Analiza Personala

ORIGINAL RESEARCH
published: 10 January 2022

doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.774148
Effects of Self-Control on Subjective

Well-Being: Examining the
Moderating Role of Trait and State
Motivation
Guojun Zhao 1,2* , Fusen Xie 1 , Yuchen Luo 1 , Yixuan Liu 1 , Yuan Chong 2,3 , Qi Zhang 1 and
Wenjie Wang 1
1
College of Psychology, Northwest Normal University, Lanzhou, China, 2 Academy of Plateau Science and Sustainability,
Qinghai Normal University, Xining, China, 3 College of Tourism, Northwest Normal University, Lanzhou, China
It is well documented that self-control has a positive effect on individuals’ subjective

well-being. However, little research has focused on the moderators underlying this
relationship. The present research used two studies to examine the moderating role
of both trait and state motivation on the relationship between self-control and subjective
well-being using psychometric and experimental models, respectively. In Study 1,
we explored whether trait motivation (including promotion vs. prevention motivation)
moderated the relationship between trait self-control and subjective well-being using
Edited by: a psychometric model. In Study 2, we examined the moderating effects of both trait
Walid Briki,
Qatar University, Qatar
and state motivation on the effect of state self-control (measured via ego depletion) on
Reviewed by:
subjective well-being using an experimental model. Our results indicated that self-control
Souhail Hermassi, had a positive effect on subjective well-being, with this relationship being primarily
Qatar University, Qatar
moderated by prevention motivation. When state and trait prevention motivations were
Aïmen Khacharem,
Université Paris-Est Créteil Val congruent, self-control had the most obvious impact on subjective well-being. This study
de Marne, France suggests that current understandings around the association between self-control and
*Correspondence: happiness is limited, implying that motivation should be the focus of future research.
Guojun Zhao
zhaogj@nwnu.edu.cn Keywords: trait self-control, state self-control, subjective well-being, ego depletion, promotion motivation,
prevention motivation
Specialty section:
This article was submitted to
Personality and Social Psychology, INTRODUCTION
a section of the journal
Frontiers in Psychology Subjective well-being refers to the overall evaluation and feelings of an individual regarding their life
Received: 11 September 2021 (Diener et al., 1985). It is a comprehensive assessment that includes a person’s affective experiences
Accepted: 20 December 2021 and cognitive evaluation, and usually contains three components: life satisfaction, positive affect,
Published: 10 January 2022 and negative affect (Diener et al., 1985, 2018). With the emergence of positive psychology,
Citation: subjective well-being has become a representative indicator of an individual’s adaptation to
Zhao G, Xie F, Luo Y, Liu Y, their life. Recently, the association between self-control and subjective well-being has attracted
Chong Y, Zhang Q and Wang W increased attention from researchers (De Ridder et al., 2012; Cheung et al., 2014; Hofmann
(2022) Effects of Self-Control on
et al., 2014; Layton and Muraven, 2014; Carter et al., 2015; Grund et al., 2015; Ouyang et al.,
Subjective Well-Being: Examining
the Moderating Role of Trait and State
2015; Wiese et al., 2018; Fritz and Gallagher, 2019; Nielsen et al., 2019; Joshanloo et al.,
Motivation. 2020; Massar et al., 2020; Zeng and Chen, 2020). Self-control is the overriding or inhibiting
Front. Psychol. 12:774148. of automatic, habitual, or innate behaviors, urges, emotions, or desires that would otherwise
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.774148 interfere with one’s goal-directed behaviors (Baumeister et al., 1994; Barkley, 1997). It is regarded
Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 1 January 2022 | Volume 12 | Article 774148

Zhao et al. Self-Control and Subjective Well-Being
as a key variable affecting individuals’ subjective well-being limited energy of self-control (Baumeister et al., 2007). Thus,
(Hofmann et al., 2014) because it is beneficial in helping people to by motivating individuals to pursue and maintain their goals
overcome any experienced interferences, to adhere to their goals, would provide the extra mental strength needed to support their
and in motivating themselves to better adapt to life (De Ridder exhausted self-control (Muraven and Slessareva, 2003).
et al., 2012); that is, it helps people to acquire more opportunities Some studies have provided evidence about the associations
to experience happiness. Studies have found that self-control between these variables. Goal orientation usually involves two
was positively associated with life satisfaction and positive affect, types of motivational orientations, namely the promotion
with it being negatively associated with negative affect (Cheung motivation and prevention motivation (Higgins, 1997; Higgins
et al., 2014; Grund et al., 2015; Wiese et al., 2018; Nielsen et al., 2001; Scholer and Higgins, 2012). Although both types
et al., 2019; Massar et al., 2020). However, some researchers have of motivation play a role in promoting a given behavior, they
questioned this relationship, arguing that excessive self-control have different trade-off strategies between how they handle
limits an individual’s ability to experience happiness (Zabelina benefits and risks. Promotion motivation emphasizes the value of
et al., 2007; Layton and Muraven, 2014). They suggest that there benefits, such as pursuing success, while prevention motivation
may be different types of relationships between self-control and focuses on the losses caused by risks, which includes actions
subjective well-being in different circumstances; that is, there around avoiding failure. Promotion motivation is concerned
are potential moderating factors that may have an effect on with nurturance needs, advancement-related goals, and eager
this relationship. approach strategies, while prevention motivation emphasizes
The current mainstream view advocates for a better safety and security needs, safety-related goals, and vigilant and
understanding of the nature of self-control from a goal- avoidant strategies. Thus, from the perspective of motivation
orientation perspective (Hagger, 2014; Wiese et al., 2018). For intensity, promotion motivation has a stronger power to
example, why do individuals with high self-control report higher promote goal seeking behaviors. Research has found that people
subjective well-being? De Ridder and Gillebaart (2017) argued with higher self-control were happier because of their more
that this could be due to their competence in inhibiting their promotion-focused and less prevention-focused orientations
temptations, with them then being better at initiating goal- (Cheung et al., 2014). Other studies have demonstrated that
directed behaviors. Individuals are more satisfied with their the interaction between state self-control (e.g., ego depletion)
lives and experience more positive affect and less negative affect and motivation affects individual performance (Milyavskaya and
when they successfully achieve their goals; consequently, an Inzlicht, 2017). Furthermore, motivation and subjective well-
individual’s subjective well-being improves. However, there are being are also closely associated. In general, individuals with
different kinds of distractions and temptations involved in the high motivation levels tend to experience a greater degree of
process of pursuing one’s goals. The role of self-control herein happiness than those with low motivation levels (Li et al., 2015).
is to overcome these difficulties, thereby helping someone to Furthermore, considering the different types of motivation,
achieve their goals. Therefore, the higher a person’ self-control, individuals with a promotion orientation have reported higher
the more likely they are to achieve their goals, and the more likely subjective well-being scores than those with a prevention one
they are then to experience a higher degree of subjective well- (Manczak et al., 2014). This is because the former were more
being. However, according to the energy model of self-control likely to be motivated to achieve their ideals and goals, which
(Baumeister et al., 2007), the energy needed for employing would then provide them with more opportunities to experience
self-control is limited, meaning that it can be exhausted and happiness. Therefore, based on the analyses of the relationship
eventually lose its efficacy in the process of overcoming a given between self-control and subjective well-being, examining the
difficulty (this state of self-control is conceptualized by the term effects of different motivation types would contribute to a more
ego depletion); thus, individuals who deplete their energy herein comprehensive understanding of this relationship (Ouyang et al.,
would no longer be able to experience the benefits from goal 2015; Zeng and Chen, 2020).
achievement, implying that their subjective well-being would not Muraven and Slessareva (2003) designed three experiments
improve. The question then arises, how can one maintain and and found that motivation and self-control jointly determined
supply the energy needed for self-control? If an individual is individuals’ performance. Though they did not focus on
committed to achieving a desired goal by means of practicing self- subjective well-being, they identified the compensation effect of
control, then they would be motivated to maintain this limited motivation on self-control. When in a state of ego depletion
source of energy. In this case, the role of motivation is critical, (which indicates that a person has less self-control energy),
as it is defined as the inner strength that arouses, maintains, the participants with low motivation performed significantly
and promotes an individual’s activity toward achieving a certain poorly than those with high motivation. Based on this study, we
goal. Motivation plays a role in the relationship between self- speculated that there are several kinds of relationships between
control and goal achievement and, subsequently, also influences self-control and subjective well-being when considering the
the relationship between the latter and subjective well-being. moderating role of motivation. When individuals have poor self-
Therefore, based on an individual’s goal, there are potential links control abilities (e.g., they lack the self-control personality trait)
between their self-control, motivation, and subjective well-being. or their self-control energy is insufficient (e.g., their state self-
For subjective well-being, goals often provide opportunities with control is low), they can still be motivated to continuously pursue
which to experience more positive feelings (Joshanloo et al., 2020; their goals if their motivation is strong (e.g., they possess a
Zeng and Chen, 2020). Additionally, pursuing goals exhausts the promotion-motivation orientation) or if they are aroused to a

