tallinna ülikool sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid tallinn ... - E-Ait

TALLINNA ÜLIKOOL
SOTSIAALTEADUSTE DISSERTATSIOONID
TALLINN UNIVERSITY
DISSERTATIONS ON SOCIAL SCIENCES
50
1

EVA-MARIA KANGRO
MANIFESTATION OF IMPULSIVE BEHAVIOUR:
THE ROLE OF CONTEXTUAL DEMANDS AND
REFLECTIVE COMPETENCE
Tallinn 2011
3

TALLINNA ÜLIKOOL
SOTSIAALTEADUSTE DISSERTATSIOONID
TALLINN UNIVERSITY
DISSERTATIONS ON SOCIAL SCIENCES
50
Eva-Maria Kangro
MANIFESTATION OF IMPULSIVE BEHAVIOUR:
THE ROLE OF CONTEXTUAL DEMANDS AND REFLECTIVE COMPETENCE
Institute of Psychology, Tallinn University, Tallinn, Estonia
The dissertation is accepted for the commencement of the degree of Doctor Philosophiae in
Psychology by the Doctoral Committee of Social Sciences of Tallinn University on March
29, 2011.
Supervisor
Opponents
Aleksander Pulver, PhD, Professor at the Institute of Psychology of Tallinn
University
Tiia Tulviste, PhD, Professor at the Faculty of Social Sciences and
Education of University of Tartu
Aaro Toomela, PhD, Professor at the Institute of Psychology of Tallinn
University
The academic disputation on the dissertation will be held on May 18, 2011 at 13 o’clock, at
Tallinn University lecture hall M-225, Uus-Sadama 5, Tallinn.
Copyright: Eva-Maria Kangro, 2011
Copyright: Tallinn University, 2011
ISSN 1736-3632 (printed publication)
ISBN 978-9949-463-85-5 (printed publication)
ISSN 1736-793X (online, PDF)
ISBN 978-9949-463-86-2 (online, PDF)
Tallinn University
Narva mnt 25
10120 Tallinn
www.tlu.ee
Publication of this thesis is granted by the Institute of Psychology,
University of Tallinn, and by the Doctoral School
of Behavioral, Social and Health Sciences created under the
auspices of European Union Social Fund.
4

CONTENTS
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS ..................................................................................................... 6
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................... 7
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 8
CHAPTER 1 Meaning and contextual features of impulsivity.............................................. 11
CHAPTER 2 Linkage between aggressive behaviour, self-reflection capacity, and selfregulation
ability in elementary school children.................................................................... 25
CHAPTER 3 From intentions to behaviour: the role of self-control in the context of
dieting, exercising, and binge-drinking ................................................................................. 38
GENERAL DISCUSSION .................................................................................................... 60
THESES ................................................................................................................................ 63
KOKKUVÕTE JA TEESID .................................................................................................. 64
REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................... 67
APPENDIX ........................................................................................................................... 77
CURRICULUM VITAE ....................................................................................................... 79
ELULOOKIRJELDUS .......................................................................................................... 81
5

LIST OF PUBLICATIONS
Published articles
1. Kangro, E.-M. (2010a). Role of self-reflection ability in children’s self-regulation. In A.
Toomela (Ed.), Systemic person-oriented study of child development in early primary
school (pp. 245-260). Frankfurt: Peter Lang GmbH.
2. Mõttus, R., Allik, J., Konstabel, K., Kangro, E.-M., & Pullmann, H. (2008). Beliefs
about the relationships between personality and intelligence. Personality and Individual
Differences, 45(6), 457 - 462.
Published conference abstracts
1. Kangro, E.-M. (2008a). Impulsivity in laypersons' mind. International Journal of
Psychology, 43, 3-4, p. 679.
2. Kangro, E.-M. (2008b). Impulsivity - what does it mean In: Abstracts of 29th International
Congress of Psychology: 29th International Congress of Psychology. Berlin, 2008.
3. Kangro, E.-M. (2010b). Link between self-reflection and externalizing behaviour in
elementary school children. In M. Blatny, M. Hrebickova, S. Kourilova, A. Slezackova,
P. Kveton, D. Voboril (Eds.), 15th European Conference on Personality: Program and
Abstracts (pp. 169). Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Institute of
Psychology.
4. Kangro, E-M. (2011). Interplay of self-control and situational demands in bingedrinking.
Association for Research in Personality (ARP) 2 nd Biennial Meeting. Submitted
abstract.
5. Kangro, E-M., & Hagger, M.S. (2010). The effects of trait-self-control on the
relationship between health-related intentions and behaviour. Psychology and Health, 25,
1, 249-250.
6

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I want to thank all the people who have contributed to the accomplishment of my
dissertation. First of all, I am grateful to my supervisor professor Aleksander Pulver
who has always supported my initiatives, created opportunities for progress, and
provided inspiring discussions which have kept me on my toes. Second, my special
thanks to Professor Aaro Toomela, as well as to Grete Arro for inviting me to
participate in the school children project, and also, for their fruitful consultations
and dialogues. Thanks to Grete’s remarkable work, I had the possibility to use the
coded data which primarily led me to the conclusions in my thesis. Third, I am
sincerely appreciative to Martin Hagger from the University of Nottingham who
invited me to join the international research project on self-regulation in the field of
health behaviour. He provided his consistent support and helpful advice throughout
all the stages of the research. I would especially like to thank all the others who
contributed to the success of the health study: Kaisa-Kitri Niit for the backtranslation
process of the tests, volunteers for devoting their time to participate in
two online studies, and, last but not least, my colleagues from Psience and other
partners as well for being involved in the process of data collection. Also, I am
grateful to the Doctoral School of Behavioural, Social, and Health Sciences for
providing possibilities to participate in valuable scientific events during the period
of doctoral studies.
And finally, I am truly grateful to my family who has been my unconditional anchor
even in the busiest times. I thank my parents for their all-around support,
encouragement and belief in me, my husband – Karel - for his love, understanding,
and tolerance, and my daughters – Nora and Heti Desiree - for their enduring
energy. Without their supportive attitude, writing this dissertation would have been
much more complicated.
7

INTRODUCTION
MANIFESTATION OF IMPULSIVE BEHAVIOUR:
THE ROLE OF CONTEXTUAL DEMANDS AND REFLECTIVE
COMPETENCE
Current dissertations focus on contingencies of the manifestation of impulsivity
(including self-control and self-regulation sources), pointing to the function of
situational demands and self-reflection ability. Impulsivity is a behavioural
construct that is generally associated with various psychological, social, and healthrelated
outcomes - particularly problematic ones. Indeed, research provides strong
evidence to support this notion: impulsive patterns (i.e., tendency to behave on the
spur of moment without deliberation and lack of planning, weak self-regulation
capacity) are found to be core aspects of hyperactivity (e.g., Barkley, 2006), certain
types of aggressiveness (e.g., Fontaine & Dodge, 2006), risky health behaviour
(e.g., Zapolski, Cyders, & Gregory, 2009), and other non-rational acts.
Contextual demands of impulsive behaviour
Impulsivity and its essential markers such as low self-control and self-regulation
capacity (e.g., Mathias and Stanford, 2003; Tangney, Baumeister, and Boone, 2004)
are considered to be relatively stable characters, like traits generally are (Eysenck,
1967; Costa & McCrae, 1992). However, the social cognitive view of personality
(Mischel, 1973) considers dispositions as situation hedged, conditional, and
interactive with the situations in which they are expressed. This means that if
different situations acquire different meanings for the same individual, the kinds of
cognitive, emotional, physical and behavioural responses will vary depending on
the situational circumstances (Mischel, 2004). In other words, the manifestation of
impulsivity needs the presence of accurate contextual cues, both psychological and
environmental (Cervone, Shoda, & Downey, 2007). Although contextual
contingences appear to play an essential role in impulsive behaviour and selfregulation
conflicts (e.g., Cervone et al., 2007; Strack & Deutch, 2004), mainstream
models of personality (such as Big 5 - Costa & McCrae, 1992) and healthbehaviour
(e.g., theory of planned behaviour - Ajzen, 1991), however, are usually
not sensitive enough to the situational contingencies that behaviours appear to be
subject to. Wright and Mischel (1987), in turn, expressly link the disposition with
context, arguing that impulsive temperament is behaviourally expressed mostly in
situations which presuppose social, self-regulatory or cognitive competences that
subjects lack.
Thus, in order to understand the context of trait manifestation, attempts should be
made to define psychologically active features of situations (Fleeson, 2004).
Thereat, those features might cover a variety of diverse aspects: physicalenvironmental
(e.g., Fleeson, 2007), social (Ackerman, Goldstein, Shapiro, &
Bargh, 2009; Bandura, 1977; Heatherton & Vohs, 1998), and internal (e.g., Mischel
8

& Ayduk, 2004). Accordingly, in Chapter 1 and 3, situational features of impulsive
behaviour – or manifestation of low self-control – are discussed. Specifically,
Chapter 1 aims to reach a better understanding about the laypersons’ way of
conceptualizing impulsivity, and find the structure of psychologically active
situational characteristics in the context of impulsive acts. Chapter 3 concentrates
on the role of self-regulation capacity (i.e., trait self-control) in health-related
behaviours such as dieting, physical activity, and alcohol consumption. Indeed,
prior findings demonstrate that self-regulation seems to be one of the central issues
when it comes to explaining people’s health behaviour (e.g., Hagger, Chatzisarantis,
& Biddle, 2002; Kangro & Hagger, 2010; Tangney, Baumeister, and Boone, 2004;
Wiers & Hoffmann, 2010). In Chapter 3, special focus is placed on the situational
contingences of alcohol consumption.
The linkage between self-reflection and impulsive behaviour
In addition to situational demands, research provides evidence for the notion that
the way people behave in provocative or stimulating situations may depend on how
they interpret those situations (e.g., Fujita & Han, 2009; John & Gross, 2004;
Metcalfe & Mischel, 1999). Specifically, an abstract way of thinking (Mischel,
2004) – including relevant and core features to form conceptualizations (Liberman,
Trope, & Stephan, 2007) - refers to more balanced responses in triggering situations
(Kangro, 2010a). Thus, Chapter 2 discusses the linkage between self-reflection
skills and aggressive behaviour in children (as an outcome of self-regulation
capacity).
Aims of the dissertation
The broad aim of the dissertation is to explain the role of contextual contingencies
and self-reflective aspects in the manifestation of impulsive behaviour. This
umbrella encompasses the following objectives:
(a) to achieve better comprehension of contextual factors in the manifestation of
impulsivity (Ch 1);
(b) to explain the relationships between children’s self-reflection capacity (use of
abstract construals) and different forms of self-regulation - behavioural
(aggression) and cognitive (executive functioning) (Ch 2);
(c) to examine the effects of trait self-control on health behaviour in three
contexts: exercise, dieting, and binge drinking (Ch3). Special focus is placed
on the situational contingences of alcohol consumption.
9

Constitution of the dissertation
This work gives an overview of three research projects which reflect different
aspects of the manifestation of impulsive behaviour, and which are, however,
conceptually consistent. Each of the projects is presented in a separate chapter.
Firstly, Chapter 1 focuses on the meaning and contextual features of impulsivity,
giving the overall conceptual background of the dissertation. Secondly, Chapter 2
concentrates on children’s aggressive behaviour, suggesting a model of types of
aggression which incorporates self-reflection capacity and self-regulation sources.
Thirdly, Chapter 3 examines the interplay of trait self-control and health-behaviour.
The chapters are followed by the general discussion and conclusions. Finally, the
theses of the dissertation are presented.
10

CHAPTER 1
Meaning and contextual features of impulsivity
Impulsivity is a multidimensional concept that has variously been defined as an
inability to wait, a tendency to act without forethought, lack of planning,
insensitivity to consequences, and an inability to inhibit inappropriate behaviours
(e.g., Barratt & Patton, 1983; Eysenck, 1993; Whiteside & Lynam, 2001). However,
there is not a complete consensus about what constitutes impulsivity. Remarkable
differences crop up when focusing on various definitions and measures based on
those definitions.
In this chapter, firstly, a brief overview of different approaches to impulsivity will
be given, and secondly, the meaningfulness of contextual features in trait
manifestation will be discussed. The empirical part, respectively, tries to (1) reach a
better understanding about a laypersons’ way of conceptualizing impulsivity, and
see how the descriptions match with theoretical background, and (2) describe the
structure of psychologically active situational characteristics in the context of
impulsive behaviour.
Perhaps the dominant perspective in psychology states that impulsiveness,
aggressiveness and other non-reflective behaviours represent a deficit in planning
and self-regulation (e.g., Barratt & Patton, 1983; Felson & Tedeschi, 1993). People
high in impulsivity are likely to “act without thinking” and have problems with
restraining impulses. Additionally, Barratt (1985) proposed that levels of
impulsiveness are related to cognitive tempo or speed of thinking, which explains
the phenomena of “racing thoughts” as an example of cognitive impulsiveness.
Relying on those views, impulsivity seems to be closely related to the construct of
self-regulation, and furthermore, is even defined by that. Self-regulation has largely
been associated with behaviours that are deliberative, reflective and consciously
directed rather than automatic, non-conscious and spontaneous (Aarts, 2007;
Hofmann, Friese, & Wiers, 2008; Sniehotta, Schwarzer, Scholz, & Schuz, 2005).
Thus, impulsivity could be associated with the lack of conscious effort and planned
behaviour. However, the notion that humans are rational beings provides only part
of the explanation, so the hardly controllable side of the construct, such as
spontaneous reactions and emotional outbursts, still remains open. Behaviour is not
only determined by its anticipated consequences but also driven by forces outside of
rational control (Strack & Deutch, 2004).
REFLECTIVE AND AUTOMATIC PROCESSES
One framework that covers both conscious and automatic processes in explaining
self-regulation and impulsive behaviour encompasses dual-process theories. Based
on the delay of gratification paradigm (Mischel, Shoda, & Rodrigues, 1989),
Metcalfe & Mischel (1999) proposed that the interaction of two systems – “hot” and
11

“cool” – enable individuals to overcome the power of stimulus control. The cool,
cognitive “know” system is emotionally neutral, reflective, flexible, coherent and
strategic, whereas the hot, emotional “go” system is emotional and consists of
passions as well as fears, initially controlled by innate releasing stimuli.
Another model – reflective-impulsive system - offered by Strack & Deutch (2004)
implies that on the one hand, impulsive influences on behaviour operate according
to associative, affective representations that mediate between stimulus input and
motor schemas of approach or avoidance. On the other hand, reflective influences
are assumed to operate via an effortful process by which behaviour is regulated in
accordance with reasoned attitudes and standards to restrain behaviour.
Accordingly, the construal-level theory (Liberman, Trope, & Stephan, 2007)
suggests that individuals simultaneously use two types of interpretations or
construals. High-level construals are general and reflective whereas low-level
construals represent specific, appetitive, and concrete features of the situations, and
are, therefore, more reflexive.
Sherman, Gawronski, Gonsalkorale, Hugenberg, et al. (2008) go into more detail
and synthesize, by their Quad model, four aspects of the well-known dual-process
models. Specifically, Quad states that several behaviours depend jointly on the
activation of an impulsive response tendency, the ability to determine a contextually
appropriate response, the success at overcoming impulsive response tendencies,
when necessary, and the influence of general guessing or response biases that may
influence behaviour in the absence of other available guides to response.
Though based on different terminology, the basic distinction of the processes
described above is similar: self-regulation or impulsive behaviour runs through two
modes and is based on different mechanisms, and thus, may require different types
of intervention. One system is more primitive and relies on hedonic, associative,
and reflexive impulses, whereas the other system is likely to be reflective, strategic,
and logical. Carver, Johnson, & Joormann (2009) argue that vulnerability to
behavioural impulsivity relates to low serotonergic function, which reduces the
influence of the deliberative mode compared to the reactive mode. Thus, the
serotonergic response has a more intensive effect on those with lower
reflective/deliberative capacity.
DISPOSITIONAL VIEW OF IMPULSIVITY
Impulsivity has largely been explained in the context of personality structure.
Accordingly, the Five Factor Model of personality (McCrae & Costa, 1990), known
as Big Five, incorporates five broad higher-ordered domains – neuroticism,
extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness – three
of which capture different aspects of impulsivity.
Firstly, impulsivity, defined as low self-control and lack of planning, is a part of the
Conscientiousness domain in terms of low self-discipline and deliberation (Costa &
12

McCrae, 1992). Thus, individuals scoring low in those facets are described as lazy,
disorganized, not thorough, hasty, careless, and impatient.
Secondly, weak resistance to negative behaviour is defined by the Impulsiveness
facet as a component of the Neuroticism (Costa & McCrae, 1992), representing an
emotional aspect of the construct. Those high in Impulsiveness are likely to be
moody, irritable, and excitable. Whiteside and Lynam (2001) also showed in their
integrative research that urgency - the tendency to experience strong impulses,
frequently under conditions of negative affect - is strongly associated with
Impulsiveness. Consistently, people high in Neuroticism are prone to feel negative
emotions and to respond based on those emotions (Whiteside & Lynam, 2001), and
may react in an irritable manner in cases of frustration. Hence, impulsive behaviour
could be seen as a response to social or personal conditions involving frustration.
Support for this is rooted in the classic frustration-aggression hypothesis of Dollard
et al. (1939).
Third, impulsivity is conceptually part of the Extraversion which represents mostly
positive emotionality, and refers to, among other things, excitement seeking which
is similar to the dimension of sensation seeking of Zuckerman (1994) and the
venturesomeness of Eysenck and Eysenck (1977). People high in excitement
seeking are likely to be pleasure-seeking, daring, and adventurous (Costa &
McCrae, 1992). Likewise, impulsive individuals have a constant tendency to
respond quickly, on the spur of the moment (e.g., Buss & Plomin, 1975).
In summary, the dispositional view of impulsivity seems to capture consciously
directed, effortful and reflective features of impulsivity as well as non-deliberative,
spontaneous and reflexive components.
FUNCTIONALITY, MEANINGS AND CONTEXT
It can be seen, so far, that impulsivity covers different meanings – both, positive
and negative, emotional and cognitive. Doob (1990) pointed out that impulsiveness
could be defined as the absence of reflection between an environmental stimulus
and an individual’s responses. According to Doob’s definition, the suitability of
impulsiveness is, to a large extent, a function of the demands of the given situation.
Some stimuli, such as a big animal suddenly starting to cross the road in front of the
car, may demand immediate behaviour – braking - consideration without
deliberation. In such cases, an automatic response may be more advantageous than
a slower, carefully considered response, whereas some other situations, in turn,
require more reflective thinking rather than a quick reaction (Kahneman, 2003;
Simon, 1956).
Similar to Doob’s views, Dickman (1990) proposed that the concept of impulsivity
possesses both functional and dysfunctional meanings. According to Dickman,
impulsivity consists of two separate elements: the functional and the dysfunctional.
Increased activity, adventurousness and enthusiasm were characteristic of the
13

functional type of impulsivity. In contrast, dysfunctional impulsivity is
hypothesized to be more closely linked with problem behaviours, as this type of
activity generally equates with negative consequences for the individual.
Disorderliness, poor appraisal of facts, and lack of concern for the consequences of
actions, are indicative of people exhibiting the dysfunctional style of impulsivity.
Although both types are regarded as acting with equal spontaneity, it is suggested
that the cognitive processes which precede these actions are different. As a whole,
Dickman (1990) defines impulsivity as a tendency to deliberate less than most
people of equal ability before taking action, stressing the relationship between
thoughts/cognitions and future actions.
On the other hand, orientation and behaviour are understandable when considering
the context – the same behaviour may have remarkably different meanings
depending on the situation, for instance hitting someone spontaneously. Whether an
act is seen as “beneficial” or as “a source of problems”, is a function of the
situation, both social and physical (Coles, 1997). In accordance with this, the social
cognitive view of personality (Mischel, 1973) considers dispositions as situation
hedged, conditional, and interactive with the situations in which they were
expressed. If different situations acquire different meanings for the same individual,
the kinds of appraisals, expectations and beliefs, affects, goals, and behavioural
scripts that are likely to become activated in relation to particular situations will
vary (Mischel, 2004). Mischel and Peake (1982) demonstrated that behaviours were
highly variable across different situations. An individual might be higher than most
people in a trait in some situations but also distinctively lower than most in other
situations. Similarly, two individuals who display the same overall average level of
aggressive behaviour, vary in their pattern of where it is displayed (Shoda, Mischel,
& Wright, 1993a). Mischel’s and his colleagues’ works (e.g., Mischel & Peake,
1982; Mischel, Shoda, & Mendoza-Denton, 2002) show that when closely
observed, individuals are characterized by stable, distinctive, and highly meaningful
patterns of variability in their actions, thoughts, and feelings across different types
of situations. This refers to the certain type of consistency which shows a distinctive
pattern of if…then relationship (Mischel, 2004).
Thus, it is quite reasonable to assume that the trait impulsivity - as well as the
manifestation of impulsive tendencies - is more or less a context-specific
phenomenon which needs to be explained in terms of increased situational
demands.
CURRENT RESEARCH
The overarching aim of current research was to explain the contextual factors in the
manifestation of impulsivity. According to the social-cognitive view of personality
(Mischel, 1973, 2004), traits can be meaningfully understood only in the context in
which they manifest themselves. In other words, the manifestation of impulsivity
presupposes certain situational conditions, both environmental and psychological.
14

The initial Study 1 presented here, aimed to develop a picture of naïve
understanding about impulsivity. It was hypothesized, based on Mischel’s approach
and other supportive works (e.g., Chen, 2003; Kangro, 2008a; Trope, 1986) that lay
conceptions of impulsivity are presented via “if…then” patterns. In Study 1,
participants were asked to freely define impulsivity (components of impulsivity) and
explain why people behave impulsively (possible if…then patterns).
The aim of Study 2 was to find out which contextual aspects are related to
impulsive behaviour. Defining psychologically active features of situations that
could provoke a change in states (i.e., impulsivity) may enable better understanding
of how traits work (e.g., Fleeson, 2007; Funder, 2001; Vansteelandt & Van
Mechelen, 2004). Thus, it was hypothesized that impulsive behaviour is likely to be
manifested in the context of certain situational features. For this, participants were
asked to recall - based on clear instructions - three personal experiences about
acting impulsively, and to rate each situation on a list of the context-specific
characteristics. Instead of focusing on different types of experiences or events (e.g.
a family quarrel, a drinking night, break-time at school), the purpose here was to
identify psychologically active features of the situations (e.g., Fleeson, 2007;
Shoda, Mischel, & Wright, 1994) that might provoke impulsive behaviour. In other
words, not an event itself (e.g., party, dinner, exam) but rather a certain set of
psychosocial features which characterize the context, such as one’s mood, others’
behaviour etc., was expected to be the case. This way it becomes possible to predict
behaviour in seemingly different situations, allowing much broader predictability
even for quite specific behavioural manifestations (e.g., Fleeson, 2007; Shoda,
LeeTiernan, & Mischel, 2002).
STUDY 1
Method
Participants
The sample consisted of 79 undergraduate students (61 female, 18 male), aged 19-
26 (M = 20.1; SD = 1.6) who were attending a lecture of a course on scientific
methodology.
Measures and procedure
Participants completed a questionnaire during the lecture, answering the following
questions: (1) “What is impulsivity in your opinion Give an example!” (2) “Do
you think there are a) any predisposing aspects for impulsive behaviour” b) any
aspects which impede impulsive behaviour” The questions were presented on one
sheet; after each question, space was provided for participants to fill in their
answers.
15

