Why are people with high self-control happier?
the emotional distress engendered by such self-control trade-offs.
Furthermore, the authors have shown that although people with
high TSC are not immune to motivational conflicts, they are
much more successful in managing competing goals by favor-
ing the one with the more virtuous outcome. Together, these
results suggest that having a high disposition of TSC enables
individuals to experience less problematic desires, and manage
goal pursuit better in favor of the more virtuous goal, which in
turn results in more happiness in life. Nonetheless as this study
remains to be the first and only study to date to provide direct
evidence that TSC positively influences happiness, more research
is warranted.
Accordingly, the current study aims to extend the research
regarding the relationship between TSC and happiness by ques-
tioning how TSC is related to goal framing. Given that TSC is
a basic temperament forming the basis of personality (Rothbart
et al., 2000) and that it is the initial capacity that enables indi-
viduals in long-term goal pursuit, there is reason to speculate
that TSC correspondingly affects the way people frame their goals
and goal pursuit strategies. In this line of reasoning, the present
study explores regulatory focus, which is the orientation of goals
in terms of a promotion or prevention focus, in relation to TSC
and happiness.
REGULATORY FOCUS AND SELF-CONTROL
According to Higgins’ (1997) regulatory focus theory, people have
two motivational orientations that direct their goal pursuit behav-
iors: promotion and prevention. A promotion focus is concerned
with growth, advancement, and accomplishment. Accordingly,
goals are framed as gains and non-gains, and approach goal pur-
suit strategies that strive toward positive outcomes are favored.
Moreover, promotion focus encourages the reduction of errors of
omission (i.e., missing out on an opportunity to accomplish some-
thing; Crowe and Higgins, 1997). Meanwhile, a prevention focus is
preoccupation with vigilance, responsibilities, and oughts. Goals
are therefore framed in respect to losses and non-losses, and avoid-
ance goal pursuit strategies that deter from errors of commission
(i.e., making mistakes) are preferred.
Regulatory focus also plays an important role in the man-
ner that people experience and resolve a motivational conflict
(Scholer and Higgins, 2010). For example, a dieter’s goal to lose
weight could be represented as an ideal or aspiration in a greater
promotion-focus, whereas it could be considered as a duty or obli-
gation in a greater prevention-focus. When exposed to a tempting
chocolate cake, greater promotion-focus may lead a dieter to
endorse approach strategies to advance to the goal – “I want to
be physically fit” or “My goal is to eat healthily,” whereas greater
prevention-focus may encourage strategies to resist the tempta-
tion by avoiding it – “I ought to stay away from this chocolate
cake” or “I should not eat sweets.”As such, successful goal pursuit
for a greater promotion focused individual may be about follow-
ing one’s dreams and aspirations, whereas for a greater prevention
focused individual this may be about living up to one’s duties and
obligations with minimal mistakes.
Recent research by Lisjak and Lee (2014) suggests that regu-
latory focus may be influenced by one’s self-control levels. The
authors have found that when individuals were induced to a state
of low self-control, they exhibited enhanced motivation for pro-
tection. In explaining such finding, the authors posited that the
experience of low self-control heightened perceived vulnerability,
and consequently increased individuals’ motivation for protec-
tion and vigilance characterized by a prevention-focus orientation.
In a similar vein, we also speculate TSC to be associated with
promotion and prevention focus, respectively, in which individ-
uals correspond the orientation of their regulatory focus to be
compatible with their TSC levels.
CURRENT STUDY
In the present study we propose that TSC initiates regulatory
focus that frames the actual goal pursuit strategies (i.e., promo-
tion focus with approach-oriented strategies or prevention focus
with avoidance-oriented strategies), which then relates to happi-
ness. Considering that TSC is a basic temperament that forms the
foundation of personality (Rothbart et al., 2000) and the effects
of experimentally manipulated self-control on regulatory focus
(Lisjak and Lee, 2014), we conceptualize TSC as an antecedent
to regulatory focus. Correspondingly, our view is that TSC is the
initial capacity for long-term goal pursuit, and regulatory focus
is the corresponding strategy for actualizing the goal pursuit. As
such, our reasoning aligns with Lyubomirsky et al.’s (2005)model
of happiness, which proposes that people can enhance their hap-
piness through intentional strategies, such as pursuing personally
concordant goals, but only under the assumption that they have the
prerequisite self-control capacity to first initiate these strategies.