strong motivational state in a particular situation (e.g., when of this relationship could not be explained through the
they adopt a state-specific promotion-motivation orientation; influence of motivation. The moderating-variable perspective
Muraven and Slessareva, 2003; Vohs et al., 2012; Cheung et al., identifies the complexity and various differential possibilities
2014). As a result, they are still likely to achieve their goals of the relationship between self-control and subjective well-
and experience the positive outcomes caused by the fulfillment being, which facilitates the integration of different findings
of these goals, thereby improving their subjective well-being in this field. Therefore, based on the moderating model of
(Joshanloo et al., 2020; Zeng and Chen, 2020). If they have a low motivation, we explored the different relationships between
level of motivation (e.g., they possess a prevention-motivation self-control and subjective well-being. To analyze how this
orientation) or if they are aroused to a weak motivational relationship changes under different circumstances, we focused
state in a particular situation (e.g., they experience a state- on chronic personal traits and situationally induced states of self-
specific prevention-motivation orientation), they are more likely control and motivation. These distinctions have been relatively
to give up on their goals when they experience a low sense under-scrutinized in studies. Hence, the role of self-control or
of self-control. Hence, they would lose the opportunity to motivation is understudied, indicated by the failure of extant
experience the resulting subjective well-being. When individuals literature to compare the effects of self-control levels in different
experience a high level of self-control, notwithstanding the type states, lack of emphasis on the interaction of self-control and
of motivation, they are more likely to persist in pursuing their motivation on subjective well-being (e.g., Ouyang et al., 2015),
goals that primarily depend on their self-control, thus providing and lack of examination into the classification of different types
increased opportunities for improving their subjective well- of motivation and self-control (e.g., Cheung et al., 2014; Nielsen
being. Therefore, motivation would act as a moderator between et al., 2019).
self-control and subjective well-being. Among individuals with In our research, the psychometrical model utilized focuses
promotion motivation, there is no significant correlation between on the individual’s stable psychological traits, which can
their self-control and subjective well-being because, whether their be used to understand trait self-control and their trait
self-control is high or low, their subjective well-being remains motivation orientation. Meanwhile, the experimental model
high because of the compensatory role of prevention motivation. utilized emphasizes each individual’s mental state in a certain
However, among individuals with a prevention motivation, there context, wherein state self-control can be manipulated by altering
is a significant and positive correlation between self-control and the participants’ ego depletion, with state motivation then being
subjective well-being. Because prevention motivation does not elicited through incentives or priming. Studies have shown that
provide enough support for self-control, the pursuit of goals the effect of self-control increased when the motivation levels
is completely dependent on the power of self-control itself. of participants in the ego depletion condition were enhanced,
When self-control is strong, it is easier to achieve one’s goals, while this effect decreased when their motivation was lowered
indicating that subjective well-being is high. When self-control (Vohs et al., 2012). This means that, when examining the effect
is weak, however, it is difficult to achieve one’s goals, meaning of motivation as a moderator on the influence of self-control
that subjective well-being is low. Furthermore, according to on subjective well-being, we need to not only consider trait self-
regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 2005), a combination of both control and trait motivation in terms of one’s personality but also
trait and state motivation has the best effect on achieving a goal include state self-control (e.g., that arising from ego depletion)
(Lisjak et al., 2012); that is, an individual with a certain type of and state motivation (e.g., that brought about by motivation
trait motivation could find themselves in a situation that then priming) as well, which are triggered depending on the context.
activates the corresponding type of state motivation. Therefore, Some evidence has shown that trait motivation’s effects do differ
the relationship between self-control and subjective well-being depending on a person’s individual characteristics—with state
is most likely to be observed among individuals with prevention motivation being triggered by situational factors—in terms of
motivation in a situation that elicits state prevention motivation. their self-control and happiness (Ouyang et al., 2015).
Although some studies have examined the relationship To date, most studies have been based on a psychometric
between motivation, self-control, and subjective well-being model that analyzed the association between self-control and
(Cheung et al., 2014; Ouyang et al., 2015; Nielsen et al., 2019), subjective well-being while focusing on trait self-control and
few have explained the uncertainty of the relationship between rarely examining state self-control. Ego depletion is a typical
self-control and subjective well-being that include motivation indicator of state self-control, but its role has not been fully
as a moderator. Furthermore, studies have not produced explored in this line of research. In the limited literature,
consistent conclusions on the association between self-control all participants experienced the same levels of ego depletion.
and subjective well-being across different conditions, indicating Furthermore, there was a lack of comparative data from the non-
that this relationship varies depending on different contexts. The depletion group or, in some cases, only the conditions between
moderator model is specifically used to explain how the link depletion and non-depletion were compared while the degree
between two variables changes according to different levels of a of ego depletion was ignored. Muraven and Slessareva (2003)
given moderating variable. In the studies of Ouyang et al. (2015) found that motivation influenced the self-control of depleted
and Nielsen et al. (2019), motivation was regarded as a mediating participants but had no effect on non-depleted ones. In a set
variable when examining the indirect relationship between of sequential self-control tasks, however, individual performance
self-control and subjective well-being (e.g., Cheung et al., 2014; was found to vary with one’s degree of ego depletion; specifically,
Ouyang et al., 2015; Nielsen et al., 2019), but the uncertainty individuals’ self-control worsens when they are already heavily

