Behavior change and individual differences in self-control.

Abstract The use of self-control has become a major emphasis in recent behavioral treatment approaches. This has been especially true for the modification of appetitive disorders: high frequency behavior with immediate positive and delayed negative consequences, such as smoking and overeating. While the results have. for the most part. been promising, they have been marked by a high degree of intersubject variability: even the most generally effective programs have had only selective success (Mahoney, 1972). This variability might well be a function of fundamental interindividual differences in the ability to implement various self-control procedures. Kanfer (1971) has conceptualized self-control as a three component, closed loop process: self-monitoring followed by self-evaluation followed by self-reinforcement. The utilization of each component, the nature of their interaction and their implementation are all learned. Given the complexity of the process and idiosyncratic learning histories, individual differences are to be expected in each component of the self-control sequence. The effectiveness of any therapeutic program emphasizing self-control should, therefore, be a function of the ability and disposition of the patients to implement the self-control sequence or the specifie component required by the procedure. An individual having low facility to administer effective self-reinforcement might, for example, do poorly in a program that required self-reinforcement by containing little or no external supports. Someone who has not learned to accurately selfevaluate might contravene a program by administering self-reinforcement inappropriately. One way to test this contention would be to administer a self-control based treatment to individuals identified as differing in self-control ability: high self-controllers would be expected to do better. That method of attack might, however, be deferred. Lichtcnstein (1971) has suggested that before conducting extensive, elegantly designed treatment research, clinical evidence supporting the efficacy of the procedures be gathered. That approbation can be applied to the evaluation of the general hypothesis presented above, which has not yet had direct empirical support. An alternative, more conservative research strategy would be to precede a treatment study with an examination of individuals who had already changed their own behavior: a process that by definition requires the effective use of self-control. Were the hypothesis valid, differences in the general predisposition (or ability) to emit self-control responses should be observed between individuals who have modified their own behavior (e.g., quit smoking, lost weight) and those unable to do so. The purpose of the present study was to offer some preliminary data on this issue by comparing a group of people who had lost weight or quit smoking with a group that had failed at either. The component of self-control selected for study was self-reinforcement. It was predicted that individuals able to modify their own behavior would have a greater predisposition to use positive self-reinforcement than those unable to do so.