See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/361633197

Motivation and well-being across the lifespan: A cross-sectional examination

Article in The Journal of Positive Psychology · June 2022

DOI: 10.1080/17439760.2022.2093787

CITATIONS READS
0 98

4 authors:

James F M Cornwell Emily Nakkawita

United States Military Academy West Point Columbia University
41 PUBLICATIONS 648 CITATIONS 8 PUBLICATIONS 31 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Becca Franks E. Tory Higgins

New York University Columbia University
71 PUBLICATIONS 1,454 CITATIONS 482 PUBLICATIONS 61,392 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Regulatory fit in persuasion View project

Social Psychology Gender Stereotypes View project

All content following this page was uploaded by James F M Cornwell on 10 August 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Running head: MOTIVES ACROSS THE LIFESPAN

Motivation and well-being across the lifespan

James F. M. Cornwell,a Emily Nakkawita,b Becca Franks,c & E. Tory Higgins b

a
United States Military Academy, Department of Behavioral Sciences and Leadership, 281
Thayer Hall, West Point, NY 10996
b
Columbia University, Department of Psychology, 406 Schermerhorn Hall, 1190 Amsterdam
Ave. MC 5501, New York, NY 10027
c
New York University, Department of Environmental Studies, 285 Mercer Street, 10th Fl., New
York, NY 10003

Cornwell: james.cornwell@westpoint.edu; Nakkawita: ebn2111@columbia.edu; Franks:

beccafranks@gmail.com; Higgins: eth1@psych.columbia.edu

Corresponding author: James F.M. Cornwell

Phone: (845) 938-3971/(716) 868-9830

This article may not exactly replicate the authoritative document published in the Taylor &

Francis journal. It is not the copy of record. To see the published document:

Cornwell, J. F. M., Nakkawita, E., Franks, B. & Higgins, E. T. (2022). Motivation and well-

being across the lifespan: A cross-sectional examination. Journal of Positive Psychology, 1-7.

https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2022.2093787
MOTIVES ACROSS THE LIFESPAN

Abstract

Research focusing on work motivation has consistently identified changes in motivational

emphases as individuals age. However, whether these same patterns exist with respect to more

domain-general conceptualizations of these motives has not yet been examined. Furthermore,

researchers have not determined whether these differences in motivations across the lifespan are

associated with increases or decreases in different measures of well-being. In Studies 1a and 1b,

we show that age is negatively associated with growth motive importance, but is unassociated

with security, control, or epistemic motive importance. In Study 2, we show that older adults

who do not show this de-emphasis of growth motives have significantly lower life satisfaction

and lower self-reported flourishing relative to those older adults who do demonstrate the typical

reduced emphasis. The implications for these findings for happiness across the lifespan are

discussed.

2
MOTIVES ACROSS THE LIFESPAN

Motivation and well-being across the lifespan

It has long been held that people’s motives change across the lifespan as their

circumstances change and the challenges and responsibilities associated with them force changes

in what they believe to be the most important things in life (Heckhausen et al., 2010; West et al.,

2013). A young person just entering the workforce or fresh out of college may focus primarily

upon achieving early career goals or spending time searching for a partner or spouse with whom

to build a future household. In contrast, an individual late in life may shift his or her focus away

from these long-term goals and focus more on preserving health and enjoying the fruits of life’s

labors. Although each individual’s circumstances and the motivations that attach to those

circumstances are unique, it is possible that certain patterns of motivational change obtain across

the life course, and that those changes may be more or less adaptive in terms of maximizing

well-being. Across three cross-sectional studies, we assess the self-rated importance of four

motivational domains among people spanning multiple age groups, and also examine the extent

to which differences in emphasis among people of different ages is associated with attendant

differences in experienced well-being.