depleted when confronted with subsequent depletion tasks version of the SCMS (Zhao, 2016) consists of 16 items that are
(Baumeister et al., 2007). This suggests that mild and severe ego rated on a five-point scale (1 = not at all, 5 = very much). Five
depletion may have differential effects. Research has found that items are reversed so that a higher total score indicated a higher
increasing motivation only assuages the adverse effects of mild level of trait self-control. The reliability of the scale was good, with
ego depletion, but does not affect severe depletion (Vohs et al., a Cronbach’s α of 0.87.
2012). Additionally, scholars have suggested that there exists
Subjective Well-Being
a curvilinear relationship between self-control and happiness,
arguing that having either too high or too low self-control may Subjective well-being was evaluated using two dimensions: life
have a negative effect on happiness (Carter et al., 2015). In satisfaction and affect experience. Life satisfaction was measured
contrast, other scholars have denied this view (Wiese et al., 2018). using the Chinese version of the five-item Life Satisfaction Rating
All these results imply that it is necessary to comprehensively Scale (LSRS; Diener et al., 1985), with an example item being: “I
consider different levels of ego depletion when manipulating state am satisfied with my life.” In this scale, participants rated each
self-control (i.e., not only dividing the conditions into depletion item on a five-point scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly
and non-depletion ones but also distinguishing between mild and agree). Higher scores represent higher levels of life satisfaction.
severe depletion). The reliability of the scale was good, with a Cronbach’s α of
In summary, the present study explored the moderating role of 0.84. Meanwhile, the Chinese version (Qiu et al., 2008) of the
motivation in the relationship between self-control and subjective Positive Affect and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS, Watson et al.,
well-being with respect to both trait and state motivation. 1988) was used to measure respondents’ affect experiences. The
Specifically, Study 1 examined the moderating role of trait PANAS is an 18-item scale that contains two subscales: positive
motivation (comparing promotion vs. prevention orientations) affect (e.g., being active, enthusiastic, and excited) and negative
in the relationship between trait self-control and subjective affect (e.g., being afraid, scared, and nervous). Participants rate
well-being. We hypothesized that a positive influence of trait the items on a five-point scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly
self-control on subjective well-being would be observed among agree). The reliabilities of these two subscales were good, with
individuals with a prevention-motivation orientation. Study 2 a Cronbach’s α of 0.86 and 0.81, respectively. After the negative
examined the subjective well-being of individuals with two types affect items are reversed, a higher total score on both scales
of trait motivations under different ego depletion conditions (no indicates higher subjective well-being.
depletion vs. mild depletion vs. severe depletion) when priming Trait Motivation
two types of state motivations (promotion vs. prevention). We The Chinese version (Ye, 1992) of the Achievement Motivation
hypothesized that the positive relationship between state self- Scale was used to measure respondents’ trait motivation using
control and subjective well-being would only appear in the case of a five-point scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree).
state or trait prevention motivation, with this relationship being The scale contains 15 items that comprise two dimensions.
most significant when the motivation types are congruent. The first dimension is the respondent’s motive to achieve
success (e.g., “I feel pleasure when working on tasks that are
somewhat difficult for me”), which belongs to the promotion-
STUDY 1 motivation orientation and evaluates an individual’s willingness
to risk success, with higher scores indicating a higher promotion
Materials and Methods motivation. The second dimension is the respondent’s motive to
Participants avoid failure (e.g., “I become anxious when I encounter a problem
A priori power analysis was conducted using G− Power (version I don’t understand at once”), which belongs to the prevention-
3.1, Faul et al., 2009) to determine the minimum required sample motivation orientation and evaluates an individual’s willingness
size. This analysis revealed that a sample size of 134 would have to reduce risk and losses, with higher scores indicating a higher
sufficient power to detect a medium effect size (0.3), with an prevention motivation. The reliabilities of these two subscales
α level of 0.05, and a power (1-β) of 95%. Participants were were good, with Cronbach’s αs of 0.87 and 0.86, respectively.
recruited from three universities located in Northwestern China.
After signing an informed consent form, 400 undergraduates Procedure
participated in the survey, with 352 eventually completing all All participants completed the questionnaires anonymously
of the study questionnaires, resulting in a response rate of 88%. and were informed that their participation in this study was
Notably, the final sample size met the statistical conditions. The voluntary, that they were free to withdraw at any time, and that
participants were from both urban and rural areas and included the data were only going to be used for research purposes. As
Han, Hui, Tibetan, and other major ethnic minorities living in the a reward, each participant received a gift worth 10 yuan at the
Northwestern region. The final sample consisted of 352 Chinese end of the survey. The testing materials and survey procedures
undergraduate students of ages 18–23 years (M age = 20.02, were approved by the Ethics in Human Research Committee of
SDage = 1.13; 255 females). the School of Psychology, Northwest Normal University.
Measures Statistical Analysis

Trait Self-Control The first step undertaken was to perform a descriptive analysis of
Self-Control and Self-Management Scale (SCMS; Mezo, 2005) the variables (means and standard deviations). The relationships
was used to measure respondents’ trait self-control. The Chinese between trait self-control, subjective well-being, and trait

motivation were examined using Pearson’s correlation. We also motivation, trait self-control significantly predicted changes in
explored the correlation between age and these variables using subjective well-being; however, trait prevention motivation did
the same method, with gender differences between these variables not. More importantly, the interaction between trait prevention
being examined using an independent samples t-test. Next, to test motivation and trait self-control, according to a bootstrap
whether trait motivation moderates the association between trait confidence interval (95% CI) that did not include 0, identified
self-control and subjective well-being, the moderation model was a significant effect herein. This indicated that trait prevention
tested using Model 1 of the PROCESS 3.3. by Andrew F. Hayes for motivation was a significant moderator of the relationship
SPSS 24. In particular, one of two types of motivation (i.e., either between trait self-control and subjective well-being (Table 2).
promotion or prevention motivation) was set as the moderator A simple slope analysis was also performed to further explore
variable, with trait self-control being set as the independent the moderating mechanism of trait prevention motivation. The
variable (X variable), and subjective well-being as the dependent scores of trait prevention motivation were subtracted from two
variable (Y variable). Age and gender (0 = male, 1 = female) were specific points (M + SD and M – SD) to determine the high
used as the control variables (covariates). Furthermore, simple and low levels. Simple slope analyses indicated that trait self-
slope analyses were used to explore the relationship between trait control was significantly associated with subjective well-being at
self-control and trait prevention motivation in the low and high both high (simpleslope = 0.507, t = 6.967, p < 0.001) and low
motivation groups. levels (simpleslope = 0.217, t = 3.266, p = 0.001) of trait prevention
motivation, but that its predictive strength weakened when the
Results level of prevention motivation was decreased. According to the
Common Method Biases trend of Figure 1, which included both low and high levels of
In the present study, a common method bias may have occurred prevention motivation, the relationship between self-control and
because all data were derived using self-report measures. Thus, subjective well-being demonstrated the same trend. Specifically,
prior to the data analysis, a Harman’s one-factor test was the respondents’ level of subjective well-being increased with
conducted, wherein 18 factors with eigenvalues above one were their level of self-control. However, the strength of this change
extracted. The results indicated that the first factor explained was different. For those with a high prevention motivation, this
13.76% of the variance, which was much lower than the critical positive relationship was more obvious.
value of 40%. Therefore, there was no serious concern around a Regarding the moderating model of trait promotion
common method bias occurring in this study. motivation, both it and trait self-control significantly predicted
subjective well-being. However, the interaction between these
Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis two variables in a bootstrap confidence interval did not include 0,
Descriptive statistics were first determined for trait self- indicating that trait promotion motivation was not a significant
control, subjective well-being, and trait motivation. A Pearson’s moderator (Table 3).
correlation analysis was performed to examine the relationships
between these variables (Table 1). The results revealed that Discussion
trait self-control was positively correlated with subjective well- In its examination of personality traits, Study 1 explored the
being and that the relationships between the two types of moderating role of trait motivation on the relationship between
trait motivation and other variables varied. Trait promotion
motivation was positively correlated with trait self-control
and subjective well-being, while trait prevention motivation TABLE 1 | Descriptive statistics and correlations among variables (N = 352).
was negatively correlated with trait self-control and was not
correlated with subjective well-being. Moreover, trait promotion M SD 1 2 3
motivation was negatively correlated with trait prevention 1 Trait self-control 3.59 0.45 –
motivation. Additionally, we explored the potential effects of two 2 Trait promotion motivation 3.11 0.42 0.367*** –
demographic variables, gender and age, which have been used 3 Trait prevention motivation 3.01 0.48 –0.147** –0.220*** –
as controlled variables in previous studies (Diener et al., 1999; Subjective well-being 2.43 0.44 0.336*** 0.335*** 0.027
Chen, 2013). The results of the Pearson’s correlation analysis
**p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.
revealed that there was no significant correlation between age
and self-control or between the two types of trait motivation
TABLE 2 | Moderating analysis of trait prevention motivation on the relationship
and subjective well-being. An independent samples t-test was
between trait self-control and subjective well-being.
used to examine the gender differences in these variables.
The results outlined that there were no significant differences β t 95%CI 1R2 F
herein, except for self-control (M male ± SDmale = 3.42 ± 0.46,
A: Trait self-control 0.362 6.918*** [0.249, 0.484]
M male ± SDfemale = 3.62 ± 0.44, t = –3.334, p = 0.001).
B: Trait prevention motivation 0.071 1.486 [–0.035, 0.167]
Moderator Analyses A×B 0.302 3.151** [0.089, 0.504] 0.026 9.929**

Gender 0.021 0.351 [–0.099, 0.135]
After controlling for the potential effects of age and gender, the
Age 0.013 0.631 [–0.026, 0.051]
moderating models of the two types of motivation were examined
separately. Regarding the moderating model of trait prevention **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.