Categorization
Participants’ descriptions were arranged into 21 meaningful aspects of impulsivity.
Then, descriptions were coded into broad categories based on the modalities by
which behavioural phenomena could be meaningfully defined, considering
cognitive, emotional, and contextual aspects (e.g., Beck, 1995; Mischel, 1973).
Another category was also set to categorize the descriptions which pointed to
impulsivity as a disposition (e.g., Eysenck & Eysenck, 1977, Costa & McCrae,
1992). Thus, the first category, ‘Cognitive deficit’ referred to the lack of reflection
and weak self-control (e.g., acting without thinking, planning, deliberation;
inability to control oneself). The second category, ‘Emotional/automatic response’
was representative of the descriptions that pointed to the emotion-specific or
reflexive reactions (e.g., acting on a spur of the moment feeling ; a decision/act
based on emotion; a powerful expression of feelings; eruptive reactions; a natural
and automatic reaction; an unconscious response). The third category,
‘Disposition’ referred to the stable entity (e.g., impulsive person; behavioural
disposition; personality trait). The fourth category, ‘Situation-derived response’
consisted of descriptions that pointed to contextual (or momentary) contingencies
(e.g., acting on the spur of the moment and others’ influence; response to the
extrinsic event). The Chi-square analysis verified that the categories were not
randomly distributed (e.g., extraction of the first category χ²(1) = 24.8, p < .001).
Reliability estimates of coding. All responses were categorized by two judges. For
each category, Cohen’s kappa was calculated. The values proved to be acceptable:
(a) 0.94, (b) 0.92, (c) 0.78, and (d) 0.81 (p < .001). After independent coding, the
coders critically considered the differences between certain loadings. Thus, any
differences in opinion were discussed until unanimous agreement was reached.
Results
Table 1 gives an overview of all categories for naïve definitions of impulsivity.
Firstly, impulsivity was mostly seen as a cognitive deficit (79%) and an affective
response (46%). Secondly, the situational factor emerged as the next main category
of impulsivity (40%), consisting of more or less direct cues of the importance of
context. Additionally, participants were asked to highlight probable determinants of
impulsive behaviour, which mostly turned out to be situational characteristics
(56%) (e.g., stressful situation, unpredictable environment, extreme situation, warm
climate, low-structured environment, little time, alcohol and drugs). The second
group of important antecedents referred to others’ influence (32%) (e.g., blame or
agitation by others, surrounded by familiars, peers or parents behaving impulsively,
enthusiastic peers). A high emotional state and dispositional propensity were also
mentioned as remarkable antecedents of impulsive behaviour (30% and 27%,
respectively).
16

Thirdly, 25% of participants made positive-negative judgements about impulsivity,
though a response to this aspect was not asked. . The judgements were mostly
negative (18%), but 5 participants found that impulsivity could have both meanings,
positive and negative, depending on the context.
Table 1. Categories of naïve view of impulsivity
Categories and examples
(a) Cognitive deficit 79
Acting without thinking, planning, or regard for consequences;
Quick decision making; Absence of consideration; Doing something
on the spur of the moment ; Cannot control himself;
Acting without restriction
Percentage of Participants
(N = 79)
(b) Emotion-based/automatic response 64
Acting on a spur of the moment feeling ; Decision/act based on
emotions; Powerful expression of feelings; eruptive reactions;
Natural and automatic reaction; Unconscious response
(c) Disposition 10
Impulsive person; Behavioural disposition; Personality trait
(d) Situation-based response 40
Acting on the spur of the moment and others’ influence;
Reaction to the stimulus; Response to the extrinsic event
Discussion
The naïve view of impulsivity appeared to be quite close to scientific descriptions,
subsuming weak cognitive control, strong emotions, and bias into rather negative
meanings (e.g., Eysenck, 1993; Barratt & Patton, 1983, Metcalfe & Mischel, 1999).
As in dual-process theories (e.g., Liberman et al., 2007; Strack & Deutch, 2004),
lay conceptions of impulsivity covered both the lack of reflective capacity and the
triumph of quick emotional reactions.
In this study, the situational factor emerged as a separate category of impulsivity:
approximately half of the laypersons’ definitions involved at least one situational
aspect. Recently, personality researchers have started to understand better that
situational aspects are worth examining in the context of trait-content manifestation
17

(e.g., Fleeson, 2007; Funder, 2006). Wright and Mischel (1987) have proposed that
impulsive temperament is behaviourally expressed mostly in situations which
presuppose social, self-regulatory or cognitive competences that subjects lack. Also,
descriptions about the possible antecedents of impulsive behaviour were largely
context-specific, referring to both, the inner state (e.g., feelings, dispositions) and
external conditions (frustrating stimuli, norms, others’ behaviour etc). A growing
body of research (e.g., Chen, 2003, Shoda, et al, 1993a) suggests that if…then
patterns are basic units in lay conceptions of personality, and hereby, intuitive
perceivers seem to be more sophisticated personality theorists than most of the
studies in personality have allowed them to be (Mischel, 2004). They spontaneously
use contextual information and their impressions of people are linked to if …then
behavioural signatures (e.g., Kammrath, Mendoza-Denton, & Mischel, 2005; Shoda
et al. 1993a). Current results also revealed that on the level of individuals’
meanings, situations seem to play a significant role when explaining impulsive
behaviour.
Based on the evidence described above, ignoring situational interpretations could
hardly be a reasonable response. . This is not a case of choosing sides - a person or
a situation - but rather perceiving possible variability within a person in the
dispositional framework. Impulsivity is considered to be a disposition (e.g.,
Eysenck & Eysenck, 1985; Costa & McCrae, 1992) which, in terms of the Big Five,
is spread between Neuroticism, Consciousness, and Extraversion (Whiteside &
Lynam, 2001). Since the dispositional approach points to powerful behavioural
consistency when considered as average behaviour in a longer period of time
(McCrae et al., 2000), these traits are valuable for describing how people usually
act in everyday life. However, the traits are not sufficient for predicting momentary
behaviour (Fleeson, 2004; Mischel, 2004): there would be a large variability within
a person and in the sensitivity of behaviour to situations. Thus, the need for
explaining the manifestation of a trait in momentary behaviour is evident. We
cannot distinguish the situational variation from the dispositional variation because
dispositions are revealed through the situations (Shoda, Mischel, & Wright, 1993).
STUDY 2
The second study aimed to describe contextual features of impulsivity. Thus, I
focused on reaching a structure of situational characteristics which might be of
interest when examining the onset of impulsive behaviour.
18

Method
Participants and procedure
The sample consisted of 90 undergraduates (79 female, 11 male), aged 19-36 (M =
22.1; SD = 3.7) who were attending a lecture on personality. Participants filled in
the self-report questionnaire for course credit.
Measures
Impulsivity. Three aspects of impulsive behaviour – quick emotion-based reactions ,
weak self-control, and quick thinking without deliberation - were measured by one
question for each: (1) “Have you done, said or decided anything based on your
emotions, without rational deliberation” (2) “Have you recognized that you were
unable to control your behaviour, feelings or thoughts” (3) “Have you behaved on
the spur of the moment,, without considering the consequences” The questions
were anchored by “quite often” (1) to “never” (4). Also participants were asked to
record a personal experience for each question according to their answer from their
recent past. The questions were validated by the short version of Dickman
Impulsivity Inventory (DII, Dickman, 1990). Six items measured dysfunctional
impulsivity and consisted of items such as “I often say and do things without
considering the consequences”. This subscale displayed satisfactory internal
consistency (α = 0.72, p < .001). Another six items were presented to test functional
impulsivity and consisted of items such as “I would enjoy working at a job that
required me to make a lot of split-second decisions”. Likewise, the scale had
adequate internal consistency (α = 0.78, p < .001). Items of both subscales were
anchored by “not true at all” (1) to “very true.” (5) An exploratory factor analysis
(principal components analysis) with varimax rotation was conducted to determine
the alignment of the author’s questions within orthogonal factor spaces formed from
DII. The analysis revealed that all three questions fitted the Dysfunctional
impulsivity subscale, displaying satisfactory factor-loadings (r = 0.511, r = 0.441,
and r = 0.456, p < .001). Thus, the questions which were created for current study
seemed to be adequate enough to measure different aspects of impulsive behaviour.
Contextual features. Participants rated their examples on a list of situational
characteristics (27 items) which were based on the Cognitive-Affective Personality
System meta-theory (Mischel & Shoda, 1995) and a relevant research by Fleeson
(2007). Items were anchored by a 5-point dimensional scale where the central point
referred to an irrelevant variable. For example, “I was in a good mood” (1) to “I
was in a bad mood” (5). The Estonian version of the questionnaire is presented in
Appendix A. The baseline of situational items consisted of the following
components: (a) environmental conditions – social factors (other’s presence and
behaviour, high/low structured context etc.) and overall convenience; (b)
psychological state - feelings, thoughts, well-being, physical conditions, biological
19

needs; (c) aspects that provoke frustration (time resource, need for sharing attention
etc.).
Results
Chi-square analyses were conducted to assess the differentiation of the poles in
situation dimensions. It revealed that in the following dimensions, both sides were
equally represented (p < .001): “Others behaved in the same manner / in different
manner”, “Situation was unexpected and required quick decision making / situation
was common, routine”, “Situation was complicated / simple”; “I was busy / I had
time”; “I was engaged in a pleasant activity / unpleasant activity”; “I had to share
my attention between several things / I focused on one thing”.
On the other hand, in some dimensions, one side clearly dominated over the other
side. For example, “Others were familiar” over “Others were unfamiliar” (χ² = 43.1,
p < .001), “Others were likable” over “Others were unlikable” (χ² = 12.6, p < .001),
“Situation was low-structured, free” over “Situation was highly structured, normed”
(χ² = 12.9, p < .001), “I was tired” over “I was cheery” (χ² = 11.3, p < .001).
Next, an exploratory factor analysis (principal components analysis) with varimax
rotation was conducted on situational characteristics for each context-specific
question. Although relevant items and factor structures turned out to be slightly
different in the case of each question, there was a meaningful intersection.
Specifically, the common prevalence of contextual features was finally best
described by a 2-factor solution: Inner state and Social-environmental conditions.
Here, inner state referred to psychological and physical conditions having the
highest loadings for disturbing thoughts, negative emotions, fatigue, and
courageousness. Social-environmental conditions had the highest loadings for
familiarity and likeability of others, as well as low-structured and familiar
environment. Table 2 presents the general factor structure of contextual
characteristics.
20

Table 2. General structure of contextual characteristics of impulsive behaviour
Inner state*
Social-environmental conditions*
Disturbing thoughts .87 - .93
Negative feelings .83 - .89
Fatigue .77 - .82
Courageousness .69 - .82
Familiar others .79 - .92
Likeable others .66 - .86
Low-structured environment .55 - .83
Familiar environment .63 - .76
Notes: Exploratory factor analysis (principal components analysis) with varimax rotation
was used.
* The values represent the range of factor loadings via 3 situational questions: (1) “Have you
done, said or decided anything based on your emotions, without rational deliberation” (2)
“Have you recognized that you were unable to control your behaviour, feelings or
thoughts” (3) “Have you behaved on the spur of the moment, without considering the
consequences”
According to the behavioural examples, the content of social context referred
largely to a conflict or emotional argument with a close person and was mostly
present in emotion-based responses (χ² = 32.9, p < .001). The explanations were
such as: “When my partner cheated on me”, “She was wrong!”, “I was irritated
because of his behaviour” etc. State-related psychological features were mostly
described in the examples about low self-control (χ² = 24,1, p < .001). For example:
“I was tired, hungry and angry”, “I was moody yesterday”, “I am busy”, “When I
was nervous about an exam” etc.
Discussion
It was hypothesized that impulsive behaviour is likely to be manifested in the
context of certain situational features. Indeed, the 2-factor solution of contextual
characteristics – inner state and social-environmental conditions - fitted for each
aspect of impulsive behaviour (emotional reaction, low self-control, and acting on
the spur of the moment). ) This classification may seem nonspecific rather than
definitive because mental and physical conditions as well as environmental aspects
should probably be present in every kind of trait manifestation. However, I suggest
that the content of the factors is specialized. It appeared that people are more likely
to behave impulsively when they are experiencing negative thoughts and feelings,
are tired, feel secure, and are situated in familiar conditions with people who are
familiar. Often the content of personal examples referred to a conflict which took
place between the participant and a person close to her/him. In other words, this
21

seems to be the context of expressing strong thoughts and feelings in a manner that
would probably be inhibited or reappraised in situations that require socially
desirable behaviour. This suggestion is in line with the social cognitive view of
personality (Mischel, 1973) according to which the behaviour is based on a set of
social cognitive person variables that become activated in interactions with
situations.
Though the personal stories in the present study were greatly diverse, the structure
of psychologically active contextual features turned out to be roughly stable. This
offers evidence to the proposal that it is not the facade of a situation which is crucial
but rather a set of psychologically active ingredients which play a functional role in
the generation of behaviours, and that are contained in a wide range of nominal
situations (Fleeson, 2007; Shoda et al. 1994, Wright & Mischel 1987). Just as
similar situations (e.g., math class, party night) may have different meanings to
different people (Shoda et al., 1994; Fleeson, 2007), different situations, in turn,
may provoke similar behaviour because of their underlying similarity.
GENERAL DISCUSSION
In the present chapter, it was demonstrated first that naïve conceptions of
impulsivity were in line with those of scientific theories with the remark that people
were likely to use if…then constructions when defining the trait. Thus, people
appear to describe personality in more subtle ways - thinking of personality in
context - than the mainstream dispositional framework does. This fact is also
supported by research in the social-cognitive approach of personality (e.g., Chen,
2003; Kammrath, Mendoza-Denton, & Mischel, 2005).
The next step was to find out which situational characteristics matter when talking
about the manifestation of impulsive behaviour. Individuals’ retrospective
descriptions about their impulsive episodes consisted of a common structure of
psychosocial contextual features: (a) secure and low-structured socio-environmental
conditions, and (b) negative emotional state (Wright & Mischel, 1987) and fatigue
(Baumeister & Heatherlon, 1996). Metcalfe and Mischel (1999) explained how
“cooling” strategies allow people to overcome diverse momentary “hot” situational
pressures. It might be suggested that an unfamiliar and high-structured context acts
rather as a “cooling” buffer than a “hot” trigger. Although the competency-demand
hypothesis (Wright & Mischel, 1987) contends that psychologically demanding
situations – like an unfamiliar situation - reveal certain aspects of human behaviour
with particular clarity, however, the core characteristic of a demanding situation in
the context of impulsive behaviour might not refer to a highly normative
environment but rather the level of tension between individuals. Sherman et al.
(2008) proposed that one aspect of impulsive behaviour is the ability to determine a
contextually appropriate response. In other words, spontaneous and/or highly
emotional reactions (both positive and negative) are more likely to be expressed in
psychologically safe conditions. This view might also provide evidence on
22

impulsive boosts (e.g., bulimic episodes) that mostly happen when being “securely
alone”.
By defining psychologically active contextual characteristics, it becomes possible to
predict behaviour across seemingly different situations, allowing much broader
predictability even for quite specific behavioural manifestations. In a discussion of
integrative nature or personality, Walter Mischel (2004, p. 19) looked back at the
conclusions of his book Personality and Assessment (Mischel, 1968) and noted:
“The main message of my 1968 monograph was that the situation has to be
incorporated into the conception and assessment of personality. In the years since,
contexts and psychological situations have come to play a central role in attempts to
understand mental processes and social behaviour /…/, even in their most complex
forms.”
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
Although this research allowed me to set a clear structure of contextual features that
are present in the manifestation of impulsivity, it is evident that this structure is far
too crude in terms of an exhaustive overview of meaningful situational aspects.
Rather, the first steps were taken toward better understanding. The 2-factor solution
consisted of 8 broad characteristics (4 for both factors) whereas many other relevant
characteristics (e.g., “The situation was unexpected / routine”) were excluded just
because of not accounting for every situational question. It does not mean that those
aspects were inaccurate but rather described only one or another of the three focuses
(emotional response, low self-control and acting on the spur of the moment)
significantly.
There appeared to be another consideration that needs future attention: in several
characteristics, opposite sides of the dimensions were equally represented. There
might be various interpretations: (a) those dimensions are not necessarily relevant in
thecontext of impulsive behaviour, (b) there are different if…then constructions for
different people – for instance, some people behave impulsively when they have
plenty of time whereas some other people have their outbursts when they are busy,
and (c) impulsive behaviour is sensitive to both extremes in the same person,
depending on other components of the context.
Methodological considerations. Firstly, although it was theoretically expected that
certain situation aspects increase impulsive behaviour, this descriptive and
retrospective research cannot make causal conclusions about situations and
impulsive behaviours. Secondly, applying a self-report of situations and behaviours
might be problematic in terms of reliability of the findings: situations may have
been rated in a way that justifies the behaviour in a given example. Nevertheless, I
suggest that the list of situational characteristics was neutral rather than obviously
biased toward socially desirable responses. Thirdly, the following problems with
the sample should be taken into account: (a) the size of the sample was quite small
23

which creates limitations for the statistical methods, and (b) the sample was
strongly female-biased.
Despite the limits mentioned above, and the fact that current research did not focus
on intra-individual variability directly, the results supported the idea of behaviour’s
sensitivity to situations, and thus, implicitly provided evidence for the view of
variability within the person.
Future research should attempt to study combinations between situational
characteristics and different aspects of impulsive behaviour in order to reach a
better understanding of trait-situation interaction. Also, a larger and more diverse
sample should be studied.
CONCLUSION
If the manifestation of impulsivity occurs in the interaction between the person and
the environment, it might be argued that different individuals are likely to behave
diversely in the same situation because they perceive or interpret the contextual
demands differently. Indeed, research provides clear evidence to this notion: the
way people behave in stimulating situations, depends, among other things, on how
they interpret those situations (e.g., Metcalfe & Mischel, 2004; Beck, 1995; Ellis &
Greiger, 1977). So, the context makes sense only in terms of compatible meaning
for the individual.
Hence, another question arises: what kind of variation in the human mind could be
associated with a tendency to behave impulsively Previous research (e.g., Fujita &
Han; John & Gross, 2004) proposes that one critical aspect is the ability to think in
an abstract way – that is, to cover multiple interpretations, differentiate between
essential and irrational meanings – as an adaptive source for coping in stressful
situations. This view will be discussed in the next chapter, in the context of
children’s aggressive behaviour.
24

CHAPTER 2
Linkage between aggressive behaviour, self-reflection
capacity, and self-regulation ability in elementary school
children
Remarkable scientific attention has been paid to children’s self-regulation in the
context of social coping (e.g., Ayduk, Rodriguez, Mischel, Shoda, & Wright, 2007;
Morgan, Farkas, Tufis, & Sperling, 2008). Among multiple applications in that
field, the research on externalizing behaviours, mostly in terms of hyperactivity
(e.g., Barkley, 2006; DuPaul & Stoner, 2003), and aggressive behaviour (e.g., Fontaine
& Dodge, 2006), is continuing to intrigue psychologists. In the current paper, I
focus on aggressive behaviour, proposing that the manifestation of aggression as a
self-regulation deficit or an impulsive-like tendency is related to children’s selfreflection
skills. It has been suggested that the way people behave in provocative
situations may depend on how those situations are interpreted (Fujita & Han, 2009;
John & Gross, 2004; Metcalfe & Mischel, 1999). Specifically, an abstract way of
thinking – including relevant and core features to form conceptualizations - refers to
more balanced responses (Kangro, 2010b). Here, I address this hypothesis, arguing
that the more children use abstract construals in self-descriptions, the less likely
they are to behave aggressively. In other words, the use of higher-level
interpretations when reflecting one’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviour may
function as an important factor in effective self-regulation (e.g., non-aggressive
behaviour in provocative situations). Also, the work by Mõttus, Allik, Konstabel,
Kangro, & Pullmann (2008) provided indirect support to this suggestion
demonstrating that there are regularities in the way people perceive relationships
between wisdom and personality: low intelligence (largely, low levels of reflection
ability) was strongly associated with anxiety, anger, and impulsivity (i.e.
neuroticism), whereas a typical clever person was perceived as emotionally stable,
self-conscious and self-disciplined.
INTEGRATIVE NATURE OF SELF-REGULATION
Self-regulation involves control over a variety of responses, including emotion
regulation, behavioural control, and executive functioning (e.g., Posner & Rothbart,
2007). Based on arguments by Calcins and Howse (2004), individual differences in
self-regulation in one domain might be expected to be related to regulation in
another. For example, if a child has problems with attention focusing, he/she might
also have the tendency to behave aggressively. Indeed, difficulties in executive
control have been associated with externalizing problems (e.g., Caspi, Henry,
McGee, Moffitt, & Silva, 1995). Consistently, deficits in self-regulatory
competencies, such as impulsivity or the inability to delay gratification, have been
associated with behavioural maladjustment and externalizing behaviours (Ayduk,
Mendoza-Denton, Mischel, Downey, Peake, & Rodrigues, 2000; Raver, Blackburn,
25