Motivation and Well-Being across the Lifespan

Most of the research examining how motivations change across the lifespan has been in

the domain of work motivation. Research has shown, for example, that as workers age, they

become more motivated by intrinsic job features rather than extrinsic ones (Inceoglu, Segers, &

Bartram, 2012). A meta-analysis of work motivation confirmed this increase in intrinsic work

motivation and decrease in extrinsic motivation (Kooij et al., 2011), and also found that older

workers generally are less motivated by both the growth and security factors associated with

their jobs relative to younger workers. Social motives, in contrast, remain unchanged across age

3
MOTIVES ACROSS THE LIFESPAN

groups. Consistent with these changes in work motivation, research on competitive motivation in

sports shows a similar effect: Older athletes, while remaining as motivated to compete in their

respective sports, were less ego-oriented than their younger peers—less driven by goals of

personal success in their athletic competition (Steinberg et al., 2001).

What explains these shifts in motivation? One fruitful line of inquiry suggests that

lifespan perspectives relating to age stereotyping, changes in time perspective, and individual

maturation can do considerable theoretical work in explaining these shifts in work motivation

across the lifespan (Kooij & Kanfer, 2019). In particular, related empirical research has found

that future time perspective decreases with age, and that this decrease is associated with declines

in promotion focus, growth motivation strength in the workplace, and motivation to continue

working (Kooij et al., 2014). By noting the changes in promotion focus across the lifespan, this

research suggests that these changes may not be domain-specific to the workplace and may be

associated with general declines in motivations to achieve one’s hopes and aspirations, which are

associated with a strong promotion focus (Higgins, 1997).

Although the research on work motivation is extensive, research on changes in

fundamental motivations across different age groups more generally is less prominent.

Furthermore, while many of these lines of research demonstrate that what motivates individuals

differs across age groups, it remains silent on the degree to which these changes may be more or

less adaptive. That is, it is unclear whether growth motives serve an important purpose among

the young in terms of well-being that diminishes over time, such that the association between

growth motives will be strong and positive among the young, and weaker (or even negative)

among older adults.

4
MOTIVES ACROSS THE LIFESPAN

Several lines of research involving large population samples has examined how well-

being changes across the lifespan. Some samples have shown increases in life satisfaction

between middle and late life stages, with declines in very late life (Baird et al., 2010). What can

account for these changes? Research has demonstrated that while some factors remain

consistently related to life satisfaction across the lifespan, such as standards of living and family

situations (Medley, 1980), the influence of other factors changes across the lifespan. For

example, research suggests that a variety of health-related factors are more predictive of life

satisfaction among older adults compared to younger adults (Joshanloo & Jovanović, 2021),

whereas fluid intelligence is more predictive of life satisfaction among younger adults compared

to older adults (Siedlecki et al., 2008).

In spite of the wide array of work examining how a variety of factors relate to well-being

across the lifespan, to our knowledge, no research has examined whether shifts in the subjective

importance of different motivations are associated with changes in life satisfaction. Therefore, in

the present research, we first examined whether the self-rated importance of four different kinds

of motivations would differ according to age. In selecting the four different motivational

domains to examine, we followed the work of Higgins (2012; see also Franks & Higgins, 2012,

and Cornwell, Franks, & Higgins, 2014), which posits four domains of motivation: truth

(wanting to establish what is real), control (wanting to manage what happens), and value

(wanting to have good results), which can further be subdivided into growth (wanting to have

things get better) and security (wanting to have things not get worse). Given the findings with

respect to the promotion focus by Kooij and colleagues (2014), we expected that growth

motivation would be lower among older adults compared to younger adults, uniquely so among

5
MOTIVES ACROSS THE LIFESPAN

these motivations and that this change in growth motivation would be associated with higher

levels of well-being.

Studies 1a and 1b

In these studies, we created a measure of self-rated importance for each of the four

motivational domains noted above and had adults of various ages complete the surveys to

determine whether their self-rated importance was different based on the age of the rater. Data

from all three studies are available upon request to the corresponding author. All three studies

were declared exempt by the IRB at the United States Military Academy and given protocol

number BSL_18-009_Cornwell.