FIGURE 1 | Interaction between trait self-control and trait prevention motivation on subjective well-being.
trait self-control and subjective well-being using a psychometric and further finds that the association is moderated by the trait
model. The results showed that generally, the higher the level prevention-motivation orientation. Prevention motivation falls
of trait self-control, the higher a person’s overall subjective under the theme of avoidance motivation, wherein individuals
well-being. However, this relationship is moderated by the attempt to reduce risk and losses in pursuit of security goals
prevention motivation; specifically, the positive influence of (Higgins, 1997). Researchers argue that the positive link between
self-control on subjective well-being becomes more obvious self-control and subjective well-being is attributable to the
when the level of trait prevention motivation increases. This function of self-control in assisting individuals in achieving
finding supports our hypothesis. We speculated that, among their goals, as it creates more opportunities to experience
individuals with prevention motivation, there is a significantly positive life satisfaction and affect, while avoiding failure-induced
positive correlation between self-control and subjective well- negative affect and stress (Hofmann et al., 2014; De Ridder
being. Because prevention motivation does not provide enough and Gillebaart, 2017). Self-control is not only an attempt
support for a lack of self-control, it becomes difficult to achieve to restrain one’s temptations (Baumeister et al., 1998), but
one’s goals, as well as maintain a low level of subjective well-being, also involves the adoption of various strategies in order to
when self-control is weak. In contrast, it is easy to achieve goals achieve one’s desired goals (Nielsen et al., 2019); its function is
and subjective well-being is high when self-control is strong. similar to that of promotion motivation (Cheung et al., 2014;
Although the association between trait self-control and Gillebaart et al., 2016). Therefore, the effect of self-control
subjective well-being has been controversial, most researchers on subjective well-being is less obvious in individuals with
have argued that there is a positive link between the two (Cheung trait promotion motivation because it has a similar positive
et al., 2014; Grund et al., 2015; Wiese et al., 2018; Nielsen relationship with happiness as does self-control (Manczak
et al., 2019; Massar et al., 2020). Study 1 supports this view et al., 2014; Ouyang et al., 2015). Some studies have provided
evidence that people with high self-control do not necessarily
experience more happiness because their motivation orientation
influences this relationship; in other words, individuals with
TABLE 3 | Moderating analysis of trait promotion motivation on the relationship trait promotion motivation experience greater levels of happiness
between trait self-control and subjective well-being. regardless of their own self-control abilities (Ouyang et al.,
β t 95%CI 1R2 F
2015). Conversely, for individuals with prevention motivation,
the effect of self-control on their subjective well-being is more
A: Trait self-control 0.251 4.614*** [0.125, 0.392] obvious because this motivation orientation encourages them
B: Trait promotion motivation 0.250 4.496*** [0.123, 0.385] to adopt more conservative strategies, which often results in
A×B 0.002 0.024 [–0.207, 0.293] 0.000 0.001 the behavioral intention of them maintaining the status quo
Gender 0.053 0.905 [–0.069, 0.175] instead of taking risks to achieve one’s goals (Higgins, 1997;
Age 0.018 0.891 [–0.022, 0.055] Scholer and Higgins, 2012). Prevention motivation is not likely
***p < 0.001. to encourage individuals to explore new opportunities, which

may be beneficial to one’s subjective well-being. Thus, prevention 138 participants (M age = 20.24 years, SDage = 1.34; 97 females),
motivation is not as closely related to happiness as is promotion including 64 with trait promotion motivation and 74 participants
motivation (Cheung et al., 2014). This means that individuals with trait prevention motivation.
with prevention motivation achieve their desired goals only
through the power of self-control, consequently having more Materials
positive experiences. In these cases, the role of self-control is Motivation Priming Materials
fully displayed. As a result, the positive connection between State motivation is triggered through the process of motivational
self-control and subjective well-being is more significant among priming. To ensure the validity of the priming manipulation
individuals with prevention motivation. Our hypothesis was method used, we conducted a three-step work. First, we identified
confirmed through the findings of Study 1. the definitions of promotion and prevention motivation. Stories
To the best of our knowledge, few studies have focused on illustrating promotion motivation emphasize the value of
the influence of trait motivation on the relationship between benefits, such as pursuing success; the characters in these stories
self-control and subjective well-being. One study found that would be described as individuals who adopt eager approach
motivation plays a mediating role between trait self-control strategies, are willing to take risks, and are eager to succeed
and subjective well-being (Cheung et al., 2014). Specifically, it for nurturance needs. Meanwhile, prevention motivation focuses
found that trait self-control has a positive relationship with on the losses caused by risks, such as avoiding failure. Stories
the promotion motivation, which is positively associated with illustrating this motivation would have characters who adopt
happiness. It also found that trait self-control has a negative vigilant and avoidant strategies and who are more willing to
relationship with the prevention motivation, which is negatively pass up tempting but risky opportunities for safety reasons.
associated with happiness. The aforementioned study’s research Second, six stories were selected from mass media based on
question was different from that of the present one because the definitions of these two motivation types, with three stories
we emphasized motivation as a moderator instead of as a related to promotion motivation and another three related to
mediator. Nonetheless, both studies would help scholars to prevention motivation. We made the appropriate adjustment on
comprehensively understand the mechanism of self-control and the format and word count of each one to make them as similar
its influence on subjective well-being. In addition to stable trait as possible in both reading time and difficulty. Additionally, there
self-control and trait motivation, situational factors also need were no obscure or difficult words used in any of these stories.
to be considered, including conditions that trigger state self- The average reading time for each one was about 2 min. Third,
control (e.g., ego depletion) and state motivation. Therefore, in from a personality psychology class, we enlisted 30 graduate
Study 2, we explored the moderating effect of trait and state students (18 female) to evaluate the materials on motivation.
motivation on the relationship between state self-control and These graduate students were majoring in psychology and their
subjective well-being in an experimental model. mean age was 22.31 years. They were asked to evaluate the validity
of the experimental materials. They rated the six stories on a five-
point scale based on the definitions of the two types of motivation
STUDY 2 orientation. After reading each story, they were asked to answer
the following question: “Do you think this story is a good example
Materials and Methods of this type of motivation?” (1 = not at all, 5 = very much). Finally,
Participants and Design we selected the most representative story for each motivation type
Study 2 utilized a 2 (trait motivation: trait promotion vs. trait as the priming material (M promotion = 4.12, SD promotion = 0.33;
prevention motivation) × 2 (state motivation: state promotion M prevention = 4.46, SD prevention = 0.50).
vs. state prevention motivation) × 3 (ego depletion: no depletion
vs. mild depletion vs. severe depletion) three-factor mixed Ego Depletion Procedure
experiment design, wherein both trait and state motivation were Ego depletion was assessed using the Stroop task, with the target
used as the between-group variables and ego depletion was used stimuli being Chinese characters with red, yellow, green, and
as the within-group variable. In this design, ego depletion was blue color words. The participants were asked to make a fast
the independent variable that represented the respondent’s state and accurate judgment of the target stimulus’ color by pressing
of self-control, with subjective well-being being the dependent different keys when it was presented, with the colors “red,”
variable. Finally, both trait and state motivation were set as the “yellow,” “green,” and “blue” corresponding to the “D,” “F,” “J,”
moderating variables. and “K” keys, respectively. The practice phase was set up for
G− Power (version 3.1, Faul et al., 2009) revealed that a sample 32 trials to ensure that the participants were familiar with the
size of 124 was required for a power (1-β) of 95% to detect an experimental procedure. During the actual formal stage, there
effect of F = 0.25 at α = 0.05. Based on the participants’ scores in were 80 trials. The specific process is shown in Figure 2. The gaze
the Achievement Motivation Scale in Study 1, those with typical point shown by the “+” symbol was first presented, followed by a
trait promotion or prevention motivation were selected by adding blank screen. Then, a Chinese character stimulus was presented.
or subtracting one standard deviation from the mean. One month If the participants responded during this period, the stimulus
after Study 1, we contacted the participants who met our selection disappeared and the next trial proceeded. If they did not respond,
criteria, with 160 then volunteering to take part in Study 2. the stimulus disappeared automatically, implying that the trial
After removing all invalid data, we obtained valid responses from was invalid, and the next trial followed. For the no depletion

TABLE 4 | Descriptive statistics of participants’ subjective well-being

in each condition.
Ego depletion Trait motivation State motivation N M SD
No depletion Promotion Promotion 36 3.51 0.37