Bancroft, & Torp, 1999). Blair (2002) concluded that children with difficulties in
regulating emotions show poorer cognitive and behavioural self-regulation than
children with better regulatory skills. Likewise, research has revealed that
behavioural control is tightly related to emotion regulation (e.g., Carlson & Moses,
2001). Thus, various forms of self-regulation appear to be consistently interrelated.
Specifically, cognitive self-regulation (executive functioning) may be related to
self-control issues, such as aggressive behaviour, in the classroom context. Kangro’s
(2010b) results support this hypothesis, revealing that those with poor
executive functioning are more likely to show disruptive behaviour in the
classroom. However, this is an average tendency. Individual level analysis
(configurational frequency analysis as a person-oriented strategy) revealed that
children differ in their developmental paths regarding changes in executive
functioning and disruptive behaviour over one year. There appeared to be clearly
different types of children representing various combinations of disruptive
behaviour, executive functioning, and self-reflection ability.
In summary, although self-regulation seems to be quite a coherent concept in terms
of average tendencies, it turned out that there is a variety of developmental paths in
terms of different aspects of self-regulation. Specifically, the core aspect of the
discrepancies was found to be the level of abstract concepts in children’s reflective
vocabulary (Kangro, 2010a).
ABSTRACT AND CONCRETE CONCEPTS – THE ROLE IN SELF-
CONTROL CONFLICTS
Vygotsky (1934) proposed that the level of thinking plays an important part in the
development of complex behaviour (e.g., self-regulation), and it is speech that
creates new functions, being inter-connected through their meaning. Vygotsky’s
ideas have been supported by neuropsychological studies. For example, Luria
(1973) demonstrated that the frontal-lobe is associated with verbal regulation of
action and higher level of verbal thinking (or, scientific thinking according to
Vygotsky). Frontal lobe damage leads to less effective thinking and lower selfcontrol.
Likewise, poor verbal skills have been associated with the early onset of
antisocial behaviours and their subsequent persistence (White, Moffitt, & Silva,
1989).
In accordance with Vygotsky’s theory, Vallacher and Wegner (1989) showed that
some individuals (high-level agents) consistently represent their behaviours in highlevel
terms, whereas others (low-level agents) prefer low-level terms. Distinction
between high-level agency and low-level agency is related to the ability of
abstraction. Liberman et al. (2007) defined by their construal-level theory that highlevel
construals or terms are mental representations that capture the global, central,
and core features of events. Through abstraction, high-level construals selectively
include relevant features and exclude irrelevant features to form conceptualizations
that capture the general meaning of a broad class of examples. Low-level
26

construals, in contrast, are more disparate representations that consist of local,
secondary, and concrete features that render events unique. Research shows that
high-level representations are more coherent and integrative, whereas low-level
representations are more specific and disparate (Liberman, Sagristano, & Trope,
2002; Nussbaum, Trope, & Liberman, 2003). Thus, representations at high and low
levels are distinct. Because high- and low-level interpretations highlight different
features, they can have opposing evaluative implications and lead to contrasting
judgments and behaviours. How people subjectively understand, or construe, a
situation would be a critical factor in judgment and decision making, including selfcontrol
conflicts (Fujita & Han, 2009; Liberman, et al., 2007). Fuijta, Trope,
Liberman, & Levin-Sagi (2006) proposed also a conceptualization of self-control
suggesting that it can be broadly conceptualized as making decisions and acting in
accordance with global, high-level construal of the situation rather than local, lowlevel
construal. Similarly, those with high-level tendencies have reported
themselves as being less impulsive (i.e., more deliberative) than those of low-levels
agents (Vallacher & Wegner, 1989). Because the valences of high- and low-level
features are independent, the same object can elicit opposing action tendencies,
depending on the level of construal activated (Fujita et al., 2006; Vygotsky, 1934).
Specifically, in self-control conflicts, when decisions or acts are made in
accordance with the action tendency that is associated with high-level construals,
one exerts self-control. And vice versa, if one makes decisions or behaves in
accordance with the action tendency associated with low-level construals, one
experiences self-control failure. Fujita et al. (2006) argue that enhancing the
tendency to construe a situation in high-level terms would correspondingly promote
decisions and actions that reflect self-control. However, action identification theory
(Vallacher & Wagner, 1986) points to the optimal identification level: if the
construal – or identification – is at too high a level for the person then it might be
rather ineffective. Also, in cases of specific behavioural change, concreteness
training might lead to more successful outcomes than thinking in abstract way. For
example, Watkins, Baeyens, and Read (2009) demonstrated that training dysphoric
individuals to become more concrete and specific in their thinking would reduce
depressive symptoms. So, in order to change dysfunctional thinking patterns such as
overgeneralization, concrete associations should be created between alternative
interpretations and positive outcomes (e.g., Beck, 1995). Thus, this process might
result in the development of new functional abstractions. The activation of highlevel
construals should, in turn, cause high-level features to be weighted
preferentially in evaluations and decisions (Trope & Liberman, 2003).
AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOUR AND THINKING STYLES
If weak self-control is included in the question of thinking style, rather than the
problem of certain modalities (cognitive ability, emotion regulation, or behavioural
control) only, then the effective self-regulation may, at least partly, rely on more
abstract way of thinking. Research on children’s aggression provides evidence for
27

this premise. Dodge and Newman (1981) noted that certain aggressive children fail
to act rationally and instead respond impulsively while others seem to behave
aggressively in a calculated manner. Indeed, Ayduk, Rodriguez, Mischel, Shoda, &
Wright (2007) demonstrated that boys who had weak attention capacities tended to
react more aggressively compared to their peers, but among them those with higher
verbal intelligence tended to be even more aggressive. This fits the model proposed
by Dodge and Coie (1987) that differentiates between reactive and proactive
aggression. Reactive aggressive children (those who tend to impulsively overreact
in provocative situations) consider fewer response options and are less likely to
compare alternative responses in consideration of the “best” response option, so
they are, consequently, more likely to select aggressive responses in conflict and
provocative situations (Fontaine & Dodge, 2006). Because successful inhibition of
aggressive impulses requires both knowing alternative behavioural scripts (i.e.,
verbal intelligence), and having the ability and motivation to carry them out (i.e.,
self-regulatory competence) (Ayduk et al., 2007), they fail to behave rationally.
Proactive aggressive children, in contrast, are more likely to select aggressive
behaviours in situations that lead to attaining social and material rewards (Fontaine
& Dodge, 2006), so their behaviour is cold and calculated rather than impulsive.
When the nature of reactive aggression is defensive, proactive aggression is
characterized as goal-directed and offensive. Thus, externally similar behaviour –
aggression – seem to rely on psychologically different mechanisms where higher
verbal skills (e.g., using abstract concepts) have a controversial role. For reactive
aggressive children, the high level of abstract thinking might be helpful in selfcontrol
conflicts, whereas for proactive aggressive children verbal intelligence can
be used in generating antisocial, aggressive behavioural scripts.
In the end, it has been demonstrated that children with externalizing problems show
a preference for response options that bring about immediate gratification (e.g.,
Wulfert, Block, Ana, Rodriguez, & Colsman, 2002; see Mischel, Shoda, &
Rodriguez, 1989 for a review of delay of gratification paradigm). Self-control
conflicts nicely fit this logic (e.g., Trope & Fishbach, 2000): because self-control
requires one to make decisions and to act in accordance with long-term rather than
short-term outcomes, it would be quite a task for an impulsive child to sacrifice
short-term outcomes in favour of long-term outcomes. According to Mischel et al.
(1989) actions can be induced by either a hot system or a cool system. While the hot
system is based on affective mental representations and, when activated, leads to
appetitive, impulsive responses, then the cool system, in contrary, is composed of
emotionally neutral cognitions that guide behaviour in a reflective manner.
Impulsive (or reactive) aggressive behaviour from this perspective appears to
involve preferential activation of the hot system over the cool system. For example,
peer’s behaviour would be interpreted as “threatening or irritative” (hot manner)
rather than “ignorable or manageable” (cold manner). In cases of impulsive or say,
hot aggression, the enhancement of reflective vocabulary - that is creating tools for
activation of the cool system - might support one’s coping with self-control
conflicts.
28

One well-known emotion-regulation strategy which is considered a “cooling”
method because of providing psychological distance from the aversive situation
(Mischel & Ayduk, 2004) is cognitive reappraisal (Richard & Gross, 2000).
Reappraisal is an antecedent strategy that entails changing the way one thinks about
an emotional situation so as to change its emotional impact once the situation
occurs. In content, this is a cognitive change which denotes thinking in a more
flexible and abstract way.
Based on prior findings, it would be meaningful, in producing more effective social
coping, to promote children’s reflective competences. That is, expanding the
repertoire of interpretations, specifically in terms of abstract concepts, could lead
children to more relevant behavioural responses.
PRESENT STUDY
Matching the theoretical background and studies about aggression, self-regulation,
and thinking styles, two hypotheses are set up in the current chapter. Firstly, I
propose that weaker executive functioning (the key marker of impulsivity, see
Barkley, 2006 for a review) and a smaller amount of abstract concepts in selfdescriptions
have a predictable effect on aggressive behaviour. Secondly, I
hypothesize that it is meaningful to differentiate between two types of aggressive
children, based on their cognitive self-regulation and self-reflection ability.
Specifically, (a) a hot aggressive type has problems in executive functioning and is
less likely to use abstract concepts compared to others, whereas (b) a cold
aggressive type demonstrates good executive functioning and a high amount of
abstract concepts. Because hot aggressive children are more likely to be impulsive,
their reactions might be prevented by enhancing abstract thinking, and more
specifically, by promoting reappraisal techniques as coping strategies.
METHOD
Participants and procedure
The sample comprised 674 elementary school children (356 girls and 318 boys, age
range 9-10). Participants’ parents were asked for informed consent, so only those
children whose parents gave permission participated in the research programme.
Testing was conducted during regular school-days.
Measures
Executive functioning. Online Trail Making Test (TMT; Reitan, 1958) was used to
assess executive function. This test is thought to be a measure of mental flexibility,
visual attention, and motor speed (Lezak, Howieson, & Loring, 2004). The TMT
consists of two trials. In the Trial A, participants were asked to draw a line (with a
29

computer mouse) connecting a series of numbers in sequential order. The more
complex task (Trial B) required participants to draw a line switching from letter to a
number in progressive sequential order. Errors in the test were counted, so that a
larger number of mistakes referred to lower levels of executive functioning.
Because the variety of mistakes in Trial B was higher and it differentiated better
between different groups of children, only the results of Trial B were considered in
this study.
Aggressive behaviour. Aggressive behaviour was assessed by teachers’ ratings for
each child on a dual scale: aggressive or non-aggressive.
Self-reflection. A free-response personality test - Situative Personality Inventory for
Children (SPIC, Arro & Konstabel, 2006) – was used to assess children’s
reflections about hypothetical situations. The test consisted of 15 vignettes for
which a child was asked to give his/her interpretation. For example, “Imagine a new
student comes to your class. This student has to sit in a wheelchair all the time.
Would you like to be his/her friend Why would you like to be/ not to be his/her
friend” The descriptions were coded into low level and high level construals
according to the level of abstraction (Arro, 2010), based on A. Luria’s theory
(Luria, 1979) and instructions provided by Toomela (2003). An example of
concrete – or low-level – description is: “I would like to be his/her friend because
the wheelchair is cool”. An example of abstract – or high-level – description is: “I
would like to be his/her friend because he/she is a child like everybody else.”
RESULTS
Overall effect of executive functioning and self-reflection ability on aggressive
behaviour.
Descriptive statistics for aggressive behaviour, executive functioning, and selfreflection
ability are presented in Table 3. As expected, aggressive children used
less abstract construals in self-descriptions and made more errors in TMT. The
multiple regression analysis revealed that aggressive behaviour, in turn, was
predicted both by lower levels of TMT performance (β = 0.13, p < 0.001) and
smaller amounts of abstract concepts (β = - 0.11, p < 0.001). As separate predictors,
TMT performance and the number of abstract construals had a lower, but still
significant effect on aggressive behaviour.
30

Table 3. Descriptive statistics of Trail Making Test (TMT) and the use of abstract construals:
General
n = 689
Aggressive
n = 93
Nonaggressive
Agr /
non-agr*
n = 591
M SD M SD M SD Sig.
TMT errors 2.91 4.06 4.59 4.83 2.66 3.87 0.000
Abstract 7.70 3.67 6.15 3.57 7.94 3.63 0.000
construals
Note: Differences between aggressive and non-aggressive children based on t-test.
Types of aggressive behaviour. Based on children’s aggressiveness studies (e.g.
Dodge, 1991), it could be presumed that children vary by the type of self-regulatory
combinations. Furthermore, some types may be sensitive to development of
reflective vocabulary whereas others would not necessarily react in this way.. In
order to test the hypothesis about the distinction between different types of
aggressive behaviour, combinations of (a) aggressive and non-aggressive behaviour
and (b) low and high executive functioning were computed. The score of TMT was
split by the median (M = 1). Next, four combinations were estimated based on the
frequency of abstract construals. Figure 1 presents the model of given
configurations.
31

Table 4. Types of aggressive and non-aggressive behaviour based on behavioural aggression,
cognitive self-regulation, and the use of abstract construals.
High EF
Low EF
Aggressive
Cold aggressive
N = 40
Average AC
Hot aggressive
N = 42
Low AC
Nonaggressive
Non-aggressive
N = 397
(OK)
Non-aggressive
N = 118
(AD)
Note: EF – executive functioning; AC – abstract construals; AD – attention deficit;
OK – average child.
It turned out that nearly half of the aggressive children – cold aggressive -
demonstrated higher levels of executive functioning (i.e., good cognitive selfregulation
according to TMT performance), while the other half of aggressive
children – hot aggressive - showed lower levels of executive functioning. As
expected, the majority of children did not have problems with cognitive selfregulation
and were not aggressive (non-aggressive OK). The fourth type (nonaggressive
AD) was representative of non-aggressive children who performed
poorly in TMT. It might be presumed that those children are likely to have an
attention deficit problem, so they might be rather distracted and absentminded.
Further, ANOVA revealed that hot aggressive children used less abstract construals
in self-descriptions (m = 5.58, SD = 3.19) than other children [F(3, 590) = 14.12, p
< .001]. Figure 2 presents the results of ANOVA.
32

9,5
9,0
8,5
8,0
Sum of abstract construals
7,5
7,0
6,5
6,0
5,5
5,0
4,5
4,0
Cold aggressive
Hot aggressive
Non-aggressive (OK)
Non-aggressive (AD)
Note. Hot aggressive type had the smallest amount of abstractive construals [F(3, 590) =
14.12, p < .001].
Figure 1. The sum of abstract construals in different types of children:
Those results provide evidence for the first part of the second hypothesis, according
to which the failure of self-control in conflicts in impulsively aggressive children
might be associated with the deficit accurate reflective tools. The second half of the
hypothesis presumed that cold aggressive children demonstrate good executive
functioning and a high amount of abstract concepts which found, however, only
partial support. Specifically, in the cold aggressive type, the use of abstract
construals did not differ significantly from any other types (M = 7.00, SD = 3.91, p
> 0.05).
DISCUSSION
The main aim of the current study was to obtain a clearer picture of the
relationships between children’s self-reflection capacity (i.e., use of abstract
construals) and different forms of self-regulation - behavioural (aggression) and
cognitive (executive functioning) - in order to explain children’s aggressive
behaviour. Of course, the variety of observed variables was limited and I would
33

ather be cautious than to come to a hasty, comprehensive conclusion. However, the
data provided promising evidence for the assumption that aggressive behaviour,
especially the impulsive-like - or hot aggression as named here - is related to the
way one thinks about oneself and interprets situations. My hypothesis relied mainly
on the works of Fontaine and Dodge (2006), Fujita and Han (2009), Liberman et al.
(2007), Mischel et al. (1989), and Vygotsky (1934) who have focused on the role of
abstractive thinking in self-regulation applications. The abstract way of thinking has
largely been explained as a thinking style (e.g., Fujita et al., 2006; Richard & Gross,
2007). Another approach regards abstract thinking as a developmental phenomenon
(e.g., Luria, 1979; Toomela, 2003; Vygotski, 1934). Certainly, it has been found to
have a central function at various psychological levels (e.g., in self-regulation), and
more importantly, it can be enhanced.
Executive functioning and self-reflection as predictors of aggressive behaviour. It
was presumed, first of all, that aggressive behaviour is predicted by lower levels of
executive functioning and a modest use of abstract construals. Indeed, the findings
supported this hypothesis. Prior research has demonstrated that cognitive selfregulation
(executive functioning) is related to self-control issues (disruption,
aggressive behaviour) in the classroom context (Kangro, 2010a): Non-aggressive
and non-disruptive children tended to perform better in TMT. This is consistent
with earlier arguments about the relationships between various forms of selfregulation
(e.g., Calkins & Howse, 2004; Blair, 2002). Thus, weak self-regulation
in one area (e.g., self-discipline in the classroom) is likely to be associated with
regulatory problems somewhere else as well (e.g., focusing on a cognitive task).
Kangro (2010a) also showed that children who have better self-regulation skills
(executive functioning and behaviour in the classroom) are more likely to use
various and abstract interpretations describing themselves and others, which might
mean that complex reflection ability refers to the adequate focusing on one’s
feelings, thoughts, and behaviour. Those findings are in line with the argumentation
by Fujita et al. (2006) who suggested that self-control can be broadly
conceptualized as making decisions and acting in accordance with global, highlevel
construal of the situation (i.e. abstract, coherent, and integrative interpretation)
rather than local, low-level construal (i.e. concrete, specific, disparate features of
situation).
Types of aggression. Current results revealed that aggressive children show diverse
patterns in their cognitive self-regulation and in the use of abstract construals. I
proposed a classification which differentiated between cold and hot aggression
incorporating three aspects of aggressive behaviour: behaviour itself, executive
functioning, and use of abstract construals. This classification was built upon the
theories by Dodge (1991), Liberman et al. (2007), Luria (1973), and Michel et al.
(1989). Specifically, cold aggressive children demonstrated good executive
functioning and average use of abstract construals in interpreting hypothetical
34

situations, whereas hot aggressive children, in turn, were more likely to perform
weakly in executive functioning tasks and use less abstract interpretations. Thus,
hot aggressive children were more impulsive than their cold aggressive and nonaggressive
peers. Those types are consistent with the model of reactive and
proactive aggressiveness (Dodge & Coie, 1987). The concept of reactive aggression
refers to a tendency to impulsively overreact in provocative situations and less
likely to compare alternative responses in consideration of the “best” response
option. Similar to reactive aggressive behaviour, hot aggression collocates with (a)
impulsive tendencies, i.e., problematic executive functioning, and (b) lower selfreflection
capacity. Although reactive aggression and hot aggression are seemingly
comparable, these could still not be equalized without further, more detailed
evidence. For example, current data provide only circumstantial evidence for the
behaviour in one way or another; also, nothing is known about children’s attitudes
and attributions. However, combining present and prior results (e.g., Fujita & Han,
2009; Kangro, 2010a; Metcalfe & Mischel, 1999), it might be assumed that the
progress in self-reflection skills may function as a significant factor in enhancing
better self-regulation, and also managing aggressive behaviour.
Associating the results with the conception of a hot system and a cool system
proposed by Mischel et al. (1989), the impulsive aggressive behaviour (i.e., hot
aggression) probably involves preferential activation of the hot system over the cool
one. Therefore, the use of cooling methods would be a meaningful application when
supporting children to develop more balanced behaviour. Research in the field of
emotion regulation provides additional support for this approach. John and Gross
(2004) point to the conception of the emotion-generative process according to
which the key of successful coping is hidden in the things we do before the emotion
response tendencies have become fully activated and have changed our behaviour
and our peripheral physiological responses. Thus, antecedent-focused strategies
result in more effective coping, whereas response-focused strategies (such as
suppression or non-reflective acting out) refer to the things we do once an emotion
is already underway, after the response tendencies have already been generated.
One example of antecedent-focused strategies is reappraisal (Lazarus & Alfert,
1962), a form of cognitive change that involves construing a potentially emotiontriggering
situation in a way that changes its emotional impact. Conceptually,
reappraisal is an example of abstract construal (Gross & John, 2004). Hence, if
reappraisal is presented to aggressive children as a way of coping with provocative
situations, and likewise, as a broader strategy for interpreting different situations,
they probably would, after all, reach more balanced behaviour.
The other type of aggressive behaviour presented here – cold aggression – seems to
resemble the concept of proactive aggression which is more like predatory and
calculated – such as what we see in some types of bullying behaviours. Children
with higher levels of proactive aggression are not necessarily reacting to the
perception of threat, but instead may engage in aggression coldly to obtain rewards
or impose their will (Crick & Dodge, 2008). Likewise, cold aggressive children did
35

not seem to be impulsive and their self-reflection capacity was likely to be average.
Thus, their behaviour might be conscious rather than impulsive. Moreover, Kangro
(2010a) pointed to a small group of children who were found to be continuously
aggressive over two years, while their executive functioning was nearly perfect, and
they showed far higher reflective vocabulary than average. It might be hypothesized
that such an extreme form of cold aggression refers to psychopathic features.
However, in most cases the cold aggressive behaviour probably associates rather
with self-positioning and self-esteem in the context of group-processes, and it is
more likely to be a solvable question of norms, values, and self-respect than the
problem of severe delinquency.
Interaction of hot and cold aggression. If cold aggressive children are those
bullying and provoking others, and hot aggressive children are likely to react
impulsively, then it might be that these behaviours go hand in hand. Also the number
of children in both types was found to be equal. If different types of aggressive
behaviour are dependent on one another, it might be presumed that hot aggressive
children initially start from the position of victim, and because of provocation,
respond impulsively. However, research on aggression in children has revealed that
reactive children are more likely to interpret social cues as hostile (e.g., Ellis,
Weiss, & Lochman, 2009). If this is also the case in hot aggressive children, they
might be sensitive to the contextual cues that are perceived as neutral for others
(e.g., a gaze of a peer or a tricky math task). After all, nothing is known about those
children who could be representative of both, hot and cold aggression. It is probable
that there are types of children who act cold-aggressively under certain conditions,
and turn to show their hot aggressive side in other situations. More research is
needed to describe these kinds of combinations, and also, explain the role of
reflective strategies such as reappraisal.
CONCLUSIONS
This paper suggests that children’s aggressive behaviour is related to the way
children interpret situations. Indeed, this was found to be the case especially for hot
aggressive children – those who were likely to be impulsive. It might be presumed
that children’s aggressive behaviour can be modified by enhancing their reflective
skills, specifically in terms of abstract interpretations. This might hold valuable
implications for educational settings. For example, developing reflective
competences in children with hyperactive tendencies may help them to apply “stop
and think” techniques more effectively. In case of cold aggression, in turn,
intervention implementation should be focused more on kids’ motivation, attitudes,
and norms rather than enhancing their reflective vocabulary.
Also, based on the evidence from the delay of gratification paradigm in the context
of hot and cool cognition (Metcalfe & Mischel, 1999), not only the activation of the
cool system should be initiated in aggression-prone situations, but also the
activation of the hot system might be of value. Specifically, if an aggressive child
36

ecognises the appetitive link between a positive behaviour (non-aggression) and a
consequence (immediate reward), he or she might be more likely to behave in a
positive manner.
LIMITATIONS AND FURTHER RESEARCH
Despite promising conclusions, current work has several limitations. The evidence
for the relationships between aggressive behaviour, impulsivity, and use of abstract
construals was not derived from direct sources but rather based on indirect
information. For example, assessment of aggression was based on teachers’ ratings,
interpretation of situations relied on hypothetical self-descriptions, and impulsive
tendencies were tested by one measure of executive functioning – TMT – only.
There is need for further research to evaluate the function of abstract construals in
real-time situations. Still, the patterns revealed in this study were significant and
fitted well with the theoretical background concerning relationships between selfregulation
and abstract interpretations.
Summing up the results described so far, we can reach the conclusion that
impulsive behaviour is closely related with the way individuals interpret situations.
The richer one’s repertoire of interpretations is, the better his/her self-regulation is
(e.g., managing feelings and behaviour). For instance, hot aggressive children might
react intensely because they lack adaptive appraisals in stressful situations. In turn,
the results demonstrated in Chapter 1 revealed that a person’s flashbacks to their
impulsive episodes were associated with a structure of situational demands. It
means that people are likely to be sensitive to certain contextual cues when
behaving impulsively. In order to reach a more specific picture of the role of selfcontrol,
the next chapter focuses on health behaviour, where self-regulation is the
main issue - specifically, dieting, exercising, and binge-drinking. Besides, relying
on the conception of the construal-level theory and social cognitive view of
personality, the next chapter focuses on the effect of self-control on an individuals’
sensitivity to situational cues in binge-drinking.
37