Accordingly, we hypothesize that TSC positively relates to hap-
piness with its effect mediated (at least partially) by regulatory
focus. Although no previous research has specifically explored
the mediating role of regulatory focus on the effect of TSC on
happiness, some speculations are made about the nature of these
relationships. As promotion focus is associated with aspirations,
it could be argued that having more TSC that favors long-term
goals would initiate approach-oriented behaviors toward the goal;
hence, a positive relation between TSC and promotion focus
could be assumed. Subsequently, greater promotion focus should
increase the likelihood of actualizing the goals of aspirations and
ideals, and the result of achieving these positive gains would
increase happiness. Therefore, it is predicted that higher TSC is
positively related to promotion focus,and in tur n promotion focus
positively predicts happiness.
As for prevention focus, however, the predictions are less obvi-
ous as, conceptually, both positive and negative associations with
TSC may be plausible. On the one hand, as prevention focus
endorses a mindset of vigilance and is considered typical for TSC,
a positive association between TSC, and prevention focus could be
assumed. On the other hand, the recent findings by Hofmann et al.
(2013) have suggested that people high in TSC are less occupied
with staying away from temptations, thereby implying a negative
relation between TSC and prevention focus. Furthermore, preven-
tion focus could be assumed to be a negative predictorof happiness
because avoidance-oriented behavior away from vices may cause
one to forego many momentary pleasures for the sake of achieving
higher order long-term goals. However, it is also equally arguable
that prevention focus is assumed to be a positive predictor of hap-
piness because one could ultimately take joy and satisfaction from
Frontiers in Psychology |Personality and Social Psychology July 2014 |Volume 5 |Article 722 |2
Cheung et al. Why are people with high self-control happier?
the valued long-goal achievement despite having to give up on the
short-term gratifications during the goal pursuit.
In summary, we expect the effect of TSC on happiness to be
mediated by regulatory focus, but while we expect TSC to be
positively associated with promotion focus, we do not draw any
specific hypothesis for the direction in which prevention focus
mediates the relationship between TSC and happiness. By explor-
ing the mediating role of regulatory focus on the effect of TSC
on happiness, the present study aims to contribute to the current
limited literature on TSC and happiness, as well as to add to the
understanding of the underlying mechanisms of self-control by
exploring its relation to regulatory-focus.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
PARTICIPANTS AND PROCEDURE
The sample consisting of 546 participants were Internet users from
Germany who participated in a larger study that assessed person-
ality dimensions (see Denissen and Penke, 2008). The mean age of
the participants was 27.52 (SD =11.01), and females made up of
65.9% of the sample. Moreover,4.5% of the sample did not receive
any formal education, 50.2% were educated up to high-school
level, and 45.2% were enrolled in or had completed a university
degree. Participants completed measures on TSC, regulatory focus
including both promotion focus and prevention focus, and also
happiness. Accounting for missing data, the final sample consisted
of 523 participants.
MEASURES
Trait self-control
Finkenauer et al.’s (2005) short version of the Self-control Scale
was administered to measure TSC. Participants indicated the
degree to which they agreed (1 =entirely false,5=entirely true)
with 11 statements such as “I am good at resisting temptations”
and “I am lazy” (reverse coded). A final TSC score was calculated
by averaging the scores from all items, where a higher score indi-
cated higher TSC. A Cronbach’s alpha (α) of 0.80 reported good
internal consistency for the 11-item short version of Self-control
Scale in the current study.