Prevention 28 3.58 0.37
Prevention Promotion 40 3.23 0.28
Mild depletion Promotion Promotion 36 3.49 0.30
Severe depletion Promotion Promotion 36 3.49 0.30
FIGURE 2 | The procedure of Stroop task. The Chinese character of “红” Prevention 34 3.22 0.47
means “red.”
number of valid responses came to 138. Each participant also

task, the word’s color was consistent with the word’s meaning; received a small token of appreciation.
for the mild depletion task, the word’s color was inconsistent
with the word’s meaning; and for the severe depletion task, the
interference of auditory stimuli was added to the inconsistent Results
visual stimuli (i.e., inconsistent word’s colors and meanings). Descriptive statistics were used to calculate the means and
For example, when the participants gazed at the stimulus, they standard deviations of each condition. The validity of the
heard the sound of a word’s meaning via headphones, with the experimental manipulation of ego depletion was then tested using
audio duration being the same as that of the visual stimulus. an independent samples t-test. Furthermore, the main effects
Thus, when the participants saw the word “blue” in a red font and interactions of ego depletion, trait motivation, and state
and simultaneously heard the word “blue,” the correct response motivation on respondents’ subjective well-being were explored
was “red” (i.e., correctly answered by pressing the “D” key). The using a repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). If
experimental procedure was developed using E-Prime 2.0, with a the interaction between an independent (ego depletion) and a
total of 112 trials per experiment condition. Subjective well-being moderating variable (state motivation or trait motivation) is
was measured using the same questionnaires as used in Study 1. significant, it would prove that motivation has a moderating
effect on the relationship between state self-control and subjective
Procedure well-being. Following this, a simple effect analysis was used to
The participants completed all experimental tasks on three explore the effects of state self-control on subjective well-being
consecutive Friday afternoons. Upon arriving at the laboratory in different conditions of state or trait motivation.
at the designated time on the first Friday, the participants
completed the no depletion task and, then, reported their Manipulation Check
level of fatigue on a seven-point scale (1 = not fatigued, First, an independent samples t-test was conducted to evaluate
7 = very fatigued). Half of the participants for each type of the validity of the experimental manipulation. For ego depletion,
trait motivation were then assigned to the promotion-motivation the feeling of fatigue differed across the various ego depletion
priming condition, while the other half were assigned to the conditions, with participants reporting significantly less fatigue
prevention-motivation priming condition. After reading the in the no depletion condition (M = 3.64, SD = 1.34) than in
story about the given motivation orientation, the participants’ the mild depletion [M = 6.09, SD = 1.15; t(137) = –15.31,
temporary risk propensity was tested on a seven-point scale (“Are p < 0.001, d = 1.96] and the severe depletion conditions
you willing to take a risk in pursuit of success now?” 1 = very [M = 6.50, SD = 1.12; t(137) = –16.69, p < 0.001, d = 2.32].
unwilling, 7 = very willing). Finally, all participants completed The feeling of fatigue in the mild depletion condition was also
questionnaires on their subjective well-being. The mild depletion significantly less than that in the severe depletion condition
task was completed on the second Friday, and the severe [t(137) = –3.486, p = 0.001, d = 0.36], indicating that our
depletion task, on the third Friday. The experimental procedures manipulation of ego depletion was valid. For state motivation,
in all three sessions were identical. According to the experimental the risk propensity of the participants in the promotion-
design, there should have been 40 participants divided into each priming condition (M = 6.21, SD = 1.62) was significantly
type of state motivation in the priming condition (Table 4); higher than that of those in the prevention-priming condition
however, 12 participants did not participate in the subsequent [M = 4.44, SD = 1.40; t(136) = 6.806, p < 0.001, d = 1.17],
experiments, six failed the Stroop task, and four did not complete indicating that motivation priming effectively initiated the two
at least one of the subjective well-being questionnaires. Thus, the state motivation orientations.

Descriptive Statistics of Subjective Well-Being in motivation and trait promotion motivation. In addition, there
Each Condition were significant differences observed in all three ego depletion
Descriptive statistics were used to calculate the means and conditions among individuals with trait prevention motivation.
standard deviations of each condition (Table 4). Table 4 shows Specifically, there were significant differences found between the
the participants’ subjective well-being scores for each type no depletion and mild depletion conditions (t = 6.901, p < 0.001,
of state motivation in the priming condition wherein they d = 0.40), the no depletion and severe depletion conditions
accomplished different ego depletion tasks with different trait (t = 3.788, p = 0.001, d = 0.08), and the mild depletion and
motivation orientations. severe depletion conditions (t = –3.855, p = 0.001, d = 0.33).
This means that self-control and happiness do not possess a
Main Effect of and Interaction of Self-Control and simple linear relationship under the condition of a combination
Motivation of state and trait prevention motivation. There was a positive
A repeated measures ANOVA revealed the existence of a correlation between them from no to mild ego depletion, with a
significant main effect of trait motivation [F(1, 136) = 22.00, negative correlation from mild to severe ego depletion. Overall,
p < 0.001, η2 = 0.142], a critically significant main effect these results indicate that the positive relationship between
of ego depletion [F(2, 274) = 2.434, p = 0.090, η2 = 0.018], state self-control and subjective well-being does not always
and a non-significant main effect of state motivation [F(1, exist and depends on the type and nature of the individual’s
136) = 0.55, p = 0.461]. Post hoc multiple comparisons revealed motivation. In most cases, there is a positive association between
that individuals with trait promotion motivation had significantly the two; however, a negative one does occur under the combined
higher levels of subjective well-being than those with trait condition of trait and state prevention motivation.
prevention motivation (p < 0.05). In terms of second-order
interactions, the interaction between ego depletion and trait Discussion
motivation was significant [F(2, 274) = 6.848, p = 0.001, Study 2 explored the relationship between state self-control
η2 = 0.049]; the interactions between ego depletion and state (ego depletion), state motivation, and subjective well-being from
motivation [F(2, 274) = 2.265, p = 0.106], and between trait a contextual perspective in an experimental model; that is,
and state motivation [F(1, 134) = 0.149, p = 0.700] were not it considered the effects of situational factors on subjective
significant. In terms of third-order interactions, the interaction well-being in addition to stable personality factors. The results
between ego depletion, state motivation, and trait motivation was revealed that the experimental manipulations of the motivation
significant, [F(2, 268) = 5.586, p = 0.004, η2 = 0.040]. These priming and ego depletion were effective, indicating that state
findings indicate that trait motivation moderated the relationship self-control and state motivation are easily induced in certain
between state self-control and subjective well-being, but state contexts. This finding suggests that it is worthwhile to explore
motivation did not. However, state motivation demonstrated a features that change with one’s surroundings, as opposed to
moderating effect when combined with trait motivation. only focusing on a person’s stable or constant personality traits.
Figures 3, 4 show that, across different levels of state Our findings are consistent with those of previous studies,
motivation, individuals with trait promotion motivation reported wherein some scholars have identified traits and states that
different levels of subjective well-being compared to those should be distinguished when examining the roles of self-control
with trait prevention motivation under different ego depletion (Cunningham and Baumeister, 2016; Friese et al., 2018) or
conditions. Specifically, our simple effect analysis revealed motivation (Silva et al., 2014; Vanroy et al., 2019).
that, according to the level of state promotion motivation, By fully considering both trait and state motivation, we
the subjective well-being of individuals with trait promotion found that these two factors interacted significantly with state
motivation did not significantly differ after they had completed self-control (i.e., ego depletion), which indicates that personal
different depletion tasks; however, there was a significant and situational factors jointly influence subjective well-being.
difference observed between the no depletion and severe Study 2 therefore supports our hypothesis; that is, the positive
depletion conditions among individuals with trait prevention relationship between state self-control and subjective well-being
motivation (t = 8.958, p < 0.001, d = 0.51). Figure 3 shows only appears among people with either state or trait prevention
a gradual decline in respondents’ subjective well-being as motivation, with this relationship being most significant when
their ego depletion became more severe. This indicates that these two motivation types are congruent. We found that the
there is a positive relationship between state self-control and positive relationship between state self-control and subjective
subjective well-being under the condition of experiencing a well-being exists under the conditions of a combination of state
combination of state promotion motivation and trait prevention promotion and trait prevention motivation and a combination
motivation. According to the level of state prevention motivation, of state prevention motivation and trait promotion motivation.
the subjective well-being of individuals with trait promotion Furthermore, under the condition of a combination of state
motivation differed significantly only between the no depletion and trait prevention motivation, there exist both positive and
and severe depletion conditions (t = 2.105, p = 0.045, d = 0.15), negative associations between state self-control and subjective
which showed a gradual decline of subjective well-being with well-being. In the case when self-control is compensated by
ego depletion (Figure 4), indicating that the positive relationship adopting a promotion motivation and not a prevention one,
between state self-control and subjective well-being exists in there is no significant relationship between state self-control and
the condition involving the combination of state prevention subjective well-being when state and trait promotion motivations