Method

Participants

One hundred thirty-six participants were recruited from Amazon’s Mechanical Turk

subject pool for the sum of $2.50 for Study 1a, and 154 were included from the same subject

pool for Study 1b approximately two months later for the same compensation. The sample

consisted of 76 females and 60 males for Study 1a; data on gender was not collected in Study 1b.

We did not know how large our effect sizes would be, so we aimed for a sample of

approximately 150 participants in order to ensure that we collected data from enough older adults

to be able to draw meaningful conclusions in both studies. The median age was 33 years, and it

ranged from 19 to 65 in Study 1a; the median age was 28 and ranged from 17 to 54 in Study 1b.

The sample was limited to the United States to ensure English proficiency.

Procedure

In both studies, participants first filled out the Regulatory Focus Questionnaire (Higgins

et al., 2001) and the Regulatory Mode Questionnaire (Kruglanski et al., 2000) to explore the

6
MOTIVES ACROSS THE LIFESPAN

relationships between these scales and the new motivational domain questions that were of

interest to this study. The relationships between the existing questionnaires and the constructs of

interest in our study are included in the supplemental materials, but are not included here as they

are outside the scope of the research hypotheses directly targeted with this work.

Motivational Importance: Following these questionnaires, participants were asked, in a

random order, to assess the perceived importance to themselves of four different motivations:

Growth, Security, Control, and Truth. Before viewing any of the motives, participants were first

given the following instructions:

People have several things in their lives that they find important. On the

following pages, please read the statements and assess the degree to which each is

of important to you.

Following these instructions, participants were shown four questionnaires corresponding to the

four motivational domains in a random order. The Growth questionnaire contained the following

instructions:

The following items refer to your motivation for advancement, nurturance, and

growth. Please indicate the importance of the items below on the accompanying

scale.

The Security questionnaire contained the following instructions:

The following items refer to your motivation for security, responsibility, and

stability. Please indicate the importance of the items below on the accompanying

scale.

The Control questionnaire contained the following instructions:

7
MOTIVES ACROSS THE LIFESPAN

The following items refer to your motivation for control, autonomy, and change.

Please indicate the importance of the items below on the accompanying scale.

Finally, the Truth questionnaire contained the following instructions:

The following items refer to your motivation for learning, sense-making, and

evaluation. Please indicate the importance of the items below on the

accompanying scale.

Each questionnaire contained four or five items, all rated on a scale from 1 (“strongly disagree”)

to 7 (“strongly agree”). The full list of items is contained in Table 1.

Motivational Priority: After rating the independent importance of each of the

motivational domains, out of concern for potential ceiling effects or a lack of differentiation

among the different motivational domains, in this study we also asked participants to rate the

different motivational domains in a non-independent manner. Specifically, they were presented

with a fourfold sliding scale with the following instructions:

Below, please assign 100 points across the four motivation domains you just

rated, indicating the relative important you place on each area (all areas must sum

to 100):

Once participants had allocated their 100 points, they were able to proceed to the demographic

questionnaire which asked them to indicate their sex and their age in years. Finally in both

studies, participants completed a pilot essay task, but since that task is unrelated to the purposes

of this research, we omit discussing it here.

Results and Discussion

The Growth (Study 1a: a = .84; Study 1b: a = .80), Security (Study 1a: a = .78; Study

1b: a = .73), Control (Study 1a: a = .84; Study 1b: a = .85), and Truth (Study 1a: a = .80; Study

8
MOTIVES ACROSS THE LIFESPAN

1b: a = .79) items all showed high internal reliability, and therefore we averaged them to create

four separate scales of Motivational Importance. In addition, we created four Motivational

Priority scales corresponding to the total number of points (out of 100 total) participants

distributed to each of the four domains when forced to choose among them. This provided us

with eight total variables to test by correlating them with age to determine whether there were

motivational differences across the different age groups.