Regulatory focus
Regulatory focus was assessed with the Regulatory Focus Ques-
tionnaire (Lockwood et al., 2002), which consistedof two subscales
to measure both promotion and prevention focus. Participants
indicated their response to 18-items on a 9-point scale with
end points 1 (not at all true of me)and9(very true of me).
Sample items include “I frequently imagine how I will achieve
my hopes and aspirations” and “I frequently think about how I
will prevent failures in my life.” Separate measures of promo-
tion focus and prevention focus were created by averaging the
scores belonging to each subscale, and a higher score reflected
greater focus strength. Both subscales demonstrated good inter-
nal consistency (promotion focus: α=0.78; prevention focus:
α=0.82) of the Regulatory Focus Questionnaire in the current
study.
Happiness
The Subjective Happiness Scale (Lyubomirsky and Lepper, 1999)
was employed where participants indicated the degree to which
they agreed to each of the four statements. For example, on a five-
point scale participants rated how “In general, I consider myself”
(1 =not a very happy person;5=a very happy person), and
“Some people are generally not very happy. Although they are
not depressed, they never seem as happy as they might be. To what
extent does this characterization describe you?” (1 =notatall;
5=very much; reverse coded). A final happiness score was calcu-
lated by averaging all the scores from all individual items, where
a higher score represented greater happiness. Cronbach’s alpha
(α=0.87) indicated good internal consistency for the Subjective
Happiness Scale in the current study.
RESULTS
DESCRIPTIVES
Overall participants exhibited moderate levels of TSC (M=2.96,
SD =0.65). On average, participants reported relatively greater
promotion focus (M=3.56, SD =0.67) compared to preven-
tion focus (M=2.84, SD =0.79), t(524) =16.45, p<0.001.
Finally, participants also indicated relatively high levels of hap-
piness (M=4.47, SD =1.49). All intercorrelations of the study
variables are presented in Tabl e 1.
MAIN ANALYSES
A mediation model was built to test whether the effect of TSC
on happiness was mediated by regulatory focus. A series of
regression equations relating TSC (the independent variable), pro-
motion focus and prevention focus (the potential mediators), and
happiness (the dependent variable) were performed using boot-
strapping analyses (based on 5,000 bootstrap samples) in the
SPSS macro (PROCESS; model 4) recommended by Hayes (2013).
Additionally, as age was significantly correlated with happiness
[r(523) =0.19, p<0.001)], it was included as a covariate in the
mediation analyses. The results of the analyses are depicted in
Figure 1.
Results were in line with our prediction that TSC was positively
associated with promotion focus [β=0.23, 95% CI (0.14, 0.32)].
Moreover, results also revealed that TSC was negatively associ-
ated with prevention focus [β=−0.45, 95% CI (−0.52, −0.37)].
Furthermore, while greater promotion focus predicted more hap-
piness [β=0.29, 95% CI (0.22, 0.36)], less prevention focus
predicted more happiness [β=−0.40, 95% CI (−0.47, −0.32)].
TSC had an indirect effect on happiness through promotion focus
[β=0.07, 95% CI (0.04, 0.10)] and prevention focus [β=0.18,
95% CI (0.23, 0.23)] respectively. Accordingly, the combined
Table 1 |Intercorrelations between study variables.
12345
Age (1) – – – – –
TSC (2) 0.22** – – – –
Promotion focus (3) –0.05 0.21** – – –
Prevention focus (4) –0.24** –0.48** 0.06 – –
Happiness (5) 0.19** 0.50** 0.31** –0.51** –
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
www.frontiersin.org July 2014 |Volume 5 |Article 722 |3
Cheung et al. Why are people with high self-control happier?