FIGURE 3 | The effect of ego depletion on subjective well-being in the level of state promotion motivation.
FIGURE 4 | The effect of ego depletion on subjective well-being in the level of state prevention motivation.
are combined. This is because promotion motivation can inspire On the one hand, the moderating effect of trait prevention
individuals to pursue goals despite their lowered self-control, motivation on the relationship between self-control and
which means that their subjective well-being is not accompanied subjective well-being was significantly stronger than that of
by changes in self-control. Additionally, in other combinations trait promotion motivation. On the other hand, the relationship
that include prevention motivation, a positive association can be between self-control and subjective well-being was more
observed. However, we are unsure as to why subjective well-being obvious in the state prevention-motivation condition than in
increased in the range between mild and severe ego depletion in the state promotion-motivation one. These results correspond
the matching condition of state and trait prevention motivation. to those of Study 1. Similar to the assumption in Study 1, we
This is a question that needs to be explored by future researchers. speculated that individuals with prevention motivation are less

motivated and require greater self-control abilities to achieve by the nature of self-control, which involves the overriding or
long-term goals and create more opportunities to experience inhibiting of automatic, habitual, or innate behaviors, urges,
happiness; meanwhile, individuals with promotion motivation emotions, or desires that would otherwise interfere with a
can compensate for the shortage of strength caused by ego person’s goal-directed behaviors (Baumeister et al., 1994; Barkley,
depletion to some extent because they are better able to maintain 1997). Our research supports this conclusion. More importantly,
their behavior in these cases (Weinberg and Gould, 2015). we verified the moderating role of motivation in this relationship.
Therefore, promotion motivation can maintain the effect of We assumed that the impact of self-control on subjective well-
self-control on subjective well-being, but prevention motivation being changes depending on the type of motivation.
cannot, as it results in a diminished effect of self-control on Self-control aims to restrict a person’s adverse impulsive
subjective well-being after energy depletion. According to the behaviors in order to make it easier for them to achieve their
regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 2005), the effect of motivation rational goals, which could grant people access to success, which,
is maximized when one’s trait matches their current state. in turn, provides them with more opportunities to achieve
Our study findings were in line with the theory, in that trait greater life satisfaction and positive affect. Therefore, there is
prevention motivation had the most significant effect on the a positive relationship between self-control and subjective well-
link between ego depletion and subjective well-being in the state being. However, self-control is challenged by the energy loss
prevention-motivation condition. that occurs in the process of pursuing one’s goals. In this case,
Study 2 found that, although ego depletion reduced if an individual has a strong desire to achieve a given goal,
participants’ subjective well-being levels, this relationship’s such as through adopting promotion motivation, any deficit
trend was not exactly linear. While in the state promotion- in their self-control will be compensated. Because promotion
motivation condition, there was no significant difference motivation focuses on the value of success, it inspires individuals
observed between no depletion and mild depletion, or between to take more risks in order to achieve success; therefore,
mild depletion and severe depletion. In the state prevention- individuals with this type of motivation have a more powerful
motivation condition, there was a lower level of subjective drive to overcome difficulties, which is beneficial in terms of
well-being in the mild depletion than in the no depletion and maintaining a degree of self-control. It ensures a high level
severe depletion conditions. One previous study found that of happiness even at a lower level of self-control. However,
strong motivation priming mitigated mild ego depletion but had when a person has sufficient self-control energy, which is not
no effect on severe depletion (Vohs et al., 2012). Other studies sensitive to their type of motivation (Muraven and Slessareva,
have suggested that the relationship between self-control and 2003), they are more likely to achieve their goals by using their
subjective well-being may be curvilinear; arguing that having a self-control’s innate strength, thus creating greater opportunities
too high or a too low level of self-control may have detrimental to increase their happiness. This means that it is possible to
effects on happiness (Carter et al., 2015; Wiese et al., 2018). achieve one’s goals no matter how much their self-control energy
Although the results of this study are different from these prior changes, and thus, individuals’ happiness levels are more likely
ones, they still illustrate that the degree of ego depletion must be to remain high. However, a significant correlation supporting
comprehensively considered when evaluating state self-control. this was not observed. On the contrary, if individuals have a
There are some studies that echo ours. For example, Shah weak desire to achieve their goals, such as those who adopt
et al. (1998) found that individuals with a prevention motivation a prevention-motivation orientation, their self-control will not
perform well in “avoid a loss” situations; however, they did benefit from this motivation orientation. Because prevention
not examine the role of self-control in these contexts. Other motivation focuses on the negative effects of failure, encouraging
studies have explored the interaction between ego depletion and people to adopt more conservative strategies in order to avoid
motivation (Berkman et al., 2017), but they did not link this effect failure, it does not provide sufficient motivation to solve any
to subjective well-being. From an experimental perspective, Study problems that arise subsequently; hence, their subjective well-
2 further demonstrated that motivation plays a moderating role being cannot be improved because their goals are less likely
in the relationship between self-control and subjective well-being, to be achieved. The relationship between subjective well-being
including both trait motivation (representing personality factors) and self-control is not affected by prevention motivation, with
and state motivation (representing contextual factors). subjective well-being maintaining its positive links with self-
control herein. Therefore, motivation type plays a moderating
role in the association between self-control and subjective well-
GENERAL DISCUSSION being.
Although a few studies have discussed the relationship
The present research verified the moderating role of motivation among these three variables (Cheung et al., 2014; Ouyang
in the relationship between self-control and subjective well-being, et al., 2015; Nielsen et al., 2019), there are still some gaps
especially among participants with a prevention-motivation in the literature, including the fact that the moderating role
orientation. According to the literature, there is a positive of motivation has not been analyzed, the interaction effect
association between self-control and subjective well-being; that is, between personal and situational factors has not been explored,
subjective well-being tends to increase with a higher level of self- and multiple levels of ego depletion have never been fully
control (Cheung et al., 2014; Grund et al., 2015; Wiese et al., 2018; manipulated. Considering the above research gaps, the present
Nielsen et al., 2019; Massar et al., 2020). This can be explained study examined the moderating effects of motivation on the