With respect to Motivational Importance, there were no significant associations between

age and Security (Study 1a: r = -.15, p = .08; Study 1b: r = -.03, p = .69), Control (Study 1a: r = -

.11, p = .20; Study 1b: r = -.11, p = .18), or Truth (Study 1a: r = -.08, p = .35; Study 1b: r = -.13,

p = .11) Importance in either study. However, consistent with the findings of Kooij and

colleagues (2014), there was a significant negative correlation between Growth Importance and

age in both studies (Study 1a: r = -.21, p = .01; Study 1b: r = -.26, p = .001). With respect to

Motivational Priority, there were no significant associations between age and Control (Study 1a:

r = -.03, p = .67; Study 1b: r = .02, p = .84) Priority in either study. However, consistent with the

correlation with Growth Importance noted above, there was a significant negative correlation

between Growth Priority and age in both studies (Study 1a: r = -.27, p = .002; Study 1b: r = -.30,

p < .001). This reduction in Growth Priority appears to have been compensated for by an

attendant increase in Truth Priority in Study 1a, which had a positive correlation with age (r =

.21, p = .01), but not in Study 1b (r = .01, p = .92). In contrast, the reduction of Growth Priority

was accompanied by an increase in Security Priority in Study 1b (r = .31, p < .001), but not in

Study 1a (r = .10, p = .25).

These results are consistent with our hypothesis that older adults would rate growth-

related motivations as less important compared to younger adults and reveal the novel finding

9
MOTIVES ACROSS THE LIFESPAN

that this decrease in growth-related motivations may be off-set by a relative increase in the

prioritization of truth-related motivations. In our third study, we sought to replicate these

findings and examine whether this potential change in motivational importance across age

groups may be adaptive in that it is associated with improved well-being. To do so, we

measured these motivational variables again, as well as two measures of well-being.

Study 2

In this study, we intended to replicate our findings with respect to Motivational

Importance and investigate whether these differences in motivation across age groups were

associated with higher or lower levels of well-being. We included two measures of well-being in

this study to ensure that we were capturing both the hedonic and eudaimonic aspects of well-

being (Ryan & Deci, 2001).

Method

Participants

Two hundred fifty individuals drawn from Amazon’s Mechanical Turk for the sum of

$2.50. Since we were looking for potential interactions in this study, we increased the target

sample size by 100 participants relative to Study 1. One individual reported his or her age as

zero, so that person’s results were omitted from the analyses, leaving 148 female and 101 male

participants. The median age was 31 with a range from 18 to 86 years. Once again, in order to

ensure English proficiency, the sample was limited to those participating within the United

States.

Procedure

The study procedure was identical to that from Study 1 with the following exceptions.

First, neither the Regulatory Focus Questionnaire (Higgins et al., 2001) nor the Regulatory Mode

10
MOTIVES ACROSS THE LIFESPAN

Questionnaire (Kruglanski et al., 2000) was included in this study. Instead, the UCLA Loneliness

scale (Russell et al., 1978) and a scale measuring psychological distress (Kessler et al., 2002)

were included in this study for exploratory purposes to determine whether certain forms of

motivational importance were associated with loneliness or psychological distress. The results

from these scales are contained in the supplemental materials. Furthermore, we included three

unpublished pilot scales randomly within the survey. The results from these scales neither

mediated nor moderated any of our findings, therefore we omitted them.

Following the Motivational Importance and Motivational Priority scales used in Studies

1a and 1b, participants also filled out the Satisfaction with Life Scale (Diener et al., 1985) and

the Flourishing Scale (Diener et al., 2010). The Satisfaction with Life Scale consists of five items

rated on a scale ranging from 1 (“strongly disagree”) to 7 (“strongly agree”) concerning the

extent to which individuals believe their lives meet their standards for satisfaction. For example,

one item from the scale reads, “The conditions of my life are excellent.” The Flourishing Scale,

in contrast, provides information concerning the presence or absence of various aspects of a

successful or happy life. It consists of eight items, all rated on scales from 1 (“strongly disagree”)

to 7 (“strongly agree”). Two example items include, “I lead a purposeful and meaningful life”

and “People respect me.”