FIGURE 1 |Results of mediation analyses testing promotion focus and
prevention focus as mediators of the effect of TSC on happiness while
controlling for age as a covariate. Double asterisks (**) indicate
coefficients are significantly different from zero, p>0.001. When the
mediators are included, the coefficient changes from β=0.47 to β=0.23,
indicating partial mediation.
indirect effect that TSC had on happiness through promotion
and prevention focus as mediators was β=0.24, 95% CI (0.19,
0.30). Finally, the direct effect of TSC on happiness remained
significant [β=0.23, 95% CI (0.15, 0.31)], therefore indicating
partial mediation by promotion and prevention focus.
DISCUSSION
In our daily lives, we encounter different obstacles in the form of
temptations that promise immediate gratifications and momen-
tary pleasures that may impede our long-term goal pursuit. Recent
findings by Hofmann et al. (2013) have revealed that while people
with high TSC encounter these motivational conflicts less, they
are also better at managing competing goals by favoring the one
with the more virtuous outcome, which in turn leads to greater life
satisfaction. Extending these findings, our present study provides
results suggesting that individuals with high TSC orient their goal
pursuit strategies tactfully according to promotion and prevention
regulatory focus, which is then related to happiness. Our results
revealed two distinct patterns of mediation through a promotion
focus and a prevention focus. On one hand, TSC positively relates
to promotion focus, and greater promotion focus is associated
with more happiness. On the other hand, TSC negatively relates
to prevention focus, and less prevention focus is associated with
more happiness.
Our findings complement previous research positing that
individuals with high TSC experience problematic desires and
temptations infrequently as they strategically structure their lives
to steer clear away from these vices (de Ridder etal., 2012;Hof-
mann et al., 2012). If individuals with high TSC are less likely
to encounter motivational conflicts, they are therefore also less
obligated to exert avoidance-oriented strategies associated with a
prevention focus to resist or counter temptations or vices. Instead,
they are more liberated to pursue their goals, aspirations and ide-
als by carrying out approach-oriented strategies to actualize their
personal ambitions as encouraged by a promotion focus. On the
other hand, although it could be plausible that prevention oriented
avoidance behaviors away from vices and giving up on hedonic
pleasures during the goal pursuit may not be affectively pleasant,
occasional execution of these avoidance behaviors are nonethe-
less essential to provide meaning and support for an individual
in their goal pursuit of long-term goals. While it is known that
success in goal pursuit brings positive affect (Oatley and Johnson-
Laird, 1987), it is not difficult to imagine why people with high
TSC are happier – they have greater dispositional capacity and
more opportunities to facilitate goal achievement.
Furthermore, our findings also offer insight into the under-
lying mechanisms of TSC in resolving motivational conflicts.
Traditionally self-control has been conceptualized as the capacity
to withstand immediate gratifications and momentary pleasures,
where emphasis was placed on the inhibition of response tenden-
cies (e.g., Baumeister et al., 1998;Tangney et al., 2004). As such,
self-control has been described as “an avoidance-oriented situa-
tion” (Muraven, 2008, p. 769). Interestingly, our results showing
TSC to be negatively related to prevention focus and positively
related to promotion focus suggests that TSC is not preoccupied
with vigilance characterized by a prevention focus (as posited
by the traditional conceptualization of TSC), but that TSC also
highly involves eagerness that is facilitated by a promotion focus.
In light of this, our findings lend support to the contemporary
perspective that acknowledges both inhibitory and initiatory com-
ponents of self-control (de Boer et al., 2011;de Ridder et al.,
2011). According to this perspective, goal achievement can be
accomplished in two ways. On one hand, TSC directs inhibitory
behaviors to resist temptations or undesirable behaviors that hin-
der the long-term goal (e.g., restraining from excessive alcohol
consumption). On the other,TSC invests toward initiatory behav-
iors that make advances to the long-term goal (e.g., initiating
more physical exercise). Considering this, our finding that higher
TSC is associated with greater promotion focus and relatively less
prevention focus helps to characterize the discernment between
initiatory and inhibitory self-control behaviors as described above.