relationship between self-control and subjective well-being. In psychological well-being can be referred to as “eudaimonic
both our psychometrical and experimental models, we found that well-being,” which represents the personal and social abilities
motivation has a moderating effect, with this effect being more that contribute to a person’s optimal psychological functioning,
pronounced in the case of prevention motivation. According such as believing in the meaning of life, a sense of continued
to the results of the two studies, the moderating effect of trait personal growth, and social contribution (Ryff, 2018). These
motivation is always present, while that of state motivation needs two kinds of well-being have different theoretical bases and
to occur in conjunction with trait motivation in order to exert philosophical traditions; therefore, it is necessary to distinguish
any influence. This suggests that distinguishing between trait and between them when discussing the relationship between self-
state motivations is necessary for a comprehensive understanding control, motivation, and happiness (Delle Fave, 2014; Joshanloo
of the mechanism underlying a person’s motivation. et al., 2020). Second, the relationship between self-control and
The present findings echo those of previous studies, meaning happiness is closely related to one’s real-life conditions; however,
that it is necessary to further explore the link between self-control this study focused on college students who live on campuses
and subjective well-being from the perspective of motivation and have less complicated life experiences than most adults.
(Cheung et al., 2014; Ouyang et al., 2015; Nielsen et al., 2019; Zeng Therefore, future research should focus on adult populations
and Chen, 2020). Additionally, our findings also address various from various backgrounds. Third, both motivation and happiness
issues ignored in the literature. When considering the roles of the have different cultural meanings. Thus, there are a large number
two types of motivation, studies have tended toward supporting of cross-cultural studies that indicate that it is necessary to
the belief that promotion motivation has a more positive effect explore the relationship between self-control, motivation, and
(Ouyang et al., 2015; Weinberg and Gould, 2015); however, happiness from a cultural perspective. Fourth, our research was
prior research has also found that the effects of prevention confined to the laboratory setting. Considering the ecological
motivation are more obvious when self-control resources are validity of this strand of research, future studies should be carried
inefficient (Lisjak and Lee, 2014). The present study draws the out in ecological contexts (Steger, 2016; Joshanloo et al., 2020), to
same conclusion. Additionally, we found that, when an individual explore the more realistic relationships among these variables and
had a state prevention-motivation orientation, their subjective provide effective suggestions for improving peoples’ happiness.
well-being was lower in the mild depletion condition than in the
no depletion and severe depletion ones. This finding contrasts
with the beliefs of other researchers who posited that too high CONCLUSION
or too low levels of self-control may interfere with a person’s
happiness (Letzring et al., 2005; Tay and Diener, 2011). There The present study found that self-control has a positive effect on
is evidence that contradicts this line of reasoning (Wiese et al., subjective well-being and that this effect is mainly moderated by
2018). Hence, this issue needs to be further discussed and prevention motivation. Specifically, when prevention motivation
explored in future research. Overall, our results support our increases, an individual is more likely to have a positive
hypothesis that motivation moderates the relationship between subjective well-being due to the resulting higher levels of self-
self-control and subjective well-being. Given that both promotion control. Regarding the state aspect, ego depletion reduces one’s
motivation and self-control adopt the goal-directed functions of level of subjective well-being; however, ego depletion does not
maintaining and promoting target-oriented behaviors, the effect have a completely linear relationship with subjective well-being
of self-control on subjective well-being is not as obvious among as a moderator of motivation, especially among people with
individuals with this kind of motivation. As for individuals with prevention motivation (both trait and state). When the two
prevention motivation, the incentivizing role of self-control can types of prevention motivation are consistent, ego depletion has
compensate for the weaknesses associated with this motivation the most obvious impact on subjective well-being. Our research
orientation, and thus, it demonstrates a more obvious effect. suggests that there are limitations on the association between
Although the present study explored the relationship between self-control and happiness and that motivation should be the
self-control, subjective well-being, and motivation from various focus of future studies. Through long-term motivation training
aspects, it had several limitations. First, we only focused on or providing temporary situational stimulation to a person’s
subjective well-being—rather than psychological well-being— motivation, the effect of self-control on one’s subjective well-
when discussing happiness. Research has demonstrated that being can be influenced, implying that these methods have
self-control and psychological well-being are related, with self- practical value for improving people’s happiness.
control being able to enhance a person’s psychological well-
being (Fritz and Gallagher, 2019). Some researchers have also
argued that the link between psychological well-being and the
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
variables involved in pursuing future objectives (e.g., self-control) The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be
is stronger than the link between subjective well-being and these made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
variables (Joshanloo et al., 2020). Because psychological well-
being emphasizes the importance of achieving one’s values, it
would have some connection to a persons’ motivation and their ETHICS STATEMENT
degree of self-control. Subjective well-being may also be referred
to as “hedonic well-being,” which is usually evaluated through The studies involving human participants were reviewed and
one’s affect and life satisfaction (Diener et al., 2018); meanwhile, approved by the Ethics in Human Research Committee of

the School of Psychology, Northwest Normal University. The data analyses. GZ, FX, YCL, and YXL wrote the manuscript.
patients/participants provided their written informed consent to All authors contributed to the article and approved the
participate in this study. submitted version.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS FUNDING

GZ designed the experiments. QZ and WW recruited the This study was supported by the National Society Science
participants and collected the data. FX and YC performed the Foundation of China (13XZJ016).
REFERENCES Fritz, H. L., and Gallagher, B. P. (2019). Three dimensions of desirability of control:
divergent relations with psychological and physical well-being. Psychol. Health
Barkley, R. A. (1997). ADHD And The Nature Of Self-Control. New York, NY: 35, 210–238. doi: 10.1080/08870446.2019.1638512
Guilford. Gillebaart, M., Schneider, I. K., and De Ridder, D. T. (2016). Effects of trait self-
Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Muraven, M., and Tice, D. M. (1998). Ego control on response conflict about healthy and unhealthy food. J. Pers. 84,
depletion: is the active self a limited resource? J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 74, 1252– 789–798. doi: 10.1111/jopy.12219
1265. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1252 Grund, A., Grunschel, C., Bruhn, D., and Fries, S. (2015). Torn between want and
Baumeister, R. F., Heatherton, T. F., and Tice, D. M. (1994). Losing Control: How should: an experience-sampling study on motivational conflict, well-being, self-
And Why People Fail At Self-Regulation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. control, and mindfulness. Motiv. Emot. 39, 506–520. doi: 10.1007/s11031-015-
Baumeister, R. F., Vohs, K. D., and Tice, D. M. (2007). The strength model of 9476-z
selfcontrol. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 16, 351–355. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007. Hagger, M. S. (2014). The multiple pathways by which trait self-control predicts
00534.x health behavior. Ann. Behav. Med. 48, 282–283. doi: 10.1007/s12160-014-9
Berkman, E. T., Hutcherson, C. A., Livingston, J. L., Kahn, L. E., and Inzlicht, M. 631-x
(2017). Self-control as value-based choice. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 26, 422–428. Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. Am. Psychol. 52, 1280–1300.
doi: 10.1177/0963721417704394 doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280
Carter, N. T., Guan, L., Maples, J. L., Williamson, R. L., and Miller, J. D. (2015). Higgins, E. T. (2005). Value from regulatory fit. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 14, 209–213.
The downsides of extreme conscientiousness for psychological well-being: the doi: 10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00366.x
role of obsessive compulsive tendencies. J. Pers. 84, 510–522. doi: 10.1111/jopy. Higgins, E. T., Friedman, R. S., Harlow, R. E., Idson, L. C., Ayduk, O. N., and
12177 Taylor, A. (2001). Achievement orientations from subjective histories of success:
Chen, J. (2013). Perceived discrimination and subjective well-being among ruralto- promotion pride versus prevention pride. Eur. J. Soc. Psychol. 31, 3–23. doi:
urban migrants in China. J. Sociol. Soc. Welf. 40, 131–156. doi: 10.1007/s11150- 10.1002/ejsp.27
013-9208-7 Hofmann, W., Luhmann, M., Fisher, R. R., Vohs, K. D., and Baumeister, R. F.
Cheung, T., Gillebaart, M., Kroese, F., and De Ridder, D. (2014). Why are people (2014). Yes, but are they happy? Effects of trait self-control on affective well-
with high self-control happier? The effect of trait self-control on happiness being and life satisfaction. J. Pers. 82, 265–277. doi: 10.1111/jopy.12050
as mediated by regulatory focus. Front. Psychol. 5:6. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014. Joshanloo, M., Jovanoviæ, V., and Park, J. (2020). Differential relationships
00722 of hedonic and eudaimonic well-being with self-control and long-term
Cunningham, M. R., and Baumeister, R. F. (2016). How to make nothing orientation. Jpn. Psychol. Res. 63, 47–57. doi: 10.1111/jpr.12276
out of something: analyses of the impact of study sampling and statistical Layton, R. L., and Muraven, M. (2014). Self-control linked with restricted
interpretation in misleading meta-analytic conclusions. Front. Psychol. 7:9. doi: emotional extremes. Pers. Individ. Dif. 58, 48–53. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2013.10.
10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01639 004
De Ridder, D. T., Lensvelt-Mulders, G., Finkenauer, C., Stok, F. M., and Baumeister, Letzring, T. D., Block, J., and Funder, D. C. (2005). Ego-control and ego-resiliency:
R. F. (2012). Taking stock of self-control: a meta-analysis of how trait self- Generalization of self-report scales based on personality descriptions from
control relates to a wide range of behaviors. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 16, 76–99. acquaintances, clinicians, and the self. J. Res. Pers. 39, 395–422. doi: 10.1016/
doi: 10.1177/1088868311418749 j.jrp.2004.06.003
De Ridder, D., and Gillebaart, M. (2017). Lessons learned from trait self-control Li, Y., Lan, J., and Ju, C. (2015). Achievement motivation and attributional
in well-being: making the case for routines and initiation as important style as mediators between perfectionism and subjective well-being in Chinese
components of trait self-control. Health Psychol. Rev. 11, 89–99. doi: 10.1080/ university students. Pers. Individ. Dif. 79, 146–151. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2015.01.
17437199.2016.1266275 050
Delle Fave, A. (2014). “Eudaimonic and hedonic happiness,” in Encyclopedia Lisjak, M., and Lee, A. Y. (2014). The bright side of impulse: Depletion heightens
of Quality of Life and Wellbeing Research, ed. A. C. Michalos (Dordrecht: self-protective behavior in the face of danger. J. Consum. Res. 41, 55–70. doi:
Springer), 1999–2004. 10.1086/674975
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., and Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with Lisjak, M., Molden, D. C., and Lee, A. Y. (2012). Primed interference: the
life scale. J. Pers. Assess. 49, 71–75. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13 cognitive and behavioral costs of an incongruity between chronic and primed
Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., and Oishi, S. (2018). Advances and open questions in the motivational orientations. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 102, 889–909. doi: 10.1037/
science of subjective well-being. Collabra. Psychol. 4:15. doi: 10.1525/collabra. a0027594
115 Manczak, E. M., Zapata-Gietl, C., and McAdams, D. P. (2014). Regulatory
Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., and Smith, H. L. (1999). Subjective well-being: focus in the life story: Prevention and promotion as expressed in three
three decades of progress. Psychol. Bull. 125, 276–302. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909. layers of personality. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 106, 169–181. doi: 10.1037/a003
125.2.276 4951
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Buchner, A., and Lang, A.-G. (2009). Statistical power Massar, K., Bìlostíková, P., and Sui, X. (2020). It’s the thought that counts: Trait self-
analyses using G-Power 3.1: tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav. control is positively associated with well-being and coping via thought control
Res. Methods 41, 1149–1160. doi: 10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149 ability. Curr. Psychol. 1–10. doi: 10.1007/s12144-020-00746-9
Friese, M., Loschelder, D. D., Gieseler, K., Frankenbach, J., and Inzlicht, M. (2018). Mezo, P. G. (2005). The Self-Control and Self-Management Scale (SCMS): A General
Is ego depletion real? An analysis of arguments. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 23, Measure of Self-Control and Self-Management Skills. (Order No. AAI3171061).
107–131. doi: 10.1177/1088868318762183 Doctoral Dissertation. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii.