CHAPTER 3
From intentions to behaviour: the role of self-control in the
context of dieting, exercising, and binge-drinking
Self-regulation seems to be one of the main issues when it comes to explaining
people’s health behaviour. There are many perplexing questions that could, at least
partly, be meaningfully explained by the concept of self-regulation. For example,
“Why do people engage in behaviours which harm their own health” (e.g., Strack
& Deutsch, 2004),“Why is it hard for many people to follow a balanced diet and
resist unhealthy temptations” (e.g., Hagger, Wood, Stiff, & Chatzisarantis, 2009),
or “Why do many seemingly reasonable individuals, in certain situations, engage in
unhealthy or risky behaviours such as binge drinking” (e.g.,Wiers & Hoffmann,
2010). Indeed, the construct of self-regulation (as well as self-control) is central to
many theories and models which try to identify the antecedents of health-related
behaviour and explain the processes by which these antecedents predict health
behaviour (Hagger, 2009; Rosenbaum, 1990; Schwarzer, 2008).
People who intend to engage in a health-related behaviour may fail to act on their
intentions due to failure to self-regulate (Scholz, Schuz, Ziegelmann, Lippke, &
Schwarzer, 2008; Sniehotta et al., 2005a). Furthermore, the capacity to regulate
oneself in a certain situation may stem from his or her persistent orientation to
attain goals or have control over behaviour, in other words, the level of
dispositional self-control. Thus, the aim of the current study was to evaluate the role
of self-control in health-related behaviours, specifically, in dieting, exercising, and
binge-drinking (as an example of unhealthy behaviour).
THE ROLE OF SELF-CONTROL IN HEALTH BEHAVIOUR
An increasing body of research has used trait self-control (i.e.the largely conscious
part of self-regulation) as a predictor of health-related behaviour. People differ in
their capacity for self-regulation (e.g., Hoyt, Rhodes, Hausenblas, & Giacobbi,
2009, Kangro & Hagger, 2010), so, many personal and social problems, including
health-related issues, have their roots in self-regulatory failure (Baumeister &
Heatherton, 1996). For instance, Tangney, Baumeister, and Boone (2004) focused
on the regulation of food and drink intake as one of the most obvious and direct
applications of self-control, and found that people high in self-control exhibited
fewer such problems. Other health-related outcomes such as levels of physical
activity (Hagger et al., 2002) and engaging in risky health-related behaviours, like
binge drinking (Murgraff, Walsh, & McDermott, 2000), also grow out of an
inability to successfully self-regulate. Bogg and Roberts (2004) showed that
conscientiousness-related traits were negatively correlated with various risky health
behaviours (excessive alcohol use, unhealthy eating, tobacco use, and risky sex) and
positively correlated with beneficial health behaviours such as exercising.
Consistently, a recent meta-analysis of 50 studies demonstrated that trait self-
38

control was significantly related to health-related behaviours such as eating and
weight-related behaviour (De Ridder et al., 2009). In turn, impulsivity has been
found to be positively associated with problematic health behaviour (e.g., Kangro &
Hagger, 2010; Verdejo-Garcia, Lawrence, & Clark, 2008; Waldeck & Miller,
1997). As mentioned in Chapter 1, the concept of impulsivity is closely linked to
the concept of self-control, reflecting a generalized tendency to act without
deliberation or forethought, making quick cognitive decisions and failing to
appreciate circumstances beyond the here-and-now (e.g., Mathias and Stanford,
2003).
Looking ahead, the problems related to self-regulatory failure in the intake of food,
alcohol consumption, and other unhealthy behaviours, may result in severe healthrisks
like obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, or other risky conditions
(Brannon & Feist, 2000; Ulbricht, & Southgate, 1991). Thus, it might be reasonable
to promote successful self-regulation skills and attitudes for preventive behaviour
change using interventions to improve self-control (Taylor, 2008). Indeed, research
has shown that regular practice on tasks that demand self-control result in increased
self-control capacity (e.g. Muraven, 2010; Oaten & Cheng, 2006). This is consistent
with the idea of the training hypothesis which is founded on the strength-energy
model (Baumeister, Bratslavsky, Muraven, & Tice, 1998; Muraven, Tice, &
Baumeister, 1998).
SELF-CONTROL IN SOCIAL COGNITIVE APPROACH
Health-related behaviour has been largely explained by models adopting a social
cognitive approach, such as the self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977) and the theory
of planned behaviour (TPB; Ajzen, 1991). According to TPB, behaviour is
predicted by an individual’s intentions to engage in that behaviour. Intentions, in
turn, are predicted by underlying attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived
behavioural control. Moreover, intentions mediate the effects of attitudes,
subjective norms, and perceived control on behaviour. With a view to the
terminology, the meaning of perceived behavioural control (Ajzen, 1991) is based
on Bandura’s (1977) concept of self-efficacy; thus, in principle, the concepts are
quite similar (Fishbein & Cappella, 2006) referring to the conviction that one can
successfully execute the behaviour required to produce the desired outcome. TPB
also postulates that perceived behavioural control has both direct and indirect
effects on behaviour to the extent that it reflects ‘actual’ control. The model of TPB
consists of another important component - past behaviour – that refers to an
individual’s earlier experiences being engaged in that behaviour. Past behaviour has
both direct and mediating effects on behaviour.
There are many studies which apply a social cognitive framework, particularly
TPB, in health contexts, focusing on interrelations of the key determinants such as
self-efficacy, attitudes and beliefs, intentions, and action plans. For example,
women failing in weight loss tend to have poorer self-efficacy and body-satisfaction
39

(Chandler-Laney, Hunter, Bush, et al., 2009). In the context of physical activity,
Spink and Nickel (2010) demonstrated that self-efficacy mediates the relationship
between individual attribution dimensions for certain exercise levels and intentions
to maintain these levels. Social cognitive models have also been successfully
applied to intervention programs, like reducing binge-drinking (Hagger, Lonsdale,
& Chatzisarantis, 2009; Murgraff, Abraham, & McDermott, 2007), increasing
physical activity (De Vet, Oenema, Sheeran, & Brug, 2009; Luszczynska, 2006), or
managing dietary behaviours (Chapman, Armitage, & Norman, 2009; Prestwich,
Ayres, & Lawton, 2008).
However, the direct link between intentions and behaviour is consistently weak
(e.g., Armitage & Conner, 2001; see Hagger et al., 2009 for a review; Povey,
Conner, Sparks, James, & Shepherd, 2000). Webb and Sheeran (2006) reviewed in
their meta-analysis experimental studies examining the intention-behaviour link and
found that medium-to-large increases in behavioural intention induce only small-tomedium
changes in behaviour. They concluded that TPB does a better job of
predicting behaviour than explaining it per se, remarking that this is not
inconsistent, however, with the original intention of the model.
Therefore it would be valuable to examine possible mediators (e.g., self-control)
that could have positive effect on health-related behaviour (Kangro & Hagger,
2010). As intended actions may require an individual to reject or suspend familiar
and deeply-rooted responses, and thus engage in trying behaviours, one should rely
on self-regulatory capability (e.g., Webb & Sheeran, 2006). Hence, the key to better
success may be hidden in a higher level of self-control – both in the meaning of
subjective perceived control in certain contexts, as well as more broadly, in the
meaning of trait-level capacity to control one’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviour.
DISPOSITIONAL VIEW OF SELF-CONTROL: IMPLICATIONS FOR
HEALTH BEHAVIOUR
As noted before, all coping-oriented behaviours, such as attending screening programmes
(Orbell & Hagger, 2006) or dieting (Kuijer, de Ridder, Ouwehand, Houx,
& van den Bos, 2008), require considerable self-control. However, the meaning of
self-control might vary across approaches. Contrary to social cognitive models,
dispositional theories view self-control as the overall, generalized ability to manage
one’s inner responses, as well as to interrupt undesired behavioural tendencies and
refrain from acting on them (Tangney et al., 2004). Additionally, there are
individual differences in this capacity (Baumeister, Gailliot, DeWall, & Oaten,
2006), so people vary in the extent to which they can apply their self-control
resources (Tangney et al., 2004, Metcalfe & Mischel, 1999). Some people may
succeed in regulating their behaviour because of a highly self-structured nature,
whereas others may have difficulty attaining self-set goals or resisting impulses.
One of the main issues in the self-control concept reflects the tendency of
individuals to attain long-term goals and rewards at the expense of immediate or
40

short-term gratification. The explanations for this phenomenon are mainly based on
the theory of delay of gratification (Mischel et al., 1989) that provides a framework
for understanding self-regulation in terms of the ability to forego short-term costs
for long-term gains. Consistently, Hall and Fong (2007) have argued that healthy
behaviour patterns require active self-regulation, and that self-regulatory abilities
must be modelled in any theoretical framework that aims to explain health
behaviour. According to their temporal self-regulation theory (TRT; Hall & Fong,
2007) people often ‘know what to do’ that is best for health in the long term, but
actually do things that are self-defeating, and have a short-term positive benefits. A
central hypothesis of TRT proposes that the strength of association between
intention and behaviour will be moderated by state and trait variability in selfregulatory
abilities (e.g., executive functioning) and by behavioural background
(e.g., past behaviour). There is already preliminary confirmation of the intentionmoderation
hypotheses (Hall, Fong, Epp, & Elias, 2008; Hoyt, Rhodes, Hausenblas,
& Giacobbi, 2009). Hoyt et al. (2009) found that self-discipline as a facet of
conscientiousness was a significant predictor of health-related physical activity
behaviour. In turn, self-discipline and self-control are, by definition, very similar
both in structure and content (e.g., McCrae & Costa, 1990), so these constructs are
used alternately (e.g., Bogg & Roberts, 2004; Roberts, Chernyshenko, Stark, &
Goldberg, 2005).
In the current paper, it is hypothesized that dispositional self-control acts as a
predictor in health-related behaviours (H1). In other words, it suggests that people
with higher self-control get involved with health-related behaviours that require
self-guidance more effectively, compared to those with lower self-control.
INTRAPERSONAL INFLUENCES ON TRAIT SELF-CONTROL
According to the trait-based approach of personality (e.g. Eysenk, 1967; Costa &
McCrae, 1992), traits are considered to be relatively stable over time, differ among
individuals (e.g. some people are outgoing whereas others are shy). The same
should apply to self-control as a part of the concept of conscientiousness. However,
personality should not necessarily be viewed as a static group of traits, but rather
the flexible and adaptable combination of emotions, thoughts, and behaviours,
depending on the demands of context, both psychological and environmental (e.g.
Mischel, 1967, Cervone, Shoda, & Downey, 2007). In turn, changes in one area of
trait manifestation may influence exposure of the same trait in other domains. For
example, the strength-energy model (Baumeister et al., 1998) presents the training
hypothesis which indicates that training in self-control tasks in one domain is likely
to lead to improved self-regulatory capacity in others. Self-control performance
may be improved by the regular practice of small acts of self-control (Muraven
2010; Muraven, Baumeister, & Tice, 1999; Oaten & Cheng 2006a). Muraven
(2010) demonstrated that participants who practiced self-control by desisting from
sweets or clenching a handgrip regularly exhibited significant improvement in stop
signal performance relative to those who practiced tasks that did not require self-
41

control. Oaten & Cheng (2006b) showed that getting involved with a 2-month programme
of regular physical exercise resulted in significant improvements in a wide
range of regulatory behaviours. Thus, in addition to the idea of flexibility, the
training hypothesis matches nicely with the view of personality as a systematic
organization where changes in one domain lead to changes in other areas. Selfcontrol
as a part of personality seems to be flexible and developmental rather than
static.
There is an additional framework that fits with the idea of the influential role of
internal states on self-regulative resources. Specifically, research has shown that
positive emotions have a significant effect on self-control (e.g. Isen, 2007 for a
review; Isen & Reeve, 2005; Tice, Baumeister, Shmueli, & Muraven, 2007) which
means that a positive affect, including advantageous interpretations, may lead to
more effective self-discipline. However, high emotions - not only negative but also
positive - may weaken self-control and drive impulsive behaviour, such as risky
sexual behaviour, binge eating, or drinking (Anestis, Selby, Fink, & Joiner, 2007;
Cyders & Smith, 2007; Smith, Fischer, Cyders, et al., 2007). For example, students
typically drink on days of celebration, often to enhance an existing positive mood
(Cooper, Agocha, & Sheldon, 2000). A longitudinal study by Zapolski, Cyders, and
Gregory (2009) showed that there was a tendency to act rashly, in terms of
problematic drinking and risky sexual behaviour, when experiencing extremely
positive moods. Bulimic eating, in turn, may occur in individuals when in a
negative affective state (Penas-Lledo, Loeb, Puerto, Hildebrandt, & Llerena, 2008).
Similarly, research has demonstrated that high levels of arousal have a weakening
influence on controlled or reflective processes (e.g., Baron, 2000). On the other
hand, very low levels of arousal, as in the state of drowsiness, are associated with
poor reflective processing and poor self-control (e.g., Baumeister & Heatherton,
1996). Taken together, those findings led me to hypothesize that when entering into
binge-drinking situations, people tend to be experiencing high positive affect rather
than being in a neutral or negative mood (H2).
INTERPLAY OF INTRA-PSYCHIC PROCESSES AND SITUATIONAL
DEMANDS
Health promotion is mainly premised on the notion that health-related behaviours
are under individual control, and strongly influenced by intra-psychic factors,
including knowledge and attitudes. For example, placing emphasis on intra-psychic
factors may lead to a neglect of the social and material context in which the
individual is situated (Bennett, Murphy, & Carroll, 1995). Hofmann, Friese, and
Wiers (2008) argue that traditional models (such as TPB) are usually not sensitive
to the situational contingencies that health-related behaviours appear to be subject
to. Specifically, in addition to inter-individual differences, there is also the
intrapersonal variety, i.e. differences within the same person, across various
situations or contexts that impact the ratio of impulsive to reflective processing.
Arguably, self-control conflicts begin with impulses initiated by the presence of
42

temptations in one's environment and successful self-control requires overriding
such kind of impulses through deliberate processing (e.g. Muraven & Baumeister,
2000; Strack & Deutch, 2004). Thus, situational contingences appear to play an
essential role in self-regulation.
Social effects on self-control. Relying on the ideas of social learning theory, people
learn how to act from one another via observation, imitation, and modelling (e.g.,
Bandura, 1977). Heatherton and Vohs (1998) even suggested that self-control could
be regarded inherently as a social enterprise, despite its name. Similarly, the
simulation theory suggests that people understand and react to the mental and
physical states of others by internally replicating them (for a review, see Goldman,
2006). As indicated by numerous studies, social perception can automatically and
non-consciously influence a person’s thoughts and actions (e.g., Ferguson & Bargh,
2004). For instance, seeing another person’s behaviour (e.g., foot shaking) can elicit
those same behaviours in oneself, even without being consciously aware of it
(Chartrand & Bargh, 1999). The same has been shown for goal-directed actions,
which are automatically encoded in terms of the goals they represent (e.g., Decety
& Sommerville, 2008). For example, nurses, who were dieting, were influenced by
social interaction with colleagues at work (Persson & Martensson, 2006). The
research by Ackerman et al. (2009) indicated that the ability to control one’s own
thoughts, feelings, and behaviours is influenced by the self-control of other people,
and by how closely one’s mind reflects the minds of others, in ways one might not
generally expect. Thus, according to the theoretical framework described above, I
suggest, in the context of the current study, that people are more likely to bingedrink
when they are sharing the situation with other binge-drinkers, i.e., seeing
peers doing the same (H3).
Seeing the forest for the trees: The power of interpretations. When faced with
conspicuous local stimuli, people often make decisions that undermine more global
considerations (e.g., Fujita & Han, 2009). Thus, dieters may disregard their weightloss
concerns and indulge in sweet, pleasant-tasting foods, and fitness amateurs may
avoid jogging because of bad weather. As mentioned before, despite having a
remarkable capacity for logical reasoning and self-control, people frequently make
decisions that undermine their valued goals (e.g., Mischel, Shoda, & Rodriguez,
1989; Rachlin, 2000, Hall & Fong, 2007). Research proposes indeed that cognitive
load increases preferences for smaller immediate outcomes over larger delayed
outcomes (e.g. Hinson, Jameson, & Whitney, 2003) and leads dieters to overconsume
high-calorie foods (Ward & Mann, 2000). Depleting conscious resources
through prior acts of self-control also appears to undermine people's ability to
override impulses (e.g., Muraven & Baumeister, 2000). However, this might not
necessarily be the case. Tempting situational cues may, contrary to distraction, have
quite another effect. For example, Fishbach et al. (2003) demonstrated that goalrelated
cognitions (e.g., diet) are automatically activated in the presence of
temptations (e.g., chocolate) among successful dieters and that these cognitive
associations increase effective self-control. So, Fujita and Han (2009) suggested
43

that non deliberative processes may also promote successful self-control and one
such factor is people's construal of self-control conflicts. Specifically, extensive
research has demonstrated that people’s subjective understanding, or construal, in a
situation is a critical factor in judgment and decision making (e.g., Griffin & Ross,
1991). Based on the construal-level theory (Trope & Liberman, 2003; see Chapter 2
for a review), Fujita and Han (2009) proposed that one critical factor for better selfcontrol
would be people's interpretation of self-control conflicts, namely the
activation of high-level construals. Indeed, their research indicated that higher-level
construals promoted a readiness to associate temptations with negativity. In turn,
these construal-dependent changes in evaluative associations promoted better selfcontrol
which led researchers to propose that changing people's interpretations of
events appears to alter the fundamental nature of temptation impulses without
requiring conscious and effortful deliberation and, in turn, to influence self-control.
The results by Fujita and Han (2009) demonstrated that impulsive reactions reflect
not only the objective features of temptations, but also people's subjective
interpretations of those features. In other words, observed changes in evaluation
were caused not by what was being thought about, but rather by the manner in
which it was thought about. Such construals reflect both chronic individual
differences (Vallacher & Wegner, 1989) and situational factors (Fujita et al., 2006;
Liberman et al., 2007).
Returning to the focus of the current study, it is proposed that high trait self-control
is associated with lower sensitivity to situational characteristics in terms of bingedrinking
behaviour (H4). With regard to risky behaviour, tempting situational
contingencies might distract individuals from their intentions, and that, in turn,
could be a signal of using low-level construals. Thus, a further implication, of
thinking in high-level construals, probably helps an individual to strengthen selfregulatory
resources and in turn, to engage in healthier behaviour.
In summary, the study presented here aims to examine the effect of trait self-control
on health-related behaviour in three contexts: exercise, dieting, and binge drinking.
Special focus is placed on the situational contingences of alcohol consumption.
Firstly, it is hypothesized that individuals with high levels of trait self-control are
more likely to engage in positive health-related behaviour. Secondly, bingedrinking
situations are expected to be associated with a highly positive affect rather
than a negative affect. Thirdly, people are more likely to binge drink when they are
sharing the situation with other binge-drinkers, i.e., seeing peers doing the same.
Fourthly, those higher in self-control are less sensitive to situational characteristics
in terms of binge-drinking behaviour.
44

METHOD
Participants and procedure
Participants were undergraduate students from Tallinn University, and the members
of two well-organized and carefully administered Facebook communities.
Participation involved the drawing of lots for 1-week vouchers to a fitness club and
a number of soft-drink prizes. A two-wave prospective design was adopted to
evaluate the intentions-behaviour relationship. Completing the questionnaire took
approximately 10 minutes. After four weeks, participants were sent an e-mail
inviting them to complete the second phase of the survey. Participation in dieting,
physical activity, and alcohol consumption of the previous four weeks was assessed
by a self-report questionnaire. Prospective responses were matched with baseline
responses using individuals’ passwords, e-mail addresses, and dates of birth. Five
hundred and seventy two participants (females, n = 342, M age = 28.04, SD = 8.16;
males, n = 230, M age = 28.07, SD = 7.19) correctly completed the first online
questionnaire. A total of 355 participants completed the second phase of the study.
Next, the elimination of cases due to missing data or spoiled questionnaires (n = 6)
resulted in final sample of 349 (females, n = 225; males, n = 125; response rate =
61.01 %).
Measures
Theory of planned behaviour. The TPB questionnaire was adapted from one used
by Chatzisarantis et al. (2009) and translated into Estonian. The components of
TPB, such as intentions, perceived behavioural control, and subjective norms were
measured by two items for each of the target behaviours (dieting, regular exercise,
and binge-drinking). An example item for intentions was: “I intend to participate in
vigorous exercise for 20 minutes at a time in the next four weeks,” anchored by
“extremely likely“ (six) to “extremely unlikely” (one). An example item for
perceived behavioural control was: “How much personal control do you have over
participation in vigorous exercise for 20 minutes at a time in the next four weeks“
anchored by “complete control” (6) to “no control at all” (1). An example item for
subjective norms was: “Most people I know would approve of me participating in
vigorous exercise for 20 minutes at a time in the next four weeks”, anchored by
“agree very strongly” (6) to “disagree very strongly” (1). Attitudes were assessed
through five adjectives. Two adjectives reflected instrumental evaluations
(useful/useless, beneficial/harmful) and three adjectives reflected affective
evaluations (bad/good, not enjoyable/enjoyable, interesting/boring) (Chatzisarantis
et al., 2004). All adjectives were measured on six-point scales from “strongly
agree” (6) to “strongly disagree” (1). Past experience of the given target behaviour
was measured by one item, for example “In the course of the past four weeks, how
often have you engaged in binge drinking (i.e., consumed over the binge drinking
definition levels given above in a single ‘session’)”, on six-point scales, anchored
by “everyday” (6) to “never” (1).
45

Self-reported alcohol behaviour. Self-report measures of the primary dependent
variables of number of units of alcohol consumed and number of binge-drinking
occasions in the past four weeks were taken at baseline and follow-up. The
measures were developed by Hagger et al. (in press) and translated into Estonian.
Participants were asked to write down the number of units of alcohol they had
consumed and the number of occasions they exceeded 10 units for men or seven
units for women each week over the previous four weeks. Separate response boxes
were provided for each week and responses were averaged for the four-week
period. As a guide, participants were presented with a chart and a table which listed
the volumes of common alcoholic beverages that equated to one unit of alcohol.
Participants also completed the four-item Fast Alcohol Screening Test (FAST) at
baseline to assess the extent of alcohol misuse (Hodgson, et al., 2002). The original
scale demonstrated relatively good inter-item correlations (α = 0.77). Consistently,
test–retest reliability was greater than 0.80. In the present study, FAST also
displayed satisfactory levels of internal consistency (α = 0.72).
Trait self-control. A short version of the self-control scale (Tangney et al., 2004)
was adopted. The scale consisted of 13 items with high internal consistency (α =
0.89). In current study, in line, the self-control scale showed satisfactory reliability
(α = 0.82). An example item for the scale was: “Pleasure and fun sometimes keep
me from getting work done”. Additionally, the self-discipline scale from the International
Personality Item Pool (IPIP, Goldberg et al., 2006) was applied. An
example item for the scale was: “I get my chores done right away”. The scale
displayed good internal consistency (α = 0.86). Items of both scales were anchored
by “not at all” (1) to “very much” (5). The measures of self-control and selfdiscipline
were quite highly correlated (r = 0.67) and also, had remarkable interitem
correlations as a whole (α = 0.90).
Perceived behavioural outcome. At the second wave of data collection, participants
were asked to assess the frequency of three target behaviours (dieting, physical
activity, and binge-drinking) over the last four weeks (e.g., “In the course of the
past four weeks, how often have you watched your diet”), anchored by “every
day” (6) to “almost never” (1).
Situational characteristics of binge drinking. Those participants who reported
engaging in at least one binge-drinking session over the last four weeks (n = 243,
i.e., 67% of the sample) were asked to recall one of their experiences and assess the
variety of situational aspects characterizing the session. Based on recent findings
about the contextual effects on manifestation of self-control (e.g., Persson &
Martensson, 2006; Cyders, et al., 2007), situational characteristics were divided into
two broad categories: (a) internal emotional state and (b) social inducement. An
exploratory factor analysis using a principal components analysis method with a
varimax rotation revealed that the components of emotional state loaded into two
factors: positive and negative affective state. Thus, three items reflected a positive
emotional state (α = 0.80) (e.g., “I was in a very good mood”), and three items
measured negative emotional state (α = 0.73) (e.g., “I was irritated and anxious”).
46

