When working towards goals, the length and frequency of goal pursuit sessions might play a role in individuals’ goal pursuit motivation. We examined whether a more divided (frequent, shorter sessions) or a cumulated (less frequent, longer sessions) goal pursuit schedule increases people’s motivation to work towards personal goals. Across two studies ( N = 448), the underlying reasons for pursuing the goal mattered. A divided schedule was more motivating than a cumulated schedule if participants reported highly autonomous reasons (pursuing a goal due to personal interest or values), but the difference was eliminated for those reporting low autonomous reasons. We discuss how perceiving time spent on goal activities as loss, reward, or investment may explain scheduling preferences and how these may map on to preferences for scheduling financial losses and rewards outlined by prospect theory.

Under what conditions does prosocial spending promote happiness? In a series of appropriately powered and pre-registered experiments, the present research revisited the role of impact, social connection, and perceived choice in maximizing the emotional benefits of spending money on others. In two exploratory studies, we found that happy (vs. less happy) prosocial spending experiences were marked by higher levels of impact, social connection and perceived choice (Study 1a and 1b). Consistent with these initial findings, three pre-registered studies confirmed that spending money on others was particularly rewarding when people were able to see the difference their generosity made (Study 2); when they felt a sense of social connection to the person or cause they were helping (Study 3); and when they felt that the decision to help was freely chosen (Study 4). Together, our findings corroborate previous research on impact, social connection and perceived choice, and highlight the importance of considering these key variables when evaluating old and new evidence on the emotional benefits of prosocial spending. In addition, our findings suggest that charitable organizations and policymakers should review their current solicitation strategies and pay more attention to people’s sense of impact, connection and choice when seeking charitable donations.

The need-support model bridges regulatory focus theory and self-determination theory. Research on this model has shown that support of needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness (key constructs in self-determination theory) is higher in experiences of pursuing hopes versus duties (key constructs in regulatory focus theory). The current research used LIWC 2015’s standard dictionary to examine differences between descriptions of high and low support of these needs ( N = 941), descriptions of pursuing hopes and duties ( N = 1,047), high need support and hopes, and low need support and duties. As expected, descriptions of high need support and hopes were more emotionally positive than low need support and duties, whereas high need support and duties showed more attention to social relationships than low need support and hopes. These and additional findings of this research support the need-support model’s proposal that regulatory focus and need support do not reduce to each other.