Milyavskaya, M., and Inzlicht, M. (2017). What’s so great about self-control? Watson, D., Clark, L. A., and Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and
Examining the importance of effortful self-control and temptation in predicting validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS
real-life depletion and goal attainment. Soc. Psychol. Pers. Sci. 8, 603–611. doi: scales. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 54, 1063–1070. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.
10.1177/1948550616679237 1063
Muraven, M., and Slessareva, E. (2003). Mechanisms of self-control failure: Weinberg, R. S., and Gould, D. (2015). Foundations of Sporth and Exercise
motivation and limited resources. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 29:894. doi: 10.1177/ Psychology, 6th Edn. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.
0146167203029007008 Wiese, C. W., Tay, L., Duckworth, A. L., D’Mello, S., Kuykendall, L., Baumeister,
Nielsen, K. S., Gwozdz, W., and De Ridder, D. (2019). Unraveling the relationship R. F., et al. (2018). Too much of a good thing? exploring the inverted-u
between trait self-control and subjective well-being: the mediating role of four relationship between self-control and happiness. J. Pers. 86, 380–396. doi: 10.
self-control strategies. Front. Psychol. 10:10. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00706 1111/jopy.12322
Ouyang, Y., Zhu, Y., Fan, W., Tan, Q., and Zhong, Y. (2015). People higher in Ye, R. (1992). Measurement and analyze on achievement motivation. Psychol. Dev.
self-control do not necessarily experience more happiness: regulatory focus also Educ. (Chinese). 8, 14–16.
affects subjective well-being. Pers. Individ. Dif. 86, 406–411. doi: 10.1016/j.paid. Zabelina, D. L., Robinson, M. D., and Anicha, C. L. (2007). The psychological
2015.06.044 tradeoffs of self-control: a multi-method investigation. Pers. Individ. Dif. 43,
Qiu, L., Zheng, X., and Wang, Y. (2008). The revising of positive emotion and 463–473. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2006.12.015
negative emotion scale. Appl. Psychol. (Chinese). 14, 249–254. Zeng, Z., and Chen, H. (2020). Distinct associations of hedonic and eudaimonic
Ryff, C. D. (2018). Well-being with soul: science in pursuit of human potential. motives with well-being: mediating role of self-control. Int. J. Environ. Res.
Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 13, 242–248. doi: 10.1177/1745691617699836 Public Health 17:5547. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17155547
Scholer, A. A., and Higgins, E. T. (2012). “Too much of a good thing? Trade- Zhao, G. (2016). Religiosity Effect In The Model Of Self-Control In The View Of
offs in promotion and prevention focus,” in Oxford Handbook of Motivation, Personality And Context. Doctoral Dissertation. Lanzhou: Northwest Normal
ed. R. Ryan (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 65–84. doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/ University.
9780195399820.013.0005
Shah, J., Higgins, E. T., and Friedman, R. S. (1998). Performance incentives and Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the
means: how regulatory focus influences goal attainment. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a
74, 285–293. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.74.2.285 potential conflict of interest.
Silva, M. N., Marques, M. M., and Teixeira, P. J. (2014). Testing theory in practice:
the example of self-determination theory-based interventions. Eur. Health. Publisher’s Note: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors
Psychol. 16, 171–180. and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of
Steger, M. F. (2016). “Hedonia, eudaimonia, and meaning: Me versus us; fleeting the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in
versus enduring,” in Handbook of Eudaimonic Well-Being, ed. J. Vittersø (Cham: this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or
Springer International), 175–182. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-42445-3_11 endorsed by the publisher.
Tay, L., and Diener, E. (2011). Needs and subjective well-being around the world.
J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 101, 354–365. doi: 10.1037/a0023779 Copyright © 2022 Zhao, Xie, Luo, Liu, Chong, Zhang and Wang. This is an open-
Vanroy, J., Seghers, J., Uffelen, J. V., and Boen, F. (2019). Can a framed intervention access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
motivate older adults in assisted living facilities to exercise? BMC Geriatr. 19:46. License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted,
doi: 10.1186/s12877-019-1060-z provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the
Vohs, K. D., Baumeister, R. F., and Schmeichel, B. J. (2012). Motivation, personal original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic
beliefs, and limited resources all contribute to self-control. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply
48, 943–947. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2012.03.002 with these terms.

Analiza Personala

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Analiza Personala

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Analiza Personala

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

published: 10 January 2022

Effects of Self-Control on Subjective

It is well documented that self-control has a positive effect on individuals’ subjective

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 1 January 2022 | Volume 12 | Article 774148

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 2 January 2022 | Volume 12 | Article 774148

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 3 January 2022 | Volume 12 | Article 774148

Measures Statistical Analysis

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 4 January 2022 | Volume 12 | Article 774148

Moderator Analyses A×B 0.302 3.151** [0.089, 0.504] 0.026 9.929**

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 5 January 2022 | Volume 12 | Article 774148

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 6 January 2022 | Volume 12 | Article 774148

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 7 January 2022 | Volume 12 | Article 774148

TABLE 4 | Descriptive statistics of participants’ subjective well-being

Ego depletion Trait motivation State motivation N M SD

No depletion Promotion Promotion 36 3.51 0.37

number of valid responses came to 138. Each participant also

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 8 January 2022 | Volume 12 | Article 774148

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 9 January 2022 | Volume 12 | Article 774148

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 10 January 2022 | Volume 12 | Article 774148

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 11 January 2022 | Volume 12 | Article 774148

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 12 January 2022 | Volume 12 | Article 774148

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS FUNDING

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 13 January 2022 | Volume 12 | Article 774148

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 14 January 2022 | Volume 12 | Article 774148

You might also like

Moderator Analyses A×B 0.302 3.151 [0.089, 0.504] 0.026 9.929