The category of social environment finally consisted of two items that reflected
other people’s behaviour in terms of drinking (α = 0.72). Additionally, there were
five distinct items referring to intra-individual states (e.g., “I wanted to binge
drink”) and social characteristics (e.g., “Others tried to restrain my drinking”. Items
were anchored by “strongly agree” (5) to “strongly disagree” (1).
Questionnaires followed the three-step back-translation procedure (Ellis, 1989) to
adopt the measures into Estonian. Questionnaires were translated from English into
Estonian, then an independent translator translated that version back into English,
and finally one of the authors of the original questionnaire compared the original
test with the back-translation. In the first wave of data collection, the questionnaire
assessed variables specified by the theory of planned behaviour in three contexts:
dieting, physical activity, and binge-drinking. To ensure that the target-behaviours
were understood, each section started with a clear definition of the given behaviour.
For example, “This part of the survey asks you about your opinions about watching
your diet over the next four weeks. Watching your diet includes any of the
following activities: cutting down on sugary foods (e.g., sweets, soft drinks,
chocolate); cutting down on fatty foods (e.g., butter, bacon, chips); forbidding
snacks between meals; decreasing food intake in general by eating lighter meals,
not having seconds and not overeating; taking diet pills, liquid diet formula, or
medications to control weight; eating lots of diet foods (e.g., reduced calorie salad
dressing, diet soft drinks etc.); fasting, i.e. purposefully skipping one or more meals.
It does not necessarily imply being on a specific diet or dietary programme.”
Special attention was paid to the instructions of the binge-drinking section that
aggregated explanations as well as verbal and visual examples. Finally, the measure
of trait self-control was administered. Participants were invited to complete the
questionnaire (a) on behalf of the administrative staff of departments of the
university, regarding the students, and (b) via two Facebook communities, after
obtaining the informed consent from the administrators of those communities.
RESULTS
Dieting, physical activity, and binge drinking in the framework of TPB
Table 4 presents descriptive statistics, internal consistency information and
Pearson’s correlations between the variables between the components of the TPB
and self-control for three target behaviours: dieting, exercise, and binge drinking.
Variables displayed satisfactory levels of reliability with alphas greater than 0.70
except perceived behavioural control in context of binge-drinking which had an
alpha coefficient lower than 0.70. As expected, correlations supported relationships
between the components of TPB in every context. So, intentions were positively
related to behaviours. However, the links varied across the sample, depending on
the level of self-control. The sample was divided into three groups by quartiles of
self-control scores: high (N = 93, M = 89.68, SD = 5.66), moderate (N = 168, M =
72.62, SD = 5.03) and low self-control (N = 88, M = 55.33, SD = 6.79). It appeared
47

that in dieting and physical activity, intention-behaviour relationships were stronger
for individuals with higher self-control (r = 0.73 and r = 0.22, p < 0.001,
respectively) compared to those with lower levels of self-control (r = 0.57 and r =
0.12, p < 0.001, respectively). In binge drinking, on the other hand, intentionbehaviour
relationship was stronger for people with lower levels of self-control (r =
0.70, p < 0.001) compared to those with higher self-control (r = 0.55, p < 0.001).
Next, attitudes, perceived behavioural control, and social norms were positively
associated with both intentions and behaviour. Also, past behaviours were
positively correlated with intentions, behaviours, and the trio of attitudes, subjective
norms, and perceived behavioural control. The only exceptions were found in the
context of physical activity where subjective norms were not -significantly
correlated with both actual and past behaviour. In the case of binge-drinking,
attitudes and subjective norms were positively related with the actual behaviour,
whereas perceived control and alcohol consumption were negatively associated.
Thus, the more an individual drinks, the less he/she perceives control over the
regulation of drinking. According to expectations, perceived behavioural control of
all target behaviours was positively related to the trait of self-control. Self-control,
in turn, was associated with past behaviour, actual behaviour, and intentions.
48

Table 4. Descriptive statistics, alpha coefficients, and correlations.
Self-control (SC) 72.81 13.62 0.90
Correlations
M SD Α SC P-Beh Int Att PBC SN
Dieting (n = 349)
Past behaviour (P-Beh)* 3.93 1.61 - 0.17 -
Intentions (Int) 9.02 2.79 0.89 0.15 0.73 -
Attitudes (Att) 23.24 4.50 0.84 0.12 0.54 0.65 -
Perceived behavioural control (PBC) 8.38 1.89 0.79 0.39 0.48 0.49 0.32 -
Subjective norms (SN) 8.45 2.00 0.74 -0.01 0.25 0.39 0.37 0.15 -
Actual behaviour* (Beh) 3.86 1.63 - 0.23 0.67 0.63 0.49 0.46 0.23
Physical activity (n = 349)
Past behaviour (P-Beh)* 3.87 1,26 - 0.20 -
Intentions (Int) 10.33 2.14 0.89 0.24 0.39 -
Attitudes (Att) 27.48 3.21 0.85 0.12 0.24 0.50 -
Perceived behavioural control (PBC) 8.92 2.21 0.80 0.40 0.37 0.72 0.41 -
Subjective norms (SN) 10.18 1.53 0.75 -0.08 0.05 0.12 0.28 0.09 -
Actual behaviour* (Beh) 3.73 1.24 - 0.29 0.39 0.42 0.22 0.44 0.01
Binge-drinking (n = 349)
Past behaviour (P-Beh)* 1.47 0.69 - -0.24 -
Intentions (Int) 5.63 3.23 0.87 -0.25 0.61 -
49

Attitudes (Att) 10.83 5.61 0.90 -0.17 0.52 0.73 -
Perceived behavioural control (PBC) 10.94 1.38 0.61 0.37 -0.37 -0.29 -0.30 -
Subjective norms (SN) 5.06 2.02 0.71 -0.17 0.34 0.64 0.61 -0.17 -
Actual behaviour* (Beh) 2.54 1.23 - -0.27 0.63 0.68 0.59 -0.38 0.49
Notes: Correlations greater than 0.10 are significant at p < 0.05 level, and correlations greater than 0.17 are significant at p < 0.001 level.
* One-item measure.
50

Next, hierarchical regression models were computed to test the basic hypotheses of
TPB. The first step of the analysis revealed that intentions predicted 40% of
variance in dieting behaviour [β = 0.63, F(1, 347) = 229,37, p < 0.001], 18% of
variance in physical activity participation [β = 0.42, F(1, 347) = 74,07, p < 0.001],
and 46% of variance in binge drinking [β = 0.68, F(1, 347) = 292,10, p < 0.001].
The second step revealed that attitudes, perceived behavioural control, and
subjective norms explained 34% of variance in dieting behaviour [F(3, 345) =
60,54, p < 0.001], 20% of variance in physical activity participation [F(3, 345) =
29,055, p < 0.001], and 42% of variance in binge drinking [F(3, 345) = 83,10, p <
0.001]. Finally, in the third step of the analysis, intentions were added (now
together with attitudes, perceived behavioural control, subjective norms, and past
behaviour) as independent variables to predict target behaviours. These models
demonstrated the highest levels of variance in all target behaviours: dieting [52%,
F(5,343) = 72,59, p < 0.001], physical activity [27%, F(5,343) = 25,25, p < 0.001],
and binge drinking [56%, F(5,343) = 87,85, p < 0.001]. However, intentions
covered the effects of attitudes, perceived behavioural control, and subjective norms
in dieting and binge drinking, referring to the effect of mediation (Baron & Kenny,
1986). According to Baron and Kenny’s (1986) criteria, mediation takes place when
(1) independent variables (e.g., perceived behavioural control) predict the mediator
(i.e., intentions); (2) independent variables (perceived behavioural control) predict
outcome variables (e.g., dieting); (3) the mediator (intentions) predicts the outcome
variable (dieting); (4) the effects of independent variables (perceived behavioural
control) on outcome variables (dieting) are smaller forr the effects of the mediator
(intentions). Moreover, perfect mediation exists if the independent variable has no
effect when the mediator is controlled. In the current context of TPB, only attitudes
in dieting and subjective norms in binge drinking matched the perfect criteria of
mediation (β = 0.36, p < 0.001 → β = 0.09, p > 0.05, and β = 0.21, p < 0.001, → β =
-0.06, p > 0.05, respectively). Thus, the components of TPB seemed to act more
likely as direct predictors of target behaviours than to describe the effect of
mediation.
The effects of self-control on health-related behaviours
Multiple regression analyses were conducted to test the effects of self-control on
dieting, physical activity, and binge drinking in the framework of the TPB. First of
all, the predictive power of self-control on the factors of TPB (intentions, attitudes,
subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control) was tested. The first step
revealed that self-control had a significant effect on intentions to diet (β = 0.15; p <
0.01), to exercise (β = 0.24; p < 0.001), and to binge-drink (β = -0.25; p < 0.001),
as well as on attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioural control in
dieting (β = 0.12; p < 0.01), exercising (β = 0.12; p < 0.001), and binge-drinking (β
= -0.17; p < 0.001). The second step revealed that attitudes, subjective norms, and
perceived behavioural control significantly predicted intentions to diet [F(3, 345) =
130.40, p < 0.001), be physically active [F(3, 345) = 152.67, p < 0.001], and to
51

inge drink [F(3, 345) = 174.23, p < 0.001]. The third step indicated that when the
trio of attitudes, perceived behavioural control, and social norms was tested as a
mediator, the direct effect of self-control disappeared in all contexts: eating (β = -
0.04, p > 0.05), physical activity (β = -0.05, p > 0.05), and binge drinking (β = -
0.09, p > 0.01).
Thus, in the context of TPB, the effect of self-control on intentions seems to be
mediated by attitudes, perceived behavioural control, and subjective norms. Figures
2, 3, and 4 illustrate this model in three contexts.
Self-control
c = 0.15**
Intentions
SELF-
CONTROL
a = 0.12**
Attitudes
Social norms
Perceived
behavioural
control
b = 0.49**
b = 0.16**
b = 0.31**
I
N
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
S
c´ = - 0.04
Note: a, b, c = standardized coefficients (βs). **p < 0.001
Figure 2 The indirect association between self-control and intentions to diet.
52

Self-control
c = 0.24**
Intentions
SELF-
CONTROL
a = 0.12**
Attitudes
Social norms
Perceived
behavioural
control
b = 0.25**
b = 0.00
b = 0.62**
I
N
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
S
S
c´ = - 0.05
Note: a, b, c = standardized coefficients (βs). **p < 0.001
Figure 3 The indirect association between self-control and intentions to exercise.
Self-control
c = -0.25**
Intentions
SELF-
CONTROL
a = -0.17**
Attitudes
Social norms
Perceived
behavioural
control
b = 0.52**
b = 0.31**
b = -0.08*
I
N
T
E
N
T
I
O
N
S
c´ = - 0.09
Note: a, b, c = standardized coefficients (βs). **p < 0.001, *p < 0.05
Figure 4 The indirect association between self-control and intentions to binge drink.
Next, the role of self-control in behavioural outcomes was tested. First, only selfcontrol
was considered as an independent variable in the regression model,
displaying significant effects on each of the target behaviours: dieting (β = 0.12, p <
53

0.05), physical activity (β = 0.30, p < 0.001), and binge-drinking (β = -0.27, p <
0.001). In other words, people with higher levels of self-control tend to drink less
alcohol, be physically more active, and are more likely to practice dieting
behaviours. The second step revealed that estimated mediators (i.e. intentions,
attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioural control, and past behaviour)
predicted all target behaviours: dieting [F(3, 343) = 72.59, p < 0.001), exercising
[F(3, 343) = 25.25, p < 0.001], and binge drinking [F(3, 343) = 87.86, p < 0.001].
The third step demonstrated that when the components of TPB (intentions, attitudes,
perceived behavioural control, subjective norms, and past behaviour) were tested as
mediators, they took up the effect of self-control in dieting (β = -0.04, p > 0.05) and
binge drinking [β = -0.06, p > 0.05]. Thus, TPB factors seem to mediate the effects
of self-control on dieting and binge drinking. Figures 5 and 6 illustrate these
models. However, in physical activity participation self-control made a significant
contribution to the prediction (β = 0.15, p < 0.005), predicting an additional 1%
variance [F(6, 342) = 22,458, p < 0.001]. Taking the analysis together, self-control
appears to have an indirect effect on dieting and binge drinking, mediated by
intentions, attitudes, perceived behavioural control, subjective norms, and past
behaviour. This is because the effects of self-control on dieting and alcohol
consumption decreased after controlling the effects of the components of TPB.
Self-control
c = 0.12*
Dieting
Intentions
SELF-
CONTROL
CONTROL
a = 0.12**
Attitudes
Social norms
Perceived
beh. control
b = 0.21**
b = 0.09
b = 0.01
b = 0.13**
D
I
E
T
I
N
G
Past
behaviour
b = 0.41**
c´ = - 0.05
Note: a, b, c = standardized coefficients (βs). **p < 0.001, * p < 0.05
Figure 5 The indirect association between self-control and dieting behaviour.
54

Self-control
c = -0.27**
Binge drinking
SELF-
CONTROL
a = 0.25**
Intentions
Attitudes
Social norms
Perceived
beh. control
Past
behaviour
b = 0.32**
b = 0.09
b = 0.10*
b = - 0.13**
b = 0.30**
B
I
N
G
E
D
R
I
N
K
I
N
G
G
c´ = - 0.06
Note: a, b, c = standardized coefficients (βs). **p < 0.001, * p < 0.05
Figure 6 The indirect association between self-control and binge drinking.
Self-control and situational characteristics of binge drinking
Firstly, the study was focused on positive and negative emotions in binge drinking
situations. In line with the hypothesis 2, evaluations of binge drinking situations
demonstrated the advantage of positive emotions (M = 8.23, SD =1.65) over
negative emotions (M = 4.37, SD = 1.99; t = 23.22, p < 0.001). Next, the sample
was split into two groups: those reporting negative emotions when describing a
binge drinking situation (group 1), and those not reporting negative emotions
(group 2). According to t-test, group 1 tended to show slightly but significantly
lower levels of self-control (M = 69.23, SD = 13.0) compared to group 2 (M =
73.05, SD =13.2; t = 2.22, p < 0.05). Thus, individuals with lower self-regulation
capacity are likely to be prone to binge drinking when feeling either high positive or
high negative emotions. However, it should be noted that the effect of negative
affect was found to be quite modest.
Secondly, it was hypothesized (H3) that people are more likely to binge drink when
they are sharing the situation with other binge-drinkers, i.e., seeing peers doing the
same. Simple frequency analysis supported the hypothesis, revealing that 96% of
participants described the binge drinking situation as a social event. In other words,
they were drinking together with peers. Also, most of the binge-drinkers (74%)
found that the atmosphere of the situation stimulated binge-drinking participation
55

(M = 4.00, min = 1, max = 5, SD = 1.20). Those who assessed the situation to be
supportive for binge drinking, showed significantly lower levels of self-control (M
= 69.91, SD = 12.76) compared to those who did not see the climate of the situation
to be an inducing stimulus for binge-drinking (M = 76.81, SD = 16.76, p < 0.01).
Those with low self-control scored higher on social inducement (M = 9.03, SD =
1.40) compared to those with high self-control [M = 7.92, SD = 2.36; F(2, 238) =
7,14, p < 0.001].
Additionally, ANOVA revealed that people with high and low self-control differed
by their volition to binge drink. Low self-control referred to somewhat higher
willingness to binge drink (M = 3.1, SD = 1.24) than higher self-control [M = 2.3,
SD = 1.24; F(2, 240) = 7,3192, p < 0.001].
Finally, multiple regression analyses were computed to assess the effects of
situational aspects and self-control on overall binge drinking frequency. The best
model predicted 18% of variance [F(5, 232) = 10,081, p < 0.001] consisting of selfcontrol
(β = -0.15), positive affect (β = 0.08), negative affect (β = 0.09), social
inducement (β = 0.23), and individual volition (β = 0.15). Hence, those having
lower self-control and higher sensitivity to situational incentives in drinking context
are likely to binge drink more.
In sum, those findings are in line with hypothesis 4, demonstrating that higher selfcontrol
is associated with lower sensitivity to situational incentives, at least in binge
drinking.
DISCUSSION
The present study aimed to explain the role of dispositional self-control in healthrelated
behaviours. The research had two lines of interest: (a) effects of self-control
on dieting, physical activity, and binge drinking in the framework of the theory of
planned behaviour (Ajzen, 1991), and (b) individuals’ sensitivity to situational
characteristics in binge drinking participation, with reference to individual
differences in self-control.
First, it was hypothesized that dispositional self-control acts as a predictor in healthrelated
behaviours. Indeed, those with higher self-control were more likely to diet
and exercise, and less prone to binge drink. Also, their intentions about dieting and
exercising were more closely related to actual behaviour. Current findings are
consistent with previous research that has demonstrated the links between efficient
self-regulation and healthy behaviours (e.g., Hoyt et al., 2009; Orbell & Hagger,
2006). Hall and Fong (2007) proposed that self-regulatory capacities should be
modelled in any theoretical approach that wants to explain healthy behaviour.
Likewise, the present study attempted to link self-control with TPB, one of the quite
recent but largely used theories in social psychology.
Thus, it was presumed that people with higher self-control are more effective in
getting involved with health-related behaviours that require self-regulation
56

compared to those with lower self-control. Results revealed that self-control appears
to have an indirect effect on dieting and binge drinking, mediated by the
components of TPB (i.e., intentions, attitudes, perceived behavioural control, and
subjective norms). However, in physical activity participation, the predictive effect
of self-control was direct, not mediated by the factors of TPB. One explanation
might stem from the character - or content - of physical activity which is different
compared to eating and drinking. Specifically, exercising seems to be an actionoriented
behaviour that requires stimulation and energizing rather than restraint.
Dieting and controlled drinking, in turn, appear to be more a suppression-oriented
action (e.g., Gross & John, 2004), referring to coping with temptations and
inhibitions. Hence, because of the active and straight nature of physical activity, no
factors emerged as mediators between personality (self-control) and behaviour.
Dieting and restrained drinking, on the contrary, seem to be more open to possible
interference, so mediators might help to strengthen the link between antecedent and
outcome.
The second hypothesis proposed that when entering into binge-drinking situations,
people tend to have highly positive feelings rather than to be in a negative or neutral
mood. Confirming this presumption, findings revealed that evaluations of binge
drinking situations demonstrated a clear advantage of positive emotions over
negative affect. This is in line with previous findings according to which high
emotions may weaken self-control and drive impulsive behaviour such as
problematic drinking (Anestis et al., 2007; Cooper et al., 2000; Zapolski et al.,
2009). Although it has been shown that positive affect leads to more effective selfdiscipline
(Isen & Reeve, 2005; Tice et al., 2007), in the case of high levels of
arousal, the effect might be contrary (e.g., Baron, 2000; Ciders & Smith, 2007).
Focusing on those participants who associated a binge drinking situation with
negative emotions, it revealed that they tended to have weaker self-control. Thus,
though an average tendency referred to experiencing highly positive emotions in
binge drinking situations, people with lower levels of self-control appeared to be
prone to binge drinking when feeling high negative emotions also. Similarly,
previous research has demonstrated that in some people, negative emotions lead to
increased or even bulimic eating (e.g., Leith & Baumeister, 1996; Penas-Lledo et
al., 2008). It has also been shown that rather than emotion itself, the way in which
negative emotions are regulated, affect the food intake (Evers, Stok, & Ridder,
2010). Specifically, reappraisal of negative thoughts and emotions lead to less
physiological activation and a more positive emotional experience (Mischel &
Ayduk, 2004) whereas suppression of negative emotions is suggested to be a
maladaptive strategy that means a passive and responsive way of dealing with
negative emotions (Gross & John, 2004), referring, thus, to weaker self-regulation
capacity. This explanation falls in line with current results about alcohol
consumption: those who are more likely to binge drink when experiencing highly
negative emotions, tend to have lower self-control. Based on the findings in the
delay of gratification paradigm (e.g., Metcalfe & Mischel, 1999) and construal-level
theory (Trope & Liberman, 2003), it might be suggested that increasing the variety
57

of abstract interpretations (i.e. high-level construals) about the demanding situations
in terms of self-regulatory issues, may lead to better self-control.
Third, it was hypothesized that people are more likely to binge drink when they are
sharing the situation with other drinkers (Kangro, 2011). This assumption was
based on the framework in which seeing another person’s behaviour tends to elicit
the same behaviour in oneself (e.g., Chartrand & Bargh, 1999, Ferguson & Bargh,
2004). Specifically, being engaged in similar behavioural patterns with other group
members enhances positive feelings, even if the process is not acknowledged.
Results of the present study revealed that for most of the binge drinkers, a drinking
situation clearly had social meaning. In addition to just drinking together with
peers, the whole social atmosphere was found to stimulate alcohol consumption.
Furthermore, focusing on those people who did not interpret the social climate as
being conducive to drinking revealed that they had higher levels of self-control than
others. This might mean that higher self-control refers to lower sensitivity to social
influences.
Finally, it was hypothesized that higher level of trait self-control is related to lower
sensitivity to situational characteristics in binge-drinking behaviour (H4). The
findings described above show that in binge drinking situations, people with high
self-control are not influenced by negative emotions and also, they are less sensitive
to social environmental impulses. Additionally, individuals with higher levels of
self-control were not really interested in binge drinking, whereas those with lower
self-control had a stronger volition to binge drink. The results thus reveal that
situational incentives play a less important role in people with high self-control than
in individuals with lower self-regulation capacity. In turn, weaker self-control and
susceptibility to situational cues predicts overall drinking frequency, i.e. impulsive
or poorly regulated behaviour. This is consistent with Trope and Liberman’s (2003)
explanation about the relationship between self-regulation and the level of
construals. Specifically, effective self-regulation requires thinking in high-level
construals that capture the global, central, and core features of events (e.g.,
consequences of binge drinking). Low-level construals, on the contrary, consist of
local, secondary, and concrete features (e.g., tempting situational contingencies).
People with poorer self-control may tend to enact low-level construals, and
consequently, are more likely to be sensitive to provocative environmental signals.
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS
The present findings have several limitations. Firstly, the self-report questioning
was the only method applied for studying behavioural criteria (such as binge
drinking). Thus the results could be biased. Secondly, for each type of health
behaviour, the questions were constructed similarly though the nature of the
behaviours was different (e.g., “I intend to participate in vigorous exercise for 20
minutes at a time in the next four weeks” compared to “I intend to participate in
binge drinking session in the next four weeks”). It might be doubtful how
58

comparable these kinds of answers are. Thirdly, although the statistical effects were
significant, their power was quite small.
Further research is needed to find out whether high-level interpretations are related
to better self-regulation in health-related behaviours.
59