While more promotion oriented approach behaviors resembling
initiatory self-control are associated with greater happiness, the
reverse pattern is apparent for prevention-oriented behaviors that
resemble inhibitory self-control. After all, refraining oneself from
giving into desires is not the same as striving toward valued
Frontiers in Psychology |Personality and Social Psychology July 2014 |Volume 5 |Article 722 |4
Cheung et al. Why are people with high self-control happier?
goals, as one may argue that happiness derives from actual goal
achievements.
The study of TSC in relation to happiness is a relatively new
topic, and our study is the first to our knowledge to examine the
mediating role of regulatory-focus on the effect of TSC on happi-
ness. By employing the Subjective Happiness Scale (Lyubomirsky
and Lepper, 1999) to measure happiness directly, our study pro-
vides additional support for Hofmann et al. (2013) initial finding
that TSC is related to life satisfaction. As such, our present research
contributes to the current limited literature on the relationship
between TSC and happiness by demonstrating the role of TSC
and regulatory focus in relation to happiness. Moreover, as the
substantial size of the sample captured a wide diversity in the pop-
ulation, there is confidence that our results are generalizable to the
greater public.
Nonetheless, limitations to the study should be addressed. First,
the collected responses were based on self-report measures, and
hence there may be a possibility that social desirability could have
biased the responses regarding self-control, regulatory focus and
happiness (Van de Mortel, 2008). It could be possible that par-
ticipants over report their levels of TSC and happiness as these
are considered to be desirable constructs. Similarly, considering
that promotion focus is associated with positive affectivity and
that prevention focus is associated with negative affectivity (Sum-
merville and Roese, 2008), this may have biased participants to
ascribe higher levels of promotion focus and lower levels of pre-
vention focus to themselves. As a result, such response bias could
have potentially contributed to our pattern of findings and we
address this as a limitation of the self-report measures used in the
current study.
Second, as our data was cross-sectional and correlational
in nature, this precludes drawing causal statements about the
observed relationships between TSC, regulatory focus and hap-
piness. Consequently, our data could not rule out the possibility
that on the statistical level regulatory focus is the antecedent before
TSC, rather than a mediator, in predicting happiness. However,
on a theoretical level, TSC in the current study is conceptu-
alized as the initial capacity to alter and regulate predominant
response tendencies in order to achieve long-term goals, while
regulatory focus is considered as the corresponding strategy to
actualize the goal pursuit. We also consider TSC as antecedent
before regulatory focus, as TSC has been argued to be a basic
temperament that forms the foundation of developing personal-
ity (Rothbart et al., 2000). Moreover, we also take into account the
recent study by Lisjak and Lee (2014) which has found partici-
pants to adopt a heightened sense of self-protection motivation
subsequent to having their self-control levels to be reduced. The
authors explained their findings by positing that having low self-
control enhances perceived vulnerability, which in turn activates
a prevention-focus orientation associated with vigilance. Relating
back to our research, it could be possible that individuals have
to adapt their regulatory focus or goal-orientation in order to
match their TSC or their capacity for goal pursuit, and the asso-
ciation between the two thereby relates to happiness. While the
findings of Lisjak and Lee’s (2014) study provide indirect evidence
for our theoretical outlook, we nonetheless recommend future
investigations to adopt a more rigorous experimental design to
include both state and trait levels of self-control in a longitu-
dinal design, in conjunction with regulatory-focus in affecting
happiness.
We also welcome future studies to assess other constructs
in conjunction with TSC in relation to happiness. For exam-
ple, Conscientiousness as a Big Five personality trait (Costa
and McCrae, 1992) has been demonstrated to predict subjec-
tive well-being and life-satisfaction (e.g., Keyes et al., 2002;Hayes
and Joseph, 2003;Weiss et al., 2008). In explaining the impor-
tance of Conscientiousness for happiness, it has been suggested
that individuals high on conscientiousness are more likely to
behave effectively in achieving their goals (e.g., planning ahead,
fulfilling commitments), and that goal achievement ultimately
results in more subjective well-being (Hayes and Joseph, 2003).