As in Studies 1a and 1b, following the completion of these questionnaires, participants

were randomly assigned to a variety of pilot experimental tasks. Since these tasks are unrelated

to the research questions in this paper, we have omitted them.

Results and Discussion

Once again, the Growth (a = .82), Security (a = .83), Control (a = .85), and Truth (a =

.82) Importance scales were all highly internally reliable. In order to determine whether our

11
MOTIVES ACROSS THE LIFESPAN

effect from Study 1 replicated, we ran correlations between each measure of Motivational

Importance and age. As in Study 1, the only Motivational Importance scale correlated with age

was Growth (r = -.16, p = .009). Security (r = -.01, p = .89), Control (r = -.02, p = .79), and Truth

(r = -.01, p = .92) Importance were all uncorrelated with age. In contrast to Studies 1a and 1b, no

forms of Motivational Priority were associated significantly with age (Growth Priority: r = -.03,

p = .62; Security Priority: r = -.02, p = .80; Control Priority: r = -.08, p = .19; Truth Priority: r =

.12, p = .053).

To examine whether the change in Growth Importance is adaptive across the lifespan, we

ran two regressions. The first regression was of Satisfaction with Life onto Growth Importance,

age, and their interaction. The second regression was identical except that it replaced Satisfaction

with Life with Flourishing. We found a significant interaction between Growth Importance and

age predicting Satisfaction with Life (b = -1.54, t(245) = -2.06, p = .04, 95% CI = [-.033, -.001],

h2 = .02) and Flourishing (b = -1.73, t(245) = -2.50, p = .01, 95% CI = [-.019, -.002], h2 = .02).

Each of these regressions suggests that the relationship between Growth Importance and both

forms of well-being is moderated by the age of the participant, such that the association is

significantly more positive for younger adults compared to older adults. It is worth noting that no

other Motivational Importance scale showed this effect pattern.

In order to understand this association more clearly, we examined these associations

around the mean age of 35. Among those under the age of 35 (N = 160), the associations

between Growth Importance and both Satisfaction with Life (r = .34, p < .001) and Flourishing

(r = .50, p < .001) were significantly positive. Among those 35 or older, the association between

Growth Importance and Flourishing was about half as strong (r = .26, p < .005), and the

12
MOTIVES ACROSS THE LIFESPAN

association between Growth Importance and Satisfaction with Life was negative, but not

significant (r = - .01, p = .90).

In a second study, we have replicated the finding that the self-rated importance of Growth

motivation is lower among older adults compared to younger adults. Furthermore, the results

from this study suggest that this shift may be adaptive, since the association between Growth

motives and two forms of well-being was significantly less positive among older adults

compared to younger adults.

General Discussion

Across both studies, we found that growth motives were significantly lower among older

adults compared to younger adults, and, in our second study, that this difference appears to be

adaptive with respect to flourishing and life satisfaction. Older adults rate the importance of

security, control, and truth motives in a manner indistinguishable from younger adults, but their

focus on improvement, gain, hopes, and aspirations is much lower.

One implication of this research is that it extends the findings of previous research on

work motivation into a more domain-general application. In addition to less emphasis on work-

related growth goals (Kooij et al., 2011), older adults appear to place a lower emphasis on

growth related goals more generally. Furthermore, the present research extends this work by

noting that while these growth goals appear to be strongly associated with higher well-being

among younger adults, the strength of association for older adults diminishes significantly. This

suggests that growth motives provide younger adults with a sense of purpose or direction,

whereas older adults derive these goods from other sources, which may include the fulfillment of

those very goals they themselves held when they were younger. It also suggests that these growth

goals are particularly importance during emerging adulthood. This would be consistent with

13
MOTIVES ACROSS THE LIFESPAN

previous findings concerning shifts in future time perspective as individuals age (Kooij et al.,

2014).

