Erin N. Stevens, Nicole J. Holmberg, Christine R. Keeports, M. C. Lovejoy, & Laura D. Pittman
Northern Illinois University
 Self-discrepancy theory (SDT; Higgins, 1987) is a framework for understanding



how incompatible beliefs about the self induce different types of negative affect.
 Discrepancies between the actual-self perception and ideal-self goals are
associated with depressive symptoms.
Regulatory strength refers to how cognitively accessible self-identified goals are
for each individual.
 Stronger goals (those that are more accessible) are hypothesized to relate
to more intense emotional responses following self-discrepancies.
 Support from (1) self-reported regulatory strength, and (2) response latency
measures of regulatory strength (e.g., Higgins et al., 1997).
 Response latency measures do not account for potential confounding
factors (e.g., typing/motor speed, processing speed, impulsive
responding).
The purpose of this study was to further examine how regulatory strength
moderates the association between actual:ideal discrepancies and depression.
 Extending upon previous work using self-report measures, we utilized a
computerized lexical decision task to measure regulatory strength.
 Used a lexical decision task similar to that of Shah, Brazy, & Higgins’ (2004)
task, which to our knowledge, has never been used to examine regulatory
strength as it relates to self-discrepancies and their respective negative
emotional outcomes.
Hypothesis
 The relationship between actual:ideal discrepancies and depressive
symptoms would be moderated by the accessibility (i.e., strength) of idealself goals, even after accounting for processing speed, actual:ought
discrepancies, and anxiety symptoms.
 Participants included undergraduate college students (N = 162)
 Age range = 18-31 years (M = 19.7 years, SD = 2.06; 52% female)
 Ethnicity: 59% White, 20% Black/African American, 12%

Hispanic/Latino(a), 6% Asian American, 2% Biracial, 3% other/unspecified
Measures
 Depressive and Anxiety Symptoms: Beck Depression Inventory, Second
Edition (BDI-II; Beck et al., 1996; α = .88); Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI;
Beck et al., 1988; α = .91).
 Self-Discrepancies: Discrepancies between actual and ideal selves were
measured using an adaptation of the Selves Questionnaire (Higgins, 1987;
Stevens et al., 2013). Participants generated five ‘ideal’ (or ‘ought’)
attributes and rated the degree to which they ideally would like to possess
each attribute (ideal- or ought-self), and then were provided with a list of
the attributes they had previously reported and asked to rate the degree to
which they currently possessed each attribute (actual-self). In order to
calculated self-discrepancies, the score for each actual attribute was
subtracted from the corresponding ideal- or ought-self attribute.
 Goal Strength: Reaction times (RTs) were calculated for the length of time
(in ms) that it took the participants to identify whether a string of letters was
a word or non-word; RTs were calculated separately for the (1) control
words, (2) ought-self goals, and (3) ideal-self goals, with faster RTs being a
proxy for more accessible goals.
 Means, standard deviations, and bivariate correlations for variables of interest

 Simple slopes tests:
 For individuals with relatively stronger ideal-self goals (i.e., faster RTs),
were calculated (see Table 1).
A regression analysis was conducted to examine ideal-self goal strength as a
moderator of the relationship between self-discrepancies and depression (see
Table 2). For the analysis, baseline (control) RTs, and actual:ought selfdiscrepancy, anxiety symptoms, and ought-self goal strength were entered as
covariates.

there was a significant positive association between actual:ideal
discrepancies and depressive symptoms (β = .33, p <.01).
For individuals with relatively weaker ideal-self goals (i.e., slower RTs),
there was not a significant association between actual:ideal discrepancies
and depressive symptoms (β = .02, p =.87).
Table 1
Descriptive Statistics and Correlations for Study Variables
Variable
1
2
3
4
1. A:I Discrepancy
-2. A:O Discrepancy
.71***
-3. Control Word Strength
.03
.07
-4. Ideal Goal Strength
.02
.02
.83***
-5. Ought Goal Strength
.01
.07
.86***
.76***
6. Depression
.20*
.17*
-.02
.00
7. Anxiety
.04
.06
-.12
-.14^
M
1.77
1.44
555.90
542.72
SD
1.05
1.08
131.19
127.03
Note. N = 162. A:I = Actual:Ideal; A:O = Actual:Ought.
^p < .10. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
5
-.05
-.06
549.38
138.04
6
7
-.60***
9.67
7.01
-8.62
8.54
Table 2
Summary of Regression Analyses Examining the Moderating Effect
of Goal Strength on Depressive Symptoms
Variable
β
Anxiety Symptoms
.59***
Actual:Ideal Discrepancy
.17^
Actual:Ought Discrepancy
.02
Control Word Strength
-.11
Ideal-Self Goal Strength
.13
Ought-Self Goal Strength
.12
A:I Discrepancy x Ideal-Self Goal Strength
2

-.16*
R
.42***
F
15.60***
Note. N = 162.
^p < .10. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
 The lexical decision task seems to be a good proxy for regulatory strength.
 Findings underscore the importance of considering the role of individual

difference factors (e.g., goal-strength) when examining the association between
actual:ideal discrepancies and depressive symptoms.
 The mean RTs for ideal-self goals were significantly less than the mean
RTs for the control words; indicates that participants had faster response
times to their ideographic ideal-self goals compared to control words.
 Individuals’ self-identified goals – particularly those associated with the
ideal-self – are more chronically activated, as they were more quickly able
to identify whether their goals were words compared to other word strings.
Results demonstrated a significant interaction between actual:ideal discrepancies
and ideal-self goal strength, such that discrepancies were positively related to
depressive symptoms, though only for individuals with a stronger regulatory focus
(i.e., faster RTs for ideal-self goals) as measured by the lexical decision task.
 Bolstering previous research that suggests goal strength is a moderator of
the discrepancy-depression relationship (Higgins et al., 1997).
 Findings hold even after controlling for general reaction times and
processing speed (as well as anxiety and ought-self constructs).
Clinical Implications:
 Individuals’ goals and their strategies for pursuing these goals (e.g., selfsystem therapy for depression; Vieth et al., 2003) may be a particularly
important clinical intervention target for a subset of individuals who present
with mood disorders (e.g., Strauman et al., 2006).
Correspondence concerning this poster should be directed to: Erin N. Stevens, M.A., Department of Psychology, Northern Illinois University, Dekalb, IL 60115, estevens@niu.edu