Given the close relationship between TSC and Conscientiousness
(Tangney et al., 2004), and how both these constructs posi-
tively relate to goal pursuit, it would be interesting to explore
how Conscientiousness predicts happiness in conjunction with
TSC.
CONCLUSION
Self-control has been linked to successes in different walks of life,
and it appears that with greater self-control one could focus more
on aspirations and less on warding off hindrances along the way.
That said, although the pursuit of happiness may not be easy, it
appears to be nonetheless in our control.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
We thank Jaap Denissen from Tilburg University for providing us
with the opportunity to collect data as part of their larger study
on personality assessment.
REFERENCES
Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Muraven, M., and Tice, D. M. (1998). Ego deple-
tion: is the active self a limited resource? J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 74, 1252–1265. doi:
10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1252
Baumeister, R. F., Vohs, K. D., and Tice, D. M. (2007). The strength model
of self-control. Curr.Dir.Psychol.Sci.16, 351–355. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-
8721.2007.00534.x
Costa, P. T. Jr., and McCrae, R. R. (1992). Four ways five factors are basic. Pers.
Individ. Dif. 13, 653–665. doi: 10.1016/0191-8869(92)90236-I
Crowe,E., and Higgins, E. T. (1997). Regulatory focus and strategic inclinations: pro-
motion and prevention in decision-making. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process.
69, 117–132. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1996.2675
de Boer, B. J., van Hooft, E. A., and Bakker, A. B. (2011). Stop and start control: a
distinction within self-control. Eur. J. Pers. 25, 349–362. doi: 10.1002/per.796
de Ridder, D. T., de Boer, B. J., Lugtig, P., Bakker, A. B., and van Hooft, E. A. (2011).
Not doing bad things is not equivalent to doing the right thing: distinguishing
between inhibitory and initiatory self-control. Pers. Individ. Dif. 50, 1006–1011.
doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2011.01.015
de Ridder, D. T., Lensvelt-Mulders, G., Finkenauer, C., Stok, F. M., and Baumeister,
R. F. (2012). Taking stock of self-control A meta-analysis of how trait self-control
relates to a wide range of behaviors. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 16, 76–99. doi:
10.1177/1088868311418749
Denissen, J. J.,and Penke, L. (2008). Motivational individual reaction norms under-
lying the Five-Factor model of personality: first steps towards a theory-based
conceptual framework. J. Res. Pers. 42, 1285–1302. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2008.04.002
Finkenauer,C., Engels, R. C. M. E., and Baumeister, R. F.(2005). Parenting behaviour
and adolescent behavioural and emotional problems: the role of self-control. Int.
J. Behav. Dev. 29, 58–69. doi: 10.1080/01650250444000333
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to Mediation. A Regression-Based Approach. New
York: Guilford Publications.
www.frontiersin.org July 2014 |Volume 5 |Article 722 |5
Cheung et al. Why are people with high self-control happier?
Hayes, N., and Joseph, S. (2003). Big 5 correlates of three measures of subjec-
tive well-being. Pers. Individ. Dif. 34, 723–727. doi: 10.1016/S0191-8869(02)
00057-0
Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. Am. Psychol. 52, 1280–1300. doi:
10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280
Hofmann, W., Baumeister, R. F., Förster, G., and Vohs, K. D. (2012). Everyday
temptations: an experience sampling study of desire, conflict, and self-control. J.
Pers. Soc. Psychol. 102, 1318. doi: 10.1037/a0026545
Hofmann, W., Luhmann, M., Fisher, R. R., Vohs, K. D., and Baumeister, R. F.
(2013). Yes, but are they happy? Effects of trait self-control on affective well-
being and life satisfaction. J. Pers. doi: 10.1111/jopy.12050 [Epub ahead of
print].