GENERAL DISCUSSION
One of the focuses in the current dissertation was to develop a better comprehension
of situational contingencies in the manifestation of impulsivity or the vacillation of
self-control. The results presented in Chapter 1 support the idea of behaviour’s
sensitivity to situations. Naïve conceptions about impulsivity were broadly in line
with those of scientific theories with the remark that people were likely to use
if…then constructions when defining the trait. In fact, this i has largely been
indicated by research in the social-cognitive approach of personality (e.g., Chen,
2003; Kammrath, Mendoza-Denton, & Mischel, 2005). Also, the hypothesis
according to which impulsive behaviour is likely to be manifested in the context of
certain set of situational demands was generally supported by the factor structure of
psychosocial contextual features that was based on participants’ examples about
their impulsive episodes. The results revealed that different aspects of impulsive
behaviour were more likely to become evident in secure and low-structured socioenvironmental
conditions, and when individuals were in a bad mood and tired.
Thus, it is a set of psychologically active ingredients which play a functional role in
the generation of behaviours, and which are contained in a wide range of nominal
situations (Fleeson, 2007; Shoda et al. 1994; Wright & Mischel 1987). In the
context of drinking behaviour (Chapter 3) the findings revealed that a drinking
situation had clear social meaning for most of the binge drinkers. In addition to just
drinking together with peers, the whole social atmosphere was found to stimulate
alcohol consumption. This is in line with earlier results (e.g., Chartrand & Bargh,
1999, Ferguson & Bargh, 2004) which state that being engaged in similar
behavioural patterns with other group members enhances positive feelings and
similar behavioural patterns, even if the process is not acknowledged.
If the manifestation of impulsivity occurs in the interaction of a person and the
environment, it might be argued that different individuals are likely to behave
diversely in the same situation because their susceptibility to situational cues is
different. I suggested that higher dispositional self-control is associated with lower
sensitivity to situational demands (Kangro, 2011; Kangro & Hagger, 2010; Trope &
Liberman, 2003). The results of the health-behaviour study (Chapter 3) provided
clear evidence to support this notion: situational incentives played a less important
role in people with high self-control than in individuals with lower self-regulation
capacity. Also weaker self-control and susceptibility to situational cues predicted
overall drinking frequency, i.e. impulsive or poorly regulated behaviour. Those who
did not interpret the social climate as being conducive in terms of drinking had
higher levels of self-control than others. This might mean that higher self-control
refers to lower sensitivity to social influences. Hence, people with higher selfcontrol
may interpret situational cues in more abstract ways than those with lower
self-control (e.g., Fujita & Han, 2009; Kangro, 2010b).
Consistently, the way people behave in stimulating situations largely depends on
how they interpret those situations (e.g., Beck, 1995; Ellis & Greiger, 1977;
60

Metcalfe & Mischel, 2004). So, the context makes sense only in terms of
compatible meaning for the individual. What does this mean Previous research
shows that the way people subjectively understand - or construe - a situation is a
critical factor in judgment and decision making, including self-control conflicts
(Fujita & Han, 2009; Liberman et al., 2007). In cases of impulsive behaviour, the
enhancement of reflective vocabulary and expanding the repertoire of
interpretations might support one’s coping with self-control conflicts (Dodge &
Coie, 1987; Gross & John, 2004). I suggested in Chapter 2 that the use of higherlevel
interpretations while reflecting one’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviour may
function as an important factor in effective self-regulation. Specifically, children’s
aggressive behaviour was hypothesized to be related to the way they interpret
situations (Ayduk et al., 2007; Fontaine & Dodge, 2006; Kangro, 2010a). I
proposed a classification which differentiated between cold and hot aggression
incorporating three aspects of aggressive behaviour: behaviour itself, executive
functioning, and the use of abstract construals. The classification was built upon the
theories by Dodge (1991), Liberman et al. (2007), Luria (1973), and Mischel et al.
(1989). The results show that hot aggressive children were more likely to perform
weakly in executive functioning tasks and they used less abstract interpretations
whereas cold aggressive children demonstrated good executive functioning and an
average use of abstract construals in interpreting hypothetical situations. Thus, hot
aggressive children were more impulsive than their cold aggressive and nonaggressive
peers. I suggest that hot aggression might be counterbalanced when
expanding children’s reflective competencies. This could be of great value in the
school context, for instance, when dealing with children’s externalizing behaviour.
The last broad aim of this dissertation was to examine the effects of trait selfcontrol
on health behaviour in three contexts: exercise, dieting, and binge drinking
(Chapter 3). Current findings were consistent with the previous research that has
demonstrated the links between efficient self-regulation and healthy behaviours
(e.g., Hoyt et al., 2009; Orbell & Hagger, 2006). Indeed, those with higher selfcontrol
were more likely to diet and exercise, and were less prone to binge drink.
Also, their intentions about dieting and exercising were more closely related to
actual behaviour. However, the effect of self-control was found to be direct only in
the context of exercising. In the case of dieting or binge-drinking, the effects were
mediated by intentions, attitudes, perceived behavioural control, and subjective
norms. This might be the case because the essence of eating and alcohol
consumption is fundamentally different from that of physical activity. Whereas
exercising is likely to be an action-oriented behaviour which requires stimulation
rather than restraint, dieting and controlled drinking, on the contrary, seem to be
challenging in terms of resisting temptations. In consideration of the findings
according to which an orientation to suppression is found to be less effective than
the use of reappraisal strategies – or more abstract thinking - (e.g., Gross & John,
2004), I propose that further research should focus more on how applications of
self-reflective tactics work in dieting and alcohol consumption.
61

CONCLUSION
In summary, this dissertation explained the manifestation of impulsive behaviour
encompassing the principles of the social-cognitive model of personality. The
results supported the idea of behaviour’s sensitivity to situations, and thus,
implicitly provided evidence to support the view of variability within a person.
Also, the data provided promising evidence to support the assumption that
impulsive behavioural patterns are related to the way one thinks about herself or
himself and interprets situations. Future research is needed to (1) study
combinations between situational characteristics and different aspects of impulsive
behaviour in order to reach a better understanding of trait-situation interaction, and
(2) explain the sophisticated linkage between abstract high-level interpretations and
the self-regulation capacity.
62

THESES
1. Impulsivity as a disposition should be conceptualised in the context of
situational demands. This means that impulsivity is likely to be manifested in
the context of a following set of psychologically active situational features: (a)
secure and low-structured socio-environmental conditions, and (b) under a
negative emotional state or fatigue.
2. The manifestation of impulsive aggression is related to lower self-reflection
skills. In other words, the use of higher-level interpretations when reflecting
one’s thoughts, feelings, and behaviour may function as an important factor in
effective self-regulation.
3. Higher dispositional self-control is associated with lower sensitivity to
situational demands. Those higher in self-control are less sensitive to
situational characteristics, for instance in binge-drinking behaviour. With
regard to risky behaviour, tempting situational contingencies might distract
individuals from their intentions, which, in turn, could signal the use of lowlevel
construals. Thus, a further implication of thinking in high-level
construals is that it probably helps an individual to strengthen self-regulatory
resources and, in turn, to engage in healthier behaviour.
63

KOKKUVÕTE JA TEESID
SITUATSIOONITINGIMUSTE JA ENESEREFLEKTSIOONITASEME
ROLL IMPULSIIVUSE AVALDUMISEL
Käesoleva dissertatsiooni üheks peamiseks eesmärgiks oli selgitada situatsioonitingimuste
osa impulsiivsuse avaldumisel. Töös kajastatud uuringud on kantud sotsiaal-kognitiivsest
lähenemisest isiksusele (Chen, 2003; Kammrath et al., 2005;
Mischel, 1973, 2004), mille järgi isiksuseomadused on sisukalt mõistetavad vaid
kontekstis, milles nad avalduvad. See tähendab, et kui erinevad olukorrad omavad
inimese jaoks erinevaid tähendusi, siis ka kognitiivsed, emotsionaalsed, füüsilised
ja käitumuslikud reageeringud on situatsiooniti erinevad. Teisisõnu, impulsiivsuse
kui isiksuseomaduse avaldumine eeldab teatavat konteksti, nii psühholoogilise kui
välise keskkonna mõttes (nt Cervone, Shoda, & Downey, 2007).
Esimeses peatükis esitletud uuringu tulemused toetasid ideed käitumise ja konteksti
loomulikust seosest. Tavakirjeldused impulsiivsuse olemuse kohta olid suuresti
kooskõlas impulsiivsust käsitlevate teooriatega (nt Barratt & Patton, 1983; Eysenck,
1993; Whiteside & Lynam, 2001), kuid selle mööndusega, et inimesed kasutasid
isiksuseomaduse kirjeldamisel valdavalt “kui…siis” konstruktsioone. See tähendab,
et omaduse avaldumine seoti kontekstiga. Veelgi enam, impulsiivsete episoodide
kirjelduste põhjal ilmnes korrapärane psühhosotsiaalsete kontekstitegurite struktuur.
Nimelt selgus, et impulsiivse käitumise erinevad aspektid avalduvad enim turvalistes
ja vabades tingimustes ning seisundis, mis viitab pigem negatiivsetele emotsioonidele
ja väsimusele. Niisiis, tegemist on kogumi psühholoogiliselt aktiivsete komponentidega,
millel on käitumise avaldumisel funktsionaalne roll ning mis kehtivad
hulga erinevate situatsioonide kohta (Fleeson, 2007; Shoda et al. 1994; Wright &
Mischel 1987). Kolmandas peatükis olid vaatluse all alkoholi tarbimisega seotud
kogemused ning selgus, et enamiku jaoks, kes kirjeldasid oma purjujoomissituatsiooni,
oli joomisel selgelt sotsiaalne tähendus. Lisaks asjaolule, et joodi enamasti
koos kaaslastega, peeti kogu sotsiaalset atmosfääri purjujoomist stimuleerivaks.
See on kooskõlas varasemate tulemustega, mis on näidanud, et koostegutsemine
soodustab positiivseid tundeid ja sarnast käitumist, isegi kui seda protsessi
otseselt ei teadvustata (nt Chartrand & Bargh, 1999; Ferguson & Bargh, 2004).
Kui impulsiivsus on nähtus, mis avaldub inimese ja keskkonna vastasmõjus, siis
võib edasi järeldada, et erinevad inimesed käituvad väliselt sarnastes keskkondades
erinevalt, sest nende tundlikkus situatsioonitegurite suhtes on erinev. Kolmandas
peatükis oletasin, et kõrgem enesekontroll seostub madalama vastuvõtlikkusega
situatsioonist tulenevatele nõudmistele (Kangro & Hagger, 2010; Trope &
Liberman, 2003). Tõepoolest, situatsioonilised tegurid mängisid oluliselt väiksemat
rolli kõrgema enesekontrolliga inimeste käitumises. Seejuures ennustas nõrgem
enesekontroll ja kõrgem tundlikkus situatsiooniliste tegurite osas ka üldist joomissagedust.
Vastajaid, kes ei tõlgendanud sotsiaalset kliimat kui joomist soodustavat
asjaolu, kaldus iseloomustama kõrgem enesedistsipliin ja –kontroll. Tuginedes
uuringutele, mis on kinnitanud abstraktse mõtlemise seost parema eneseregulat-
64

sioonivõimega (nt Fujita & Han, 2009; Kangro, 2010b), võib joomiskäitumise kontekstis
oletada, et kõrgema enesekontrolliga inimesed tõlgendavad situatsioonilisi
tegureid abstraktsemal moel ja on seega ümbritsevast vähem kõigutatud.
Eelnevaga on kooskõlas ka varasemad tulemused, mille kohaselt inimeste käitumine
potentsiaalselt ärgitavates olukordades sõltub suuresti vaatenurgast, mis antud
olukorrale võetakse (nt Beck, 1995; Ellis & Grieger, 1977; Metcalfe & Mischel,
2004). Uuringud (Fujita & Han, 2009; Liberman et al., 2007) on näidanud, et viis,
kuidas inimesed tõlgendavad või mõistavad situatsioone, võib olla kriitiline faktor
otsustuste - sh enesekontrolliga seonduvate – tegemisel. Nii näiteks aitab reflektiivne
sõnavara ja interpretatsioonide laiendamine toime tulla enesekontrollikonfliktidega
(Dodge & Coie, 1987; Gross & John, 2004). Teises peatükis oletasin, et kõrgema
taseme (st abstraktsete) tõlgenduste kasutamine mõtete, tunnete ja käitumise
kirjeldamisel on efektiivse eneseregulatsiooni oluline komponent. Püstitasin hüpoteesi,
mille kohaselt laste agressiivne käitumine on seotud viisiga, kuidas lapsed
situatsioone tõlgendavad (Ayduk et al., 2007; Fontaine & Dodge, 2006; Kangro,
2010a). Pakkusin välja klassifikatsiooni, mis eristab „külma“ ja „kuuma“ agressiivsust,
ühendades kolm agressiivse käitumise aspekti: käitumise enda, eksekutiivse
toimimise ja enesekirjelduste abstraktsuse (Dodge, 1991; Liberman et al., 2007;
Luria, 1973; Mischel et al., 1989). Tulemused näitasid, et „kuumade“ agressiivsete
laste eksekutiivne funktsioneerimine (nt võime ühelt teemalt teisele lülituda) oli
keskmisest madalam, viidates seega impulsiivsusele, samuti sisaldasid nende enesekirjeldused
vähem abstraktseid tõlgendusi. „Külmad“ agressiivsed lapsed näitasid
seevastu üles kõrget eksekutiivset funktsioneerimist, mis viitab madalamale impulsiivsusetasemele,
enesekirjeldustes kasutasid nad aga keskmisel hulgal abstraktseid
tõlgendusi. Võib oletada, et „kuuma“ agressiivsust saab vähemalt osaliselt ennetada
ja tasakaalustada reflektiivsete pädevuste arendamise kaudu, suunates tähelepanu
laste arutlusoskusele ja tõlgenduste repertuaarile. Koolikontekstis võimaldaks see
tulla edukamalt toime ka laste käitumisprobleemidega.
Disseratsiooni viimane laiem eesmärk oli selgitada, milline on enesekontrolli osa
tervisekäitumise kontekstis, võttes fookuse alla füüsilise aktiivsuse, söömise jälgimise
ja alkoholi tarbimise. Kolmandas peatükis esitatud tulemused kinnitasid varasemates
uuringutes leitut, mille kohaselt positiivne tervisekäitumine on seotud suutlikkusega
oma käitumist efektiivselt reguleerida (nt Hoyt et al., 2009; Orbell &
Hagger, 2006). Selgus, et kõrgema enesekontrolliga inimesed olid füüsiliselt aktiivsemad,
jälgisid enam toitumist ja pidasid joomisega piiri rohkem kui madalama
enesekontrolliga inimesed. Samuti olid nende kavatsused toitumise ja kehalise aktiivsuse
osas tugevamalt seotud reaalse käitumisega. Siiski, kõrgem enesekontroll
ennustas otseselt vaid füüsilist aktiivusust. Söömise jälgimise ja purjujoomise kontekstis
vahendasid enesekontrolli efekti kavatsused, hoiakud, tunnetatud käitumuslik
kontroll ja oluliste inimeste arvamus. Siin võib üks seletus peituda söömise ja
joomise fundamentaalselt erinevas olemuses võrreldes füüsilise aktiivsusega. Kui
liikumine on tegutsemisele orienteeritud käitumine, mis nõuab pigem stimulatsiooni
kui piiranguid, siis söömise jälgimise ja joomisega piiri pidamise väljakutse seisneb
65

sageli kiusatustele vastuseismises. Võttes arvesse varasemaid uurimistulemusi,
mille kohaselt orientatsioon mõtete-tunnete allasurumisele pole nii tõhus kui olukordade
ümberhindamise strateegia ehk abstraktsem mõtlemisviis (nt Gross & John,
2004), siis edasine uurimistöö võiks selgitada enam, kuidas toimivad reflektiivsed
taktikad söömiskäitumise (nt impulsiivne söömine) ja alkoholi tarbimise (nt
purjujoomine) kontekstis.
Käesolev dissertatsioon kajastas kokku kolme uuringut, millest igaüks keskendus
impulsiivsuse avaldumisele mõneti erineva nurga alt, kuid mis kõik baseerusid
sotsiaal-kognitiivsele isiksusekäsitlusele. Tulemused toetasid ideed käitumise situatsioonitundlikkusest,
pakkudes seega implitsiitselt kinnitust lähenemisele, mis
rõhutab isiksusesisese variatiivsuse olulisust isiksuse mõistmisel. Antud tulemuste
valguses on oluline, et edasine uurimistöö aitaks jõuda terviklikumale arusaamale
isiksuse- ja situatsioonijoonte vastastikusest koosmõjust, näiteks selgitades situatsioonikarakteristikute
ja impulsiivse käitumise erinevate aspektide kombinatsioone.
Teine oluline järeldus puudutab eneseregulatsiooni (nt impulsiivse käitumise) seoseid
iseendast ja keskkonnast arusaamisega. Seega on vaja täiendavaid uuringuid,
mis aitaksid selgitada keerukat seost interpretatsioonide taseme ja eneseregulatsiooni
võime vahel.
TEESID
1. Impulsiivsust isiksuseomadusena tuleb kontseptualiseerida situatsiooniliste
nõudmiste kontekstis. See tähendab, et impulsiivsus avaldub sellistes psühholoogiliselt
aktiivsetes olukordades, mida iseloomustab ühelt poolt turvaline ja
vaba keskkond ning teisalt negatiivsetele emotsioonidele ja väsimusele viitav sisemine
seisund.
2. Impulsiivse agressiivsuse avaldumine on seotud kehvema reflektsioonitasemega.
Teisisõnu, abstraktsemate interpretatsioonide kasutamine mõtete, tunnete ja käitumise
peegeldamisel võib toimida efektiivse eneseregulatsiooni olulise tegurina.
3. Kõrgem enesekontroll on seotud madalama tundlikkusega situatsiooniliste
nõudmiste suhtes. Ahvatlevad situatsioonitingimused (nt meeldivad kaaslased)
võivad indiviidi kavatsustest kinnipidamisel (nt otsus mitte alkoholiga liialdada)
häirida, mis aga omakorda võib olla märk madala taseme ehk konkreetsete interpretatsioonide
kasutamisest.
66

REFERENCES
Aarts, H. (2007). Health and goal-directed behaviour: The non-conscious regulation and
motivation of goals and their pursuit. Health Psychology Review, 1, 53-82.
Ackerman, J.M., Goldstein, N.J., Shapiro, J.R., & Bargh, J.A. (2009). You wear me out: the
vicarious depletion of self-control. Psychological Science, 20, 3, 326-332
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behaviour: Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 50, 2, 179-211.
Anestis, M., Selby, E., Fink, E., Joiner, T. (2007). The multi-faceted role of distress tolerance
in dysregulation eating behaviours: International Journal of Eating Disorders, 40, 718-
726.
Arro, G. (2010). Children’s self-reflection and personality and their relationships with cognitive
ability and academic success. In A. Toomela (Ed.), Systemic person-oriented study of
child development in early primary school (pp. 225-243). Frankfurt: Peter Lang GmbH.
Ayduk, O., Mendoza-Denton, R., Mischel, W., Downey, G., Peake, P.K., & Rodrigues, M.
(2000). Regulating the interpersonal self: Strategic self-regulation for coping with rejectionsensitivity:
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 776-792.
Ayduk, O., Rodriguez, M., Mischel, W., Shoda, Y., & Wright, J. (2007).Verbal intelligence
and self-regulatory competencies: Joint predictors of boys’ aggression. Journal of Research
in Personality, 41, 374-388.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioural change. Psychological
Review, 84, 191-215.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. General Learning Press.
Barkley, R.A. (2006). Attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: A handbook for diagnosis and
treatment (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social
psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.
Baron, R.S. (2000). Arousal, capacity, and intense indoctrination: Personality and Social
Psychology Review, 4, 3, 328-254
Barratt, E. S. (1985). Impulsiveness defined within a systems model of personality. In C. D.
Spielberger & J. M. Butcher (Eds.), Advances in personality assessment (Vol. 5, pp. 113-
132). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Barratt, E. S., & Patton, J. H. (1983). Impulsivity: cognitive, behavioural and psychophysiological
correlates. In M. Zuckerman (Ed.), Biological bases of sensation seeking,
impulsivity and anxiety (pp. 77–116). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Baumeister, R.F., Bratslavsky, E., Muraven, M., & Tice, D.M. (1998) Ego depletion: is the
active self a limited resource Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1252-1265.
67

Baumeister, R.F., Gailliot, M.T., DeWall, C.N., & Oaten, M. (2006). Self-regulation and
personality: how interventions increase regulatory success, and how depletion moderates the
effects of traits on behaviour. Journal of Personality, 74, 1773-1801.
Baumeister. R. R, & Heatherlon, T.E. (1996). Self-regulation failure: An overview. Psychological
Inquiry, 7, 1-15.
Beck, J.S. (1995). Cognitive Therapy: Basics and beyond. New York: The Guilford Press.
Bennett, P., Murphy, S., & Carroll, D.(1995) Social cognition models as a framework for
health promotion- Necessary, but not sufficient. Health Care Analysis, 3, 1, 15-21.
Blair, C. (2002). School readiness: integrating cognition and emotion in a neurobiological
conceptualization of children’s function at school entry. American Psychologist, 57, 111-
127.
Bogg, T. & Roberts, B. W. (2004).Conscientiousness and health-related behaviours: A metaanalysis.
Psychological Bulletin, 130, 887-919.
Brannon, L., & Feist, J. (2000). Health psychology: An introduction to behaviour and health.
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Buss, A., & Plomin, R. (1975). A temperamental theory of personality development New
York: Wiley.
Calcins, S.D., & Howse, R.B. (2004). Individual differences in self-regulation: implications
for childhood adjustment. In P. Philippot & R.S. Feldman (Eds.), The regulation of emotion
(pp. 307-332). Mahwah: NJ: Erlbaum.
Carlson, S.M., & Moses, L.J. (2001). Individual differences in inhibitory control and children’s
theory of mind Child Development, 72, 1032-1053.
Carver, C.S., Johnson, S.L., & Joormann, J. (2009). Two-mode models of self-regulation as
a tool for conceptualizing effects of the serotonin system in normal behaviour and diverse
disorders. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 4, 195-199.
Caspi, A., Henry, B., McGee, R.O, Moffitt, T.E., & Silva, P.A. (1995). Temperamental
origins of child and adolescent behaviour problems: from age three to fifteen. Child Development,
66, 55-68.
Cervone, D., Shoda, Y., & Downey, G. (2007). Construing persons in context. In Y. Shoda,
D. Cervone, G.Downey (Eds), Persons in context: building a science of the individual (pp.
3-15). Guilford Press: New York.
Chandler-Laney, P.C., Hunter, G.R., Bush, N.C., Alcarez, J.A., Roy, J.L., Byrne, N.M., &
Gower, B.A. (2009). Associations among body size dissatisfaction, perceived dietary control,
and diet history in African, American and European American women. Eating Behaviours,
10, 4, 202-208.
Chapman, J., Armitage, C.J., Norman, P. (2009). Comparing implementation intention interventions
in relation to young adults' intake of fruit and vegetables Psychololy and Health,
24, 317-332.
Chartrand, T.L., & Bargh, J.A. (1999). The chameleon effect: The perception-behaviour link
and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 893–910.
68