There are several limitations of these studies. First, both of our studies overrepresented

adults between the ages of 20 and 35, in spite of collecting data from a substantial number of

older adults in both studies. It is possible that some of the effects we found could be due to the

particular population which we sampled, although the consistency of our findings with those in

the domain of work motivation make this possibility unlikely (Kooij et al., 2011). Second, our

studies were merely cross-sectional, not longitudinal. Although we have found that the

association between well-being and growth motives drops in strength across age groups, we

cannot be certain that this is the result of a developmental process without longitudinal data.

Although our results and theoretical explanations are suggestive of an important developmental

process, they cannot be considered conclusive with these limited methods.

Nevertheless, we have found definitive evidence that the self-rated importance of

individuals’ growth motivations does vary across age groups, and that this has important

implications for well-being. Future research on motivation and well-being will need to recognize

that these differences exist—particularly given psychology and related fields’ tendency to

oversample young adults—when attempting to understand how human goals and happiness

function more generally. While it is a small starting point, it is our hope that this research will

inspire more concerted and comprehensive efforts to understand how human motivations change

across the lifespan and exploring what the implications of those changes are for life satisfaction

and human flourishing.

14
MOTIVES ACROSS THE LIFESPAN

15
MOTIVES ACROSS THE LIFESPAN

References

Baird, B. M., Lucas, R. E., & Donnellan, M. B. (2010). Life satisfaction across the lifespan:

Findings from two nationally representative panel studies. Social Indicators Research,

99, 183-203.

Cornwell, J. F. M., Franks, B., & Higgins, E. T. (2014). Truth, control, and value motivations:

the “what,” “how,” and “why” of approach and avoidance. Frontiers in Systems

Neuroscience, 8, 194.

Diener, E. D., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life

scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71-75.

Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D. W., Oishi, S., & Biswas-Diener, R.

(2010). New well-being measures: Short scales to assess flourishing and positive and

negative feelings. Social Indicators Research, 97(2), 143-156.

Franks, B. & Higgins, E. T. (2012). Effectiveness in humans and other animals. Advances in

Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 285-346.

Gomez, V., Grob, A., & Orth, U. (2013). The adaptive power of the present: Perceptions of past,

present, and future life satisfaction across the life span. Journal of Research in

Personality, 47(5), 626-633.

Heckhausen, J., Wrosch, C., & Schulz, R. (2010). A motivational theory of life-span

development. Psychological Review, 117(1), 32-60.

Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280–1300.

Higgins, E. T. (2012). Beyond Pleasure and Pain: How Motivation Works. New York, NY:

Oxford University Press.

16
MOTIVES ACROSS THE LIFESPAN

Higgins, E. T., Friedman, R. S., Harlow, R. E., Idson, L. C., Ayduk, O. N., & Taylor, A. (2001).

Achievement orientations from subjective histories of success: Promotion pride versus

prevention pride. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31(1), 3-23.

Inceoglu, I., Segers, J., & Bartram, D. (2012). Age-related differences in work motivation.

Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 85(2), 300-329.

Joshanloo, M., & Jovanović, V. (2021). Similarities and differences in predictors of life

satisfaction across age groups: A 150-country study. Journal of Health Psychology,

26(3), 401–411. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105318819054

Kessler, R.C., Andrews, G., Colpe, L. J., Hiripi, E., Mroczek, D. K., Normand, S.-L. T., Walters,

E. E., & Zaslavsky, A. M. (2002). Short screening scales to monitor population

prevalences and trends in non-specific psychological distress. Psychological Medicine,

32, 959-956.

Kooij, D. T. A. M., Bal, P. M., & Kanfer, R. (2014). Future time perspective and promotion

focus as determinants of intraindividual change in work motivation. Psychology and

Aging, 29(2), 319–328. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036768

Kooij, T. A. M., de Lange, A. H., Jansen, P. G. W., Kanfer, R., & Dikkers, J. S. E. (2011). Age

and work-related motives: Results of a meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational

Behavior, 32, 197-225.