Keyes, C. L., Shmotkin, D., and Ryff, C. D. (2002). Optimizing well-being: the
empirical encounter of two traditions. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 82, 1007–1022. doi:
10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.1007
Layton, R. L., and Muraven, M. (2014). Self-control linked with restricted emotional
extremes. Pers. Individ. Dif. 58, 48–53. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2013.10.004
Lockwood, P., Jordan, C. H., and Kunda, Z. (2002). Motivation by positive or
negative role models: regulatory focus determines who will best inspire us. J. Pers.
Soc. Psychol. 83, 854–864. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.83.4.854
Lisjak, M., and Lee, A. Y. (2014). The bright side of impulse: depletion heightens
self-protective behavior in the face of danger. J. Consum. Res. 41, 55–70. doi:
10.1086/674975
Lyubomirsky, S., and Lepper, H. S. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness:
preliminary reliability and construct validation. Soc. Indic. Res. 46, 137–155. doi:
10.1023/A:1006824100041
Lyubomirsky, S., Sheldon, K. M., and Schkade, D. (2005). Pursuing happiness:
the architecture of sustainable change. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 9, 111–131. doi:
10.1037/1089-2680.9.2.111
Muraven, M. (2008). Autonomous self-control is less depleting. J. Res. Pers. 42,
763–770. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2007.08.002
Oatley, K.,and Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1987). Towards a cognitive theory of emotions.
Cogn. Emot. 1, 29–50. doi: 10.1080/02699938708408362
Rothbart, M. K., Ahadi, S. A.,and Evans, D. E. (2000). Temperamentand personality :
origins and outcomes. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 78, 122–135. doi: 10.1037/0022-
3514.78.1.122
Scholer, A. A., and Higgins, E. T. (2010). “Promotion and prevention systems:
regulatory focus dynamics within self-regulatory hierarchies,” in Handbook of
Self-Regulation, 2nd Edn, eds R. F. Baumeister and K. D. Vohs (New York, NY:
Guilford Press), 143–161.
Summerville, A., and Roese, N. J. (2008). Self-report measures of individual dif-
ferences in regulatory focus: a cautionary note. J. Res. Pers. 42, 247–254. doi:
10.1016/j.jrp.2007.05.005
Tangney, J. P., Baumeister, R. F., and Boone, A. L. (2004). High self-control predicts
good adjustment, less pathology, better grades, and interpersonal success. J. Pers.
72, 271–324. doi: 10.1111/j.0022-3506.2004.00263.x
Van de Mortel, T. F. (2008). Faking it: social desirability response bias in self-report
research. Aust. J. Adv. Nurs. 25, 40–48.
Weiss, A., Bates, T. C., and Luciano, M. (2008). Happiness is a personal(ity) thing
the genetics of personality and well-being in a representative sample. Psychol. Sci.
19, 205–210. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02068.x
Zabelina, D. L., Robinson, M. D., and Anicha, C. L. (2007). The psychological
tradeoffs of self-control: a multi-method investigation. Pers. Individ. Dif. 43,
463–473. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2006.12.015
Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare that the research was conducted
in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed
as a potential conflict of interest.
Received: 24 April 2014; accepted: 23 June 2014; published online: 08 July 2014.
Citation: Cheung TTL, Gillebaart M, Kroese F and De Ridder D (2014)Why are people
with high self-control happier? The effect of trait self-control on happiness as mediated
by regulatory focus. Front. Psychol. 5:722. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00722
This article was submitted to Personality and Social Psychology, a section of the journal
Frontiers in Psychology.
Copyright © 2014 Cheung, Gillebaart, Kroese and De Ridder. This is an open-
access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permit-
ted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original
publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice.
No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these
terms.
Frontiers in Psychology |Personality and Social Psychology July 2014 |Volume 5 |Article 722 |6
Content uploaded by Denise de Ridder
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Denise de Ridder on Sep 05, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
Available via license: CC BY 3.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Tracy T L Cheung
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Tracy T L Cheung on Jan 23, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