Chatzisarantis, N., Hagger, M, Smith, B., & Phoenix, C. (2004). The influences of continuation
intentions on execution of social behaviour within the theory of planned behaviour.
British Journal of Social Psychology, 43, 551–583.
Chatzisarantis, N.L.D, Hagger, M.S, Wang, C.K.J., & Thøgersen-Ntoumani, C. (2009).The
effects of social identity and perceived autonomy support on health behaviour within the
theory of planned behaviour. Current Psychological Research & Reviews, 28, 55-68
Coles, E.M. (1997). Impulsivity in major mental and personality disorders. In C.D Webster,
& M. Jackson (Eds), Impulsivity: Perspectives, principles and practice. Guilford Publications.
Cooper, M.L, Agocha, V.B, & Sheldon, M.S. (2000). A motivational perspective on risky
behaviours: The role of personality and affect regulatory processes. Journal of Personality,
68, 1059–1088.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Four ways five factors are basic. Personality and
Individual Differences, 13, 653–665.
Crick, N.R. & Dodge, K.A. (2008). Social information-processing mechanisms in reactive
and proactive aggression Child Development, 67, 3, 993-1002.
Cyders, M.A, & Smith, G.T. (2007). Mood-based rash action and its components: Positive
and negative urgency and their relations with other impulsivity-like constructs. Personality
and Individual Differences, 4, 839–850.
De Vet, E., Oenema, A., Sheeran, P., Brug, J. (2009). Should implementation intentions
interventions be implemented in obesity prevention The impact of if-then plans on daily
physical activity in Dutch adults International Journal of Behavioural Nutrition and Physical
Activity, 6, 11, 1-9.
Decety, J., & Sommerville, J.A. (2008). Action representation as the bedrock of social cognition:
A developmental neuroscience perspective. In E. Morsella, J.A. Bargh, & P.M. Gollwitzer
(Eds.), The Oxford handbook of human action (pp. 250–275). New York: Oxford
University Press.
Dickman, S. (1990). Functional and dysfunctional impulsivity: Personality and cognitive
correlates. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 95-102.
Dodge, K.A., & Coie, J.D. (1987). Social-information processing factors in reactive and
proactive aggression in children’s peer groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
53, 1146-1158.
Dodge, K.A., & Newman, J. P. (1981). Biased decision making processes in aggressive
boys. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 90, 375-379.
Dollard, J., Doob, L., Miller, N. E., Mowrer, 0. H., & Sears, R. (1939). Frustration and
aggression. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Doob, L. (1990). Hesitation: Impulsivity and reflection. New York: Greenwood.
DuPaul, G. J., & Stoner, G. (2003). ADHD in the schools: Assessment and intervention
strategies (2nd edition). New York: Guilford Press.
Ellis, B.B. (1989). Differential item functioning: implications for test translations. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 74, 6, 912-921.
69

Ellis, A., & Greiger, R. (1977). Handbook of Rational-Emotive Therapy. New York:
Springer.
Ellis, M., Weiss, B., & Lochman, J. (2009). Executive Functions in Children: Associations
with Aggressive Behaviour and Appraisal Processing. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology,
37, 7, 945-956.
Evers, C., Stok, F.M., & de Ridder, D.T.D. (2010). Feeding your feelings: Emotion regulation
strategies and emotional eating. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 6, 792-
804.
Eysenck, H. J. (1993). The nature of impulsivity In W. G. McCown, J. L. Johnson, & M. B.
Sure (Eds.), The impulsive client: Theory, research and treatment. Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, M. W. (1985). Personality and individual differences: A natural
science Approach. New York: Plenum Press.Eysenck, S. B. G., & Eysenck, H. J. (1977) The
place of impulsiveness in a dimensional system of personality description. British Journal of
Social and Clinical Psychology, 16, 57-68.
Eysenck, H.J. (1967). The biological basis of personality. Springfield, IL: Thomas.
Felson, R. B., & Tedeschi, J. T. (Eds.) (1993). Aggression and violence: Social interactionist
perspectives. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Ferguson, M.J., & Bargh, J.A. (2004). How social perception can automatically influence
behaviour. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 33–39.
Fishbach, A., Friedman, R.S., & Kruglanski, A.W. (2003). Leading us not into temptation:
Momentary allurements elicit overriding goals activation. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 84, 296–309.
Fishbein, M., & Cappella, J.N. (2006). The role of theory in developing effective health
communications. Journal of Communication, 56, 1, S1-S17.
Fleeson, W. (2004). Moving personality beyond the person-situation debate: The challenge
and opportunity of within-person variability. Current Directions in Psychological Science,
13, 83-87.
Fleeson, W. (2007). Situation-based contingencies underlying trait-content manifestation in
behaviour. Journal of Personality, 75, 4, 825-861.
Fontaine, R.G. & Dodge, K.A. (2006). Real-time decision making and aggressive behaviour
in youth: a heuristic model of response evaluation and decision (RED). Aggressive behaviour,
32, 604-624.
Friese, M., Hofmann, W., & Wanke, M. (2008). When impulses take over: Moderated predictive
validity of explicit and implicit attitude measures in predicting food choice and consumption
behaviour. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47, 3, 397-419.
Fujita, K. & Han, H.A. (2009). Moving Beyond Deliberative Control of Impulses: The Effect
of Construal Levels on Evaluative Associations in Self-Control Conflicts. Psychological
Science, 20, 7, 799-804.
Fujita, K., Trope, Y., Liberman, N., & Levin-Sagi, M. (2006). Construal levels and selfcontrol.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 351-367.
70

Funder, D.C. (2001). Personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 197-221.
Funder, D.C. (2006). Toward a resolution of the personality triad: Persons, situations, and
behaviours. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 21-34.
Goldberg, L.R., Johnson, J.A., Eber, H.W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M.C, Cloninger, C.R., &
Gough, H.C. (2006). The international personality item pool and the future public-domain
personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 50, 84-96.
Goldman, A.I. (2006). Simulating minds: The philosophy, psychology and neuroscience of
mindreading. New York: Oxford University Press.
Griffin, D.W., & Ross, L. (1991). Subjective construal, social inference, and human misunderstanding.
In M.P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 24, pp.
319–359). New York: Academic Press.
Gross, J.J., & John, O.P. (2004). Healthy and unhealthy emotion regulation: Personality
processes, individual differences, and life span development. Journal of Personality, 72,
1301-1333.
Hagger, M.S., Lonsdale, A., Chatzisarantis, N.L.D. (2009). A Theory-Based Intervention to
Reduce Alcohol Drinking in Excess of Guideline Limits in Undergraduate Students Using
Online and Pen-and-Paper Communication Methods. In press.
Hagger, M.S., Wood, C., Stiff, C., & Chatzisarantis, N.L.D. (2009). The strength model of
self-regulation failure and health-related behaviour. Health Psychology Review, 3, 2, 208-
238.
Hall, P.A., & Fong, G.T. (2007). Temporal self-regulation theory: a model for individual
health behaviour. Health Psychology Review, 1, 6-52.
Hall, P.A., Fong, G.T., Epp, L.J., & Elias, L. (2008). Executive function moderates the intention-behavior
link for physical activity and dietary behavior. Psychology & Health, 23, 309-
326.
Hinson, J.M., Jameson, T.L., & Whitney, P. (2003). Impulsive decision making and working
memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 298–
306.
Hodgson, R. J., Alwyn, T., John, B., Thom, B., & Smith, A. (2002). The fast alcohol screening
test. Alcohol and Alcoholism, 37, 61-66.
Hofmann, W., Friese, M., & Wiers, R.W. (2008). Impulsive versus reflective influences on
health behaviour: a theoretical framework and empirical review. Health Psychology Review,
2, 2, 111-137.
Hoyt, A.L., Rhodes, R.E., Hausenblas, H.A., & Giacobbi, Jr., P.R. (2009). Integrating fivefactor
model facet-level traits with the theory of planned behaviour and exercise. Psychology
of Sport & Exercise, 10, 565-572.
Isen, A. (2007). Positive Affect, Cognitive flexibility, and self-control. In Y. Shoda, D. Cervone,
G. Downey (Eds), Persons in context: building a science of the individual (pp. 130-
147). Guilford Press: New York.
71

Isen, A.M, & Reeve, J. (2005). The influence of positive affect on intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation: facilitating enjoyment of play, responsible work behaviour, and self-control.
Motivation and Emotion, 29, 4, 297-325.
John. O.P., & Gross, J.J. (2004). Personality processes, individual differences, and life span
development. Journal of Personality, 72, 6, 1301-1333.
Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgment and choice: Mapping bounded rationality.
American Psychologist, 58, 9, 697–720.
Kammrath, L.K., Mendoza-Denton, R., & Mischel, W. (2005). Incorporating if…then…
signatures in person perception: Beyond the person-situation dichotomy. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 88, 605-618.
Kangro, E.-M. (2008a). Impulsivity in laypersons' mind. In J. Allik, A. Realo, L. Kööts
(Eds.), 14th European Conference on Personality: Program and Abstracts (pp. 214). Tartu:
University of Tartu.
Kangro, E.-M. (2008b). Impulsivity - what does it mean In: Abstracts of 29th International
Congress of Psychology: 29th International Congress of Psychology. Berlin.
Kangro, E.-M. (2010a). Role of self-reflection ability in children’s self-regulation. In A.
Toomela (Ed.), Systemic person-oriented study of child development in early primary school
(pp. 245-260). Frankfurt: Peter Lang GmbH.
Kangro, E.-M. (2010b). Link between self-reflection and externalizing behaviour in elementary
school children. In M. Blatny, M. Hrebickova, S. Kourilova, A. Slezackova, P. Kveton,
D. Voboril (Eds.), 15th European Conference on Personality: Program and Abstracts (pp.
169). Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Institute of Psychology.
Kangro, E-M. (2011). Interplay of self-control and situational demands in binge-drinking.
Association for Research in Personality (ARP) 2 nd Biennial Meeting Submitted manuscript.
Kangro, Eva-Maria, & Hagger, Martin S. (2010). The effects of trait-self-control on the
relationship between health-related intentions and behaviour. Psychology and Health, 25, 1,
207.
Lazarus, R. S., & Alfert, E. (1964). Short-circuiting of threat by experimentally altering
cognitive appraisal. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 69, 195–205.
Leith, K.P., & Baumeister, R.F. (1996). Why do bad moods increase self-deflating behaviour
Emotion, risk taking, and self-regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
71, 1250-1267.
Liberman, N., Sagristano, M., & Trope, Y. (2002). The effect of temporal distance on level
of mental construal. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 29, 199-217.
Liberman, N., Trope, Y., & Stefan, E. (2007). Psychological distance. In E.T. Higgins &
A.W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (Vol. 2.pp 353-
381). New York: Guilford Press.
Luria, A. R. (1979). The making of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Luria, A.R. (1973). The working brain. New York: Basic Books.
72

Mathias, C. W., & Stanford, M. S. (2003). Impulsiveness and arousal: Heart rate under conditions
of rest and challenge in healthy males. Personality and Individual Differences, 35,
355–371.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. Jr (1990). Personality in adulthood. New York: Guilford.
McCrae, R.R., Costa, P.T., Hrebícková, M., Ostendorf, F., Angleitner, A., Avia, M.D., et al.
(2000). Nature over nuture: Temperament, personality, and life span development. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 1, 173-186.
Metcalfe, J., & Mischel, W. (1999). A hot/cool-system analysis of delay of gratification:
Dynamics of willpower. Psychological Review, 106, 3-19.
Mischel W. (1968). Personality and Assessment. New York: Wiley.
Mischel, W. (1969). Continuity and change in personality. American Psychologist, 24, 1012-
1018.
Mischel, W. (1973). Toward a cognitive social learning reconceptualization of personality.
Psychological Review, 80, 252–83.
Mischel, W. (2004). Toward an integrative science of the person. Annual Review of Psychology,
55, 1–22.
Mischel, W., & Ayduk, O. (2004). Willpower in a cognitive-affective processing system:
The dynamics of delay of gratification. In R. F. Baumeister & K. D. Vohs (Eds.), Handbook
of self-regulation: Research, theory and practice (pp. 99-129). New York, NY: Guilford.
Mischel, W., & Peake, P.K. (1982). Beyond déjà vu in the search for cross-situational consistency.
Psychological Review, 89, 730–755.
Mischel, W., Shoda, Y., & Mendoza-Denton, R. (2002). Situation-behaviour profiles as a
locus of consistency in personality. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 50–54.
Mischel, W., Shoda, Y., & Rodriguez, M.L. (1989). Delay of gratification in children. Science,
244, 933–938.
Morgan, P.L., Farkas, G., Tufis, P.A. & Sperling, R.A. (2008). Are reading and behaviour
problems risk factors for each other Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 5, 417-436.
Mõttus, R., Allik, J., Konstabel, K., Kangro, E.-M., & Pullmann, H. (2008). Beliefs about
the relationships between personality and intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences,
45(6), 457 - 462.
Muraven, M. (2010). Building self-control strength: Practicing self-control leads to improved
self-control performance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 2, 465-
468.
Muraven, M., & Baumeister, R.F. (2000). Self-regulation and depletion of limited resources:
Does self-control resemble a muscle Psychological Bulletin, 126, 247–259.
Muraven, M., Tice, D.M., & Baumeister, R.F. (1998). Self-control as a limited resource:
regulatory depletion patterns. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 774-789.
Murgraff, V., Abraham, C., McDermott, M. (2007). Reducing Friday alcohol consumption
among moderate, women drinkers: Evaluation of a brief evidence-based intervention. Alcohol,
42, 37-41.
73

Nussbaum, S., Trope, Y. & Liberman, N. (2003). Creeping dispositionism: The temporal
dynamics of behaviour prediction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 485-
497.
Oaten, M., & Cheng, K. (2006a). Improved self-control: the benefits of a regular program of
academic study. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1-16.
Oaten, M, & Cheng, K, (2006b). Longitudinal gains in self-regulation from regular physical
exercise. British Journal of Health Psychology, 11, 4, 717-733.
Penas-Lledo, E.M., Loeb, K.L., Puerto, R., Hildebrandt, T.B., & Llerena, A. (2008). Subtyping
undergraduate women along dietary restraint and negative affect. Appetite, 51, 3, 727-
730.
Persson, M., & Martensson, J. (2006). Situations influencing habits in diet and exercise
among nurses working night shift. Journal of Nursing Management, 14, 414–423.
Posner, M.I., & Rothbart, M.K. (2007). A mind of one’s own. In M.I. Posner & M.K.
Rothbart (Eds.), Educating the human brain (pp. 79-97). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Povey, R., Conner, M., Sparks, P., James, R., & Shepherd, R. (2000). The theory of planned
behaviour and healthy eating: examining additive and moderation effects of social influence
variables. Psychology and Health, 14, 991-1006.
Prestwich, A., Ayres, K., Lawton, R. (2008). Crossing two types of implementation intentions
with a protection motivation intervention for the reduction of saturated fat intake: A
randomized trial. Social Science and Medicine, 67, 1550-1558.
Rachlin, H. (2000). The science of self-control. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Raver, C.C., Blackburn, E.K., Bancroft, M., & Torp, N. (1999). Relations between effective
self-regulation, attentional control, and low-income preschoolers’ social competence with
peers. Early Education and Development Special Issue: Early peer relationships, 10, 333-
350.
Reitan, R. (1958). Validity of the trail making test as an indicator of organic brain damage.
Perceptual Motor Skills, 8, 271-276.
Roberts, B.W., Chernyshenko, O.S., Stark, S., & Goldberg, L.R. (2005). The structure of
conscientiousness: an empirical investigation based on seven major personality questionnaires.
Personnel Psychology, 58, 103-139.
Scholz, U., Schüz, B., Ziegelmann, J.P., Lippke, S., & Schwarzer, R. (2008). Beyond behavioural
intentions: Planning mediates between intentions and physical activity. British Journal
of Health Psychology, 13, 479-494.
Sherman, J.W., Gawronski, B., Gonsalkorale, K., Hugenberg, K., Allen, T.J., & Groom, C.J.
(2008). The Self-Regulation of Automatic Associations and Behavioural Impulses. Psychological
Review, 115, 2, 314-335.
Shoda, Y., Mischel, W., Wright, J.C. (1993a). The role of situational demands and cognitive
competencies in behavior organization and personality coherence. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 65, 1023–1035.
74

Shoda, Y., LeeTiernan, S.J, & Mischel, W. (2002). Personality as a dynamical system:
emergence of stability and consistency in intra- and interpersonal interactions. Personality
and Social Psychology Review, 6, 316–325.
Shoda, Y., Mischel, W., & Wright, J.C. (1993). Links between personality judgements and
contextualized behaviour patterns: Situation-behaviour profiles of personality prototypes.
Social Cognition, 4, 399-429.
Shoda, Y., Mischel, W., Wright, J.C. (1994). Intra -individual stability in the organization
and patterning of behaviour: incorporating psychological situations into the ideographic
analysis of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 674–87.
Simon, H. A. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological
Review, 63, 2, 129-138.
Smith, G.T, Fischer S, Cyders M.A, Annus, A.M, Spillane, N.S, McCarthy, D.M (2007). On
the validity and utility of discriminating among impulsivity-like traits. Assessment, 14, 2,
155–170.
Sniehotta, F.F., Schwarzer, R., Scholz, U., & Schuz, B. (2005). Action planning and coping
planning for long-term lifestyle change: Theory and assessment. European Journal of Social
Psychology, 12, 244-255.
Spink, K.S., & Nickel, D. (2010). Self-regulatory efficacy as a mediator between attributions
and intention for health-related physical activity. Journal of Health Psychology, 15, 1, 75-84.
Strack, S., & Deutsch, R. (2004). Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behaviour.
Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 220–247.
Tangney, J.P., Baumeister, R.F., & Boone, A. (2004). High self-control predicts good adjustment,
less pathology, better grades, and interpersonal success. Journal of Personality, 72,
271-324.
Tice, D.M., Baumeister, R.F., Shmueli, D., & Muraven, M. (2007). Restoring the self: positive
affect helps improve self-regulation following ego depletion. Journal of Experimental
Social Psychology, 43, 3, 379-384.
Toomela, A. (2003). Relationships between personality structure, structure of word meaning,
and cognitive ability: a study of cultural mechanisms of personality. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 85, 4, 723-735.
Trope, Y., & Fishbach, A. (2000). Counteractive self-control in overcoming temptation
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 493-506.
Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2003). Temporal construal Psychological Review, 110, 403-421.
Ulbricht, T.L.V., & Southgate, D.A.T. (1991). Coronary heart disease: seven dietary factors.
The Lancet, 338, 985-992.
Vallacher, R.R., & Wegner, D.M. (1989). Levels of personal agency: Individual variation in
action identification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 660–671.
Vansteelandt, K., & Van Mechelen, I.V. (2004). The personality triad in balance: Multidimensional
individual differences in situation-behaviour profiles. Journal of Research in
Personality, 38, 367–393.
75

Verdejo-Garcia, A., Lawrence, A. J., & Clark, L. (2008). Impulsivity as a vulnerability
marker for dynamics of willpower. Psychological Review, 106, 3-19.
Vygotsky, L. (1934). Thought and Speech. Moscow.
Waldeck, T. L., & Miller, L. S. (1997). Gender and impulsivity differences in licit substance
use. Journal of Substance Abuse, 9, 269-275.
Ward, A., & Mann, T. (2000). Don't mind if I do: Disinhibited eating under cognitive load.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 753–763.
Watkins, E.R., Baeyens, C.B., Read, R. (2009). Concreteness training reduces dysphoria:
proof-of-principle for repeated cognitive bias modification in depression. Journal of Abnormal
Psychology, 11, 8, 1, 55-64.
Webb, T. L., & Sheeran, P. (2006). Does changing behavioural intentions engender behaviour
change A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 132,
249-268.
Whiteside, S.P, & Lynam, D.R. (2001). The Five factor model and impulsivity: using a
structural model of personality to understand impulsivity. Personality and Individual Differences,
30, 669-689.
Wiers, R. W. & Hofmann, W. (2010). Implicit cognition and health psychology: Changing
perspectives and new interventions. European Health Psychologist, 12, 4-6.
Wright, J.C, & Mischel, W. (1987). A conditional approach to dispositional constructs: The
local predictability of social behaviour. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 6,
1159-1177
Wulfert, E., Block, J. A., Santa Ana, E., Rodriguez, M. L., & Colsman, M. (2002). Delay of
gratification: Impulsive choices and problem behaviors in early and late adolescence. Journal
of Personality, 70, 4, 533-552.
Zapolski, T.C.B., Cyders, M.A., & Gregory, T.S. (2009). Positive Urgency Predicts Illegal
Drug Use and Risky Sexual Behaviour. Psychology of Addictive Behaviour, 32, 2, 348-354.
Zuckerman, M. (1994). Behavioural expressions and biosocial bases of sensation seeking.
New York: Cambridge University Press.
76

APPENDIX
Table 1 The questionnaire of contextual features of impulsive behaviour
Kui palju teisi inimesi selles olukorras
0 1 2-3 4-10 üle 10
oli
Hinda järgnevat 6 kirjeldust juhul, kui peale sinu oli olukorras ka teisi (teine). Kui ümbritsevaid
inimesi ei olnud, jätka 7. kirjeldusest.
1. Teisi / teist
inimest:
tundsin hästi 1 2 3 4 5 ei tundnud üldse
2. Teised /
tema toimis(id):
3. Teised /
tema:
4. Teised /tema
oli(d):
5. Mind:
6. Teis(t)e
positsioon/staatus:
samuti nagu mina 1 2 3 4 5 täiesti teisiti
meeldis(id) mulle 1 2 3 4 5 ei meeldinud üldse
soojad ja sõbralikud 1 2 3 4 5
õhutati, innustati,
tunnustati
1 2 3 4 5
oli kõrgem kui minul 1 2 3 4 5
7. Olukord oli: rangelt normeeritud 1 2 3 4 5
8. Olukord:
9. Keskkond
oli minu jaoks:
10. Keskkond
oli minu jaoks:
11. Olukord
oli:
12. Olukord
oli:
13. Olukord
oli:
14. See olukord
oli minu
jaoks:
oli täielikult minu
poolt juhitav, kontrollitav
tuttav, turvaline,
omane
ahvatlev, meeldiv,
nauditav
kriitiline, vajas väga
kiiret otsustamist
1 2 3 4 5
ebasõbralikud,
agressiivsed
takistati, pidurdati,
süüdistati
oli madalam kui
minul
vaba, reeglite ja
piiranguteta
ei allunud minu
kontrollile, ei sõltunud
minust
1 2 3 4 5 võõras, ebamugav
1 2 3 4 5
ebameeldiv, eemaletõukav
1 2 3 4 5 tavapärane, turvaline
ootamatu 1 2 3 4 5
keeruline, mitmetimõistetav
kohustustega hõivatud
aeg
rutiinne, täiesti ette
teada olev
1 2 3 4 5 lihtne ja ühene
1 2 3 4 5
vaba, kohustustevaba
aeg
15. Mul oli: vähe aega, kiire 1 2 3 4 5 küllaldaselt aega
16. Käsilolev
tegevus oli:
minu jaoks nauditav 1 2 3 4 5
minu jaoks
ebameeldiv
77