Kruglanski, A. W., Thompson, E. P., Higgins, E. T., Atash, M. N., Pierro, A., Shah, J. Y., &

Spiegel, S. (2000). To "do the right thing" or to "just do it": Locomotion and assessment

as distinct self-regulatory imperatives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

79(5), 793–815.

17
MOTIVES ACROSS THE LIFESPAN

Medley, M. L. (1980). Life satisfaction cross four stages of adult life. The International Journal

of Aging and Human Development, 3, 193-209.

Russell, D., Peplau, L. A., & Ferguson, M. L. (1978). Developing a measure of loneliness.

Journal of Personality Assessment, 42, 290-294.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on

hedonic and eudaimonic well-being. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 141-166.

Siedlecki, K. L., Tucker-Drob, E. M., Oishi, S., & Salthouse, T. A. (2008). Life satisfaction

across adulthood: Different determinants at different ages? Journal of Positive

Psychology, 3(3), 152-164.

Steinberg, G., Grieve, F. G., & Glass, B. (2001). Achievement goals across the lifespan. Journal

of Sport Behavior, 24(3), 298-306.

West, R. L., Ebner, N. C., & Hastings, E. C. (2013). Linking goals and aging: Experimental and

lifespan approaches. In E. A. Locke & G. P. Latham (Eds.), New Developments in Goal

Setting and Task Performance (pp. 439-459). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

18
 MOTIVES ACROSS THE LIFESPAN

Table 1: Items rating the perceived importance of the four motivational domains.

M (SD) M (SD) M (SD)

Item
Study 1a Study 1b Study 2
Growth Items
It is important that my life's hopes and aspirations are fulfilled. 5.45 (1.29) 5.91 (1.05) 5.57 (1.12)
It is important that I have all I want and even a little more. 4.82 (1.50) 4.99 (1.40) 4.95 (1.48)
It is important that I experience a sense of advancement. 5.24 (1.45) 5.58 (1.26) 5.53 (1.16)
It is important that today is better than yesterday. 5.10 (1.51) 5.26 (1.41) 5.28 (1.33)
It is important that I regularly get a chance to feel eager. 5.04 (1.46) 5.24 (1.15) 5.13 (1.39)
Security Items
It's important that my life's duties and obligations are met. 5.70 (1.10) 5.36 (1.12) 5.67 (1.17)
It's important that I feel a sense of sufficiency. 5.58 (1.29) 5.66 (.97) 5.79 (1.12)
It's important that I feel secure. 5.93 (1.19) 6.10 (.98) 5.93 (1.09)
It's important that I never drop below basic standards. 5.37 (1.35) 5.44 (1.32) 5.55 (1.32)
Control Items
It's important that I have the opportunity to control what happens. 5.29 (1.29) 5.40 (1.16) 5.41 (1.24)
It's important that I keep my projects moving smoothly. 5.41 (1.21) 5.34 (1.15) 5.55 (1.08)
It's important that I act with intention. 5.55 (1.25) 5.58 (1.09) 5.66 (1.06)
It's important that I make things happen. 5.34 (1.42) 5.65 (1.13) 5.57 (1.18)
It's important that my actions bring something about. 5.41 (1.27) 5.62 (1.17) 5.62 (1.09)
Truth Items
It's important that I have a chance to figure things out. 5.67 (1.14) 5.91 (.97) 5.72 (1.00)
It's important that I am able to make sense of things. 5.84 (1.03) 5.96 (.92) 5.71 (1.13)
It's important that I can fit what I learn with what I already know. 5.43 (1.22) 5.70 (1.21) 5.55 (1.20)
It's important that I have the opportunity to explore. 5.60 (1.34) 6.02 (.89) 5.73 (1.05)

19

View publication stats