17. Käsilolev
tegevus oli:
18. Ma:
19. Olin parasjagu:
20. Mul oli
parasjagu:
21. Mind
valdasid parasjagu:
22. Olin parasjagu:
23. Tundsin
end füüsiliselt:
24. Mul oli
parasjagu:
25. Mõtted
minu peas
olid:
minu jaoks tähtis,
vajalik
pidin jagama korraga
tähelepanu mitme
teema vahel
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5
minu jaoks
tähtsusetu, ebaoluline
keskendusin rahumeeli
korraga
ühele asjale
puhanud ja reibas 1 2 3 4 5 väsinud ja kurnatud
positiivsed tunded,
kõrgendatud
meeleolu, õnnetunne
põnev 1 2 3 4 5 igav
1 2 3 4 5
negatiivsed tunded,
halb meeleolu
rahulikus olekus 1 2 3 4 5 stressis ja pinges
suurepäraselt 1 2 3 4 5 väga kehvasti
julge tunne 1 2 3 4 5 hirm
rõõmsad, helged 1 2 3 4 5
26. Mul: oli nälg/janu 1 2 3 4 5
häirivad, keerulised,
murelikud
oli kõht täis / janu ei
olnud
78

CURRICULUM VITAE
Name:
Eva-Maria Kangro
Date of Birth: 27.05.1980
E-mail:
evamaria@psience.ee
EDUCATION
2005 – 2011 Doctoral studies in Psychology, Tallinn University
2004 MSc in Psychology, Tallinn University
2002 BSc in Psychology, Tallinn University
1998 Tallinn French Lycée
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
01/2011 – Tallinn University, Institute of Psychology
Researcher
05/2008 – Psience OÜ
Member of the Board
03/2003 – 03/2010 Tallinn University, Institute of Psychology
Assistant
SCIENTIFIC INTERESTS
Personality in context, self-regulation, emotion management, health behaviour
PUBCLICATIONS
Articles
Kangro, E.-M. (2010a). Role of self-reflection ability in children’s self-regulation.
In A. Toomela (Ed.), Systemic person-oriented study of child development in early
primary school (pp. 245-260). Frankfurt: Peter Lang GmbH.
Mõttus, R., Allik, J., Konstabel, K., Kangro, E.-M., & Pullmann, H. (2008). Beliefs
about the relationships between personality and intelligence. Personality and
Individual Differences, 45(6), 457 - 462.
79

Kangro, E.-M. (2006). Money Attitudes: an Aspect of Sustainable Development.
Education and Sustainable Development: First Steps Toward Changes, 1, 307-318.
Kangro, E.-M. (2006). Rahaga seotud hoiakud – isiksuslikud ja sotsiodemograafilised
tegurid. Eesti sotsiaalteaduste VI aastakonverentsi artiklite kogumik.
TLÜ: Tallinn.
Book
Kangro, E.-M., & Lage, M. (2007). Õpime arvutama. Tallinn: Ajakirjade Kirjastus.
Conference theses
Kangro, E.-M. (2010). Link between self-reflection and externalizing behaviour in
elementary school children. In M. Blatny, M. Hrebickova, S. Kourilova, A.
Slezackova, P. Kveton, D. Voboril (Eds.), 15th European Conference on
Personality: Program and Abstracts (pp. 169). Academy of Sciences of the Czech
Republic, Institute of Psychology.
Kangro, E-M., & Hagger, M.S. (2010). The effects of trait-self-control on the
relationship between health-related intentions and behaviour. Psychology and
Health, 25, 1, 207.
Kangro, E.-M. (2008a). Impulsivity in laypersons' mind. In J. Allik, A. Realo, L.
Kööts (Eds.), 14th European Conference on Personality: Program and Abstracts
(pp. 214). Tartu: University of Tartu.
Kangro, E.-M. (2008b). Impulsivity - what does it mean In: Abstracts of 29th International
Congress of Psychology: 29th International Congress of Psychology.
Berlin, 2008.
Kangro, E.-M. (2006). Money attitudes as related to subjective well-being, individualism
and locus of control. Abstracts of 13th European Conference on
Personality, 275.
80

ELULOOKIRJELDUS
Nimi:
Eva-Maria Kangro
Sünniaeg: 27.05.1980
E-mail:
evamaria@psience.ee
HARIDUSKÄIK
2005 – 2011 Doktorantuur
Tallinna Ülikool Psühholoogia Instituut
2004 MSc psühholoogias
Tallinna Ülikool Psühholoogia Instituut
2002 BSc psühholoogias
Tallinna Ülikool Psühholoogia Instituut
1998 Keskharidus
Tallinna Prantsuse Lütseum
TÖÖKOGEMUS
01/2011 – Tallinna Ülikool, Psühholoogia Instituut
Teadur
05/2008 – Psience OÜ
Juhatuse liige
03/2003 – 03/2010 Tallinna Ülikool, Psühholoogia Instituut
Osakonnajuhataja abi
TEADUSHUVI
Isiksuse kontekstuaalsus, eneseregulatsioon, tervisekäitumine, tarbimiskäitumine
81

PUBLIKATSIOONID
Artiklid
Kangro, E.-M. (2010a). Role of self-reflection ability in children’s self-regulation.
In A. Toomela (Ed.), Systemic person-oriented study of child development in early
primary school (pp. 245-260). Frankfurt: Peter Lang GmbH.
Mõttus, R., Allik, J., Konstabel, K., Kangro, E.-M., & Pullmann, H. (2008). Beliefs
about the relationships between personality and intelligence. Personality and
Individual Differences, 45(6), 457 - 462.
Kangro, E.-M. (2006). Money Attitudes: an Aspect of Sustainable Development.
Education and Sustainable Development: First Steps Toward Changes, 1, 307-318.
Kangro, E.-M. (2006). Rahaga seotud hoiakud – isiksuslikud ja sotsiodemograafilised
tegurid. Eesti sotsiaalteaduste VI aastakonverentsi artiklite kogumik.
TLÜ: Tallinn.
Raamat
Kangro, E.-M., & Lage, M. (2007). Õpime arvutama. Tallinn: Ajakirjade Kirjastus.
Konverentside teesid
Kangro, E.-M. (2010). Link between self-reflection and externalizing behaviour in
elementary school children. In M. Blatny, M. Hrebickova, S. Kourilova, A.
Slezackova, P. Kveton, D. Voboril (Eds.), 15th European Conference on
Personality: Program and Abstracts (pp. 169). Academy of Sciences of the Czech
Republic, Institute of Psychology.
Kangro, E-M., & Hagger, M.S. (2010). The effects of trait-self-control on the
relationship between health-related intentions and behaviour. Psychology and
Health, 25, 1, 207.
Kangro, E.-M. (2008a). Impulsivity in laypersons' mind. In J. Allik, A. Realo, L.
Kööts (Eds.), 14th European Conference on Personality: Program and Abstracts
(pp. 214). Tartu: University of Tartu.
Kangro, E.-M. (2008b). Impulsivity - what does it mean In: Abstracts of 29th International
Congress of Psychology: 29th International Congress of Psychology.
Berlin, 2008.
Kangro, E.-M. (2006). Money attitudes as related to subjective well-being, individualism
and locus of control. Abstracts of 13th European Conference on
Personality, 275.
82

TALLINNA ÜLIKOOL
SOTSIAALTEADUSTE DISSERTATSIOONID
TALLINN UNIVERSITY
DISSERTATIONS ON SOCIAL SCIENCES
1. MARE LEINO. Sotsiaalsed probleemid koolis ja õpetaja toimetulek. Tallinna Pedagoogikaülikool.
Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 1. Tallinn: TPÜ kirjastus, 2002. 125 lk.
ISSN 1406-4405. ISBN 9985-58-227-6.
2. MAARIS RAUDSEPP. Loodussäästlikkus kui regulatiivne idee: sotsiaal-psühholoogiline
analüüs. Tallinna Pedagoogikaülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 2. Tallinn:
TPÜ kirjastus, 2002. 162 lk. ISSN 1406-4405. ISBN 9985-58-231-4.
3. EDA HEINLA. Lapse loova mõtlemise seosed sotsiaalsete ja käitumisteguritega. Tallinna
Pedagoogikaülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 3. Tallinn: TPÜ kirjastus, 2002.
150 lk. ISSN 1406-4405. ISBN 9985-58-240-3.
4. KURMO KONSA. Eestikeelsete trükiste seisundi uuring. Tallinna Pedagoogikaülikool.
Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 4. Tallinn: TPÜ kirjastus, 2003. 122 lk. ISSN 1406-4405.
ISBN 9985-58-245-2.
5. VELLO PAATSI. Eesti talurahva loodusteadusliku maailmapildi kujunemine rahvakooli
kaudu (1803–1918). Tallinna Pedagoogikaülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 5. Tallinn:
TPÜ kirjastus, 2003. 206 lk. ISSN 1406-4405. ISBN 9985-58-247-0.
6. KATRIN PAADAM. Constructing Residence as Home: Homeowners and Their Housing
Histories. Tallinn Pedagogical University. Dissertations on Social Sciences, 6. Tallinn: TPU
Press, 2003. 322 p. ISSN 1406-4405. ISBN 9985-58-268-3.
7. HELI TOOMAN. Teenindusühiskond, teeninduskultuur ja klienditeenindusõppe konseptuaalsed
lähtekohad. Tallinna Pedagoogikaülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 7. Tallinn:
TPÜ kirjastus, 2003. 368 lk. ISSN 1406-4405. ISBN 9985-58-287-X.
8. KATRIN NIGLAS. The Combined Use of Qualitative and Quantitative Metods in Educational
Research. Tallinn Pedagogical University. Dissertations on Social Sciences, 8. Tallinn:
TPU Press, 2004. 200 p. ISSN 1406-4405. ISBN 9985-58-298-5.
9. INNA JÄRVA. Põlvkondlikud muutused Eestimaa vene perekondade kasvatuses: sotsiokultuuriline
käsitus. Tallinna Pedagoogikaülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 9. Tallinn:
TPÜ kirjastus, 2004. 202 lk. ISSN 1406-4405. ISBN 9985-58-311-6.
10. MONIKA PULLERITS. Muusikaline draama algõpetuses – kontseptsioon ja rakendusvõimalusi
lähtuvalt C. Orffi süsteemist. Tallinna Pedagoogikaülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid,
10. Tallinn: TPÜ kirjastus, 2004. 156 lk. ISSN 1406-4405. ISBN 9985-58-
309-4.
11. MARJU MEDAR. Ida-Virumaa ja Pärnumaa elanike toimetulek: sotsiaalteenuste vajadus,
kasutamine ja korraldus. Tallinna Pedagoogikaülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid,
11. Tallinn: TPÜ kirjastus, 2004. 218 lk. ISSN 1406-4405. ISBN 9985-58-320-5.
12. KRISTA LOOGMA. Töökeskkonnas õppimise tähendus töötajate kohanemisel töötingimustega.
Tallinna Pedagoogikaülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 12. Tallinn: TPÜ
kirjastus, 2004. 238 lk. ISSN 1406-4405. ISBN 9985-58-326-4.
83

13. МАЙЯ МУЛДМА. Феномен музыки в формировании диалога культур (сопоставительный
анализ мнений учителей музыки школ с эстонским и русским языком
обучения). Таллиннский педагогический университет. Диссертации по социальным
наукам, 13. Таллинн: Изд-во ТПУ, 2004. 209 c. ISSN 1406-4405. ISBN 9985-58-330-2.
14. EHA RÜÜTEL. Sociocultural Context of Body Dissatisfaction and Possibilities of Vibroacoustic
Therapy in Diminishing Body Dissatisfaction. Tallinn Pedagogical University.
Dissertations on Social Sciences, 14. Tallinn: TPU Press, 2004. 91 p. ISSN 1406-4405.
ISBN 9985-58-352-3.
15. ENDEL PÕDER. Role of Attention in Visual Information Processing. Tallinn Pedagogical
University. Dissertations on Social Sciences, 15. Tallinn: TPU Press, 2004. 88 p. ISSN
1406-4405. ISBN 9985-58-356-6.
16. MARE MÜÜRSEPP. Lapse tähendus eesti kultuuris 20. sajandil: kasvatusteadus ja
lastekirjandus. Tallinna Pedagoogikaülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 16. Tallinn:
TPÜ kirjastus, 2005. 258 lk. ISSN 1406-4405. ISBN 9985-58-366-3.
17. АЛЕКСАНДР ВЕЙНГОЛЬД. Прагмадиалектика шахматной игры: основные особенности
соотношения формально- и информально-логических эвристик аргументационного
дискурса в шахматах. Таллиннский педагогический университет. Диссертации
по социальным наукам, 17. Таллинн: Изд-во ТПУ 2005. 74 c. ISSN 1406-
4405. ISBN 9985-58-372-8.
18. OVE SANDER. Jutlus kui argumentatiivne diskursus: informaal-loogiline aspekt. Tallinna
Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 18. Tallinn: TLÜ kirjastus, 2005. 110 lk.
ISSN 1406-4405. ISBN 9985-58-377-9.
19. ANNE UUSEN. Põhikooli I ja II astme õpilaste kirjutamisoskus. Tallinna Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste
dissertatsioonid, 19. Tallinn: TLÜ kirjastus, 2006. 193 lk. ISSN 1736-3632.
ISBN 9985-58-423-6.
20. LEIF KALEV. Multiple and European Union Citizenship as Challenges to Estonian
Citizenship Policies. Tallinn University. Dissertations on Social Sciences, 20. Tallinn: Tallinn
University Press, 2006. 164 p. ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN-10 9985-58-436-8. ISBN-
13 978-9985-58-436-1
21. LAURI LEPPIK. Transformation of the Estonian Pension System: Policy Choices and
Policy Outcomes. Tallinn University. Dissertations on Social Sciences, 21. Tallinn: Tallinn
University Press, 2006. 155 p. ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 978-9985-58-440-8. ISBN 9985-
58-440-6.
22. VERONIKA NAGEL. Hariduspoliitika ja üldhariduskorraldus Eestis aastatel 1940–1991.
Tallinna Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 22. Tallinn: TLÜ kirjastus, 2006. 205 lk.
ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 978-9985-58-448-4. ISBN 9985-58-448-1.
23. LIIVIA ANION. Läbipõlemissümptomite ja politseikultuurielementide vastastikustest mõjudest.
Tallinna Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 23. Tallinn: TLÜ kirjastus, 2006.
229 lk. ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 978-9985-58-453-8. ISBN 9985-58-453-8.
24. INGA MUTSO. Erikooliõpilaste võimalustest jätkuõppeks Eesti Vabariigi kutseõppeasutustes.
Tallinna Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 24. Tallinn: TLÜ kirjastus,
2006. 179 lk. ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 978-9985-58-451-4. ISBN 9985-58-451-1.
25. EVE EISENSCHMIDT. Kutseaasta kui algaja õpetaja toetusprogrammi rakendamine
Eestis. Tallinna Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 25. Tallinn: TLÜ kirjastus, 2006.
185 lk. ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 978-9985-58-462-0. ISBN 9985-58-462-7.
84

26. TUULI ODER. Võõrkeeleõpetaja proffessionaalsuse kaasaegne mudel. Tallinna Ülikool.
Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 26. Tallinn: TLÜ kirjastus, 2007. 194 lk. ISSN 1736-3632.
ISBN 978-9985-58-465-1.
27. KRISTINA NUGIN. 3-6-aastaste laste intellektuaalne areng erinevates kasvukeskkondades
WPPSI-r testi alusel. Tallinna Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 27. Tallinn:
TLÜ kirjastus, 2007. 156 lk. ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 978-9985-58-473-6.
28. TIINA SELKE. Suundumusi eesti üldhariduskooli muusikakasvatuses 20. sajandi II
poolel ja 20. sajandi alguses. Tallinna Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 28. Tallinn:
TLÜ kirjastus, 2007. 198 lk. ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 978-9985-58-486-6.
29. SIGNE DOBELNIECE. Homelessness in Latvia: in the Search of Understanding. Tallinn
University. Dissertations on Social Sciences, 29. Tallinn: Tallinn University Press, 2007.
127 p. ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 978-9985-58-440-8.
30. BORISS BAZANOV. Tehnika ja taktika integratiivne käsitlus korvpalli õpi-treeningprotsessis.
Tallinna Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 30. Tallinn: TLÜ kirjastus, 2007.
95 lk. ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 978-9985-58-496-5
31. MARGE UNT. Transition from School-to-work in Enlarged Europe. Tallinn University.
Dissertations on Social Sciences, 31. Tallinn: Tallinn University Press, 2007. 186 p. ISSN
1736-3632. ISBN 978-9985-58-504-7.
32. MARI KARM. Täiskasvanukoolitajate professionaalsuse kujunemise võimalused. Tallinna
Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 32. Tallinn: TLÜ kirjastus, 2007. 232 lk. ISSN
1736-3632. ISBN 978-9985-58-511-5.
33. KATRIN POOM-VALICKIS. Novice Teachers’ Professional Development Across Their
Induction Year. Tallinn University. Dissertations on Social Sciences, 33. Tallinn: Tallinn
University Press, 2007. 203 p. ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 978-9985-58-535-1.
34. TARMO SALUMAA. Representatsioonid oranisatsioonikultuuridest Eesti kooli pedagoogidel
muutumisprotsessis. Tallinna Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 34. Tallinn:
TLÜ kirjastus, 2007. 155 lk. ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 978-9985-58-533-7.
35. AGU UUDELEPP. Propagandainstrumendid poliitilistes ja poliitikavälistes telereklaamides.
Tallinna Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 35. Tallinn: TLÜ kirjastus, 2008.
132 lk. ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 978-9985-58-502-3.
36. PILVI KULA. Õpilaste vasakukäelisusest tulenevad toimetuleku iseärasused koolis.
Tallinna Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 36. Tallinn: TLÜ kirjastus, 2008. 186
lk. ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 978-9985-58-578-8.
37. LIINA VAHTER. Subjective Complaints in Different Neurological Diseases – Correlations
to the Neuropsychological Problems and Implications for the Everyday Life. Tallinn
University. Dissertations on Social Sciences, 37. Tallinn: Tallinn University Press,
2009. 100 p. ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 978-9985-58-660-0.
38. HELLE NOORVÄLI. Praktika arendamine kutsehariduses. Tallinna Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste
dissertatsioonid, 38. Tallinn: TLÜ kirjastus, 2009. 232 lk. ISSN 1736-
3632. ISBN 978-9985-58-664-8.
39. BIRGIT VILGATS. Välise kvaliteedihindamise mõju ülikoolile: Eesti kogemuse
analüüs. Tallinna Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 39. Tallinn: TLÜ kirjastus,
2009. 131 lk. ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 987-9985-58-676-1
85

40. TIIU TAMMEMÄE. Kahe- ja kolmeaastaste eesti laste kõne arengu tase Reynelli ja
HYKS testi põhjal ning selle seosed koduse kasvukeskkonna teguritega. Tallinna Ülikool.
Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 40. Tallinn: TLÜ kirjastus, 2009. 131 lk. ISSN 1736-
3632. ISBN 978-9985-58-680-8.
41. KARIN LUKK. Kodu ja kooli koostöö strukturaalsest, funktsionaalsest ning sotsiaalsest
aspektist. Tallinna Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 41. Tallinn: TLÜ kirjastus,
2009. 93 lk. ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 978-9985-58-681-5.
42. TANEL KERIKMÄE. Estonia in the European Legal System: Protection of the Rule of
Law Through Constitutional Dialogue. Tallinn University. Dissertations on social sciences,
42. Tallinn: Tallinn University Press, 2009. 149 lk. ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 978-
9985-58-693-8.
43. JANNE PUKK. Kõrghariduse kvaliteet ja üliõpilaste edasijõudmine kõrgkoolis. Tallinna
Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 43. Tallinn: Tallinna Ülikool, 2010. 124 lk.
ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 978-9985-58-664-8.
44. KATRIN AAVA. Eesti haridusdiskursuse analüüs. Tallinna Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste
dissertatsioonid, 44. Tallinn: Tallinna Ülikool, 2010. 163 lk. ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN
978-9949-463-18-3.
45. AIRI KUKK. Õppekava eesmärkide saavutamine üleminekul lasteasutusest kooli ning I
kooliastmes õpetajate hinnanguil. Tallinna Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 45.
Tallinn: Tallinna Ülikool, 2010. 175 lk. ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 978-9949-463-35-0.
46. MARTIN KLESMENT. Fertility Development in Estonia During the Second Half of the
XX Century: The Economic Context and its Implications. Tallinna Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste
dissertatsioonid, 46. Tallinn: Tallinna Ülikool, 2010. 447 lk. ISSN 1736-3632.
ISBN 978-9949-463-40-4.
47. MERIKE SISASK. The social construction and subjective meaning of attempted suicide.
Tallinna Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 47. Tallinn: Tallinna Ülikool, 2010.
181 lk. ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 978-9949-463-61-9
48. TIIA ÕUN. Koolieelse lasteasutuse kvaliteet lapsekeskse kasvatuse aspektist. Tallinna
Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste dissertatsioonid, 48. Tallinn: Tallinna Ülikool, 2011. 95 lk.
ISSN 1736-3632. ISBN 978-9949-463-68-8
49. JANIKA BACHMANN. Sustainability of the Japanese Retirement System in the Context
of Pension age Population Labour Force Participation. Tallinna Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste
dissertatsioonid, 49. Tallinn: Tallinna Ülikool, 2011. 100 lk. ISSN 1736-3632.
ISBN 978-9949-463-77-0
86

DISSERTATSIOONINA KAITSTUD MONOGRAAFIAD,
ARTIKLIVÄITEKIRJAD (ilmunud iseseisva väljaandena)
1. TIIU REIMO. Raamatu kultuur Tallinnas 18. sajandi teisel poolel. Monograafia. Tallinna
Ülikool. Tallinn: TLÜ kirjastus, 2001. 393 lk. ISBN 9985-58-284-5.
2. AILE MÖLDRE. Kirjastustegevus ja raamatulevi Eestis. Monograafia. Tallinna Ülikool.
Tallinn: TLÜ kirjastus, 2005. 407 lk. ISBN 9985-58-201-2.
3. LINNAR PRIIMÄGI. Klassitsism. Inimkeha retoorika klassitsistliku kujutavkunsti kaanonites.
I-III. Monograafia. Tallinna Ülikool Tallinn: TLÜ kirjastus, 2005. 1242 lk. ISBN
9985-58-398-1, ISBN 9985-58-405-8, ISBN 9985-58-406-6.
4. KATRIN KULLASEPP. Dialogical Becoming. Professional Identity Construction of
Psychology Students. Tallinn: Tallinn University Press, 2008. 285 p. ISBN 978-9985-58-
596-2
5. LIIS OJAMÄE. Making choices in the housing market: social construction of housing
value. The case of new suburban housing. Tallinn: Tallinn University Press, 2009. 189 p.
ISBN 978-9985-58-687-7
87