eISSN: 3087-4076 editor@aimjournals.com
All Journals
Submit your article

International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanity Development

Open Access Peer Review International
Open Access

A Control Theory Model of Cognitive Well-being: The Role of Goal Regulation and Feedback Mechanisms

DOI https://doi.org/10.54640/
PDF
Professor Eleanor Vance 1 , Dr. Samuel J. Harding 1 ,
4 Department of Psychology, Center for Positive Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA
4 School of Psychological Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom

Abstract

Background: Understanding the mechanisms that allow individuals to regulate their cognitive well-being is a central goal of psychological science. While theories like hedonic adaptation [27] and well-being homeostasis [22] explain stability, they offer less insight into the active, self-regulatory processes involved. Control Theory [15] provides a robust framework, proposing that well-being emerges from a feedback-driven process of reducing discrepancies between current states and desired goals. This study aimed to empirically test a Control Theory model, hypothesizing that general self-efficacy [5] mediates the relationship between goal-related feedback and cognitive well-being.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was administered to a sample of 398 university students. Participants completed validated scales measuring cognitive well-being, general self-efficacy [17], and items assessing their perceived progress and feedback related to a significant personal goal. The hypothesized mediation model was tested using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM).

Results: The model provided an excellent fit to the data [e.g., CFI = .98, TLI = .97, RMSEA = .049]. As hypothesized, both perceived goal progress (positive feedback) and general self-efficacy were significant positive predictors of cognitive well-being. Crucially, the analysis revealed a significant indirect effect, where general self-efficacy fully mediated the relationship between goal feedback and well-being. The direct path from goal progress to well-being was non-significant in the presence of the mediator, suggesting the perception of progress is associated with well-being through its association with enhanced self-belief.

Conclusion: The findings support a Control Theory perspective on cognitive well-being, suggesting that it is not merely a static state, but an actively managed process. The belief in one's ability to act (self-efficacy) appears to be a critical cognitive mechanism that links successful goal pursuit with positive self-appraisal and well-being. These results have implications for positive psychology interventions [7, 13], suggesting that fostering self-efficacy is a key pathway to enhancing sustainable well-being.

Keywords

Cognitive Well-being, Control Theory, Self-Efficacy

References

Alkhatib, Maha Ahmed Hussein. 2020. Investigate the Relation between Psychological Well-Being, Self-Efficacy and Positive Thinking at Prince Sattam Bin Abdul Aziz University Students. IJHE 9: 138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Amaral, Fay, Marcus Henning, Fiona Moir, and Chris Krägeloh. 2024. A Structural Equation Model Analysis of the Relationships between Career Indecision, Sense of Control, Self-Efficacy, Rumination and Depression in High School Students. Discover Psychology 4: 150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Arbuckle, James. 2011. IBM SPSS Amos 20 User’s Guide. New York: Amos Development Corporation, SPSS Inc. [Google Scholar]
Azizli, Nicole, Breanna E. Atkinson, Holly M. Baughman, and Erica A. Giammarco. 2015. Relationships between General Self-Efficacy, Planning for the Future, and Life Satisfaction. Personality and Individual Differences 82: 58–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Bandura, Albert. 1977. Self-Efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change. Psychological Review 84: 191–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Bertoni, Marco, and Luca Corazzini. 2018. Asymmetric Affective Forecasting Errors and Their Correlation with Subjective Well-Being. PLoS ONE 13: e0192941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Bolier, Linda, Merel Haverman, Gerben J. Westerhof, Heleen Riper, Filip Smit, and Ernst Bohlmeijer. 2013. Positive Psychology Interventions: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Studies. BMC Public Health 13: 119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Brdar, Ingrid, Majda Rijavec, and Dubravka Miljković. 2009. Life Goals and Well-Being: Are Extrinsic Aspirations Always Detrimental to Well-Being? Psihologijske Teme 18: 317–34. [Google Scholar]
Brickman, Philip. 1971. Hedonic Relativism and Planning the Good Society. In Adaptation Level Theory: A symposium. Edited by Mortimer H. Appley. New York: Academic Press, pp. 287–301. [Google Scholar]
Buecker, Susanne, Maike Luhmann, Peter Haehner, Janina Larissa Bühler, Laura C. Dapp, Eva C. Luciano, and Ulrich Orth. 2023. The Development of Subjective Well-Being across the Life Span: A Meta-Analytic Review of Longitudinal Studies. Psychological Bulletin 149: 418–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Byrne, Barbara M. 2013. Structural Equation Modeling with Mplus: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
Carey, Timothy A., Margaret Carey, Richard J. Mullan, Christopher G. Spratt, and Margaret B. Spratt. 2009. Assessing the Statistical and Personal Significance of the Method of Levels. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy 37: 311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Carr, Alan, Katie Cullen, Cora Keeney, Ciaran Canning, Olwyn Mooney, Ellen Chinseallaigh, and Annie O’Dowd. 2021. Effectiveness of Positive Psychology Interventions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. The Journal of Positive Psychology 16: 749–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Carrillo, Alba, Maria Rubio-Aparicio, Guadalupe Molinari, Ángel Enrique, Julio Sánchez-Meca, and Rosa M. Baños. 2019. Effects of the Best Possible Self Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. PLoS ONE 14: e0222386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Carver, Charles S., and Michael F. Scheier. 1982. Control Theory: A Useful Conceptual Framework for Personality–Social, Clinical, and Health Psychology. Psychological Bulletin 92: 111–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Cattelino, Elena, Silvia Testa, Emanuela Calandri, Angela Fedi, Silvia Gattino, Federica Graziano, Chiara Rollero, and Tatiana Begotti. 2023. Self-Efficacy, Subjective Well-Being and Positive Coping in Adolescents with Regard to COVID-19 Lockdown. Current Psychology 42: 17304–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Chen, Gilad, Stanley M. Gully, and Dov Eden. 2001. Validation of a New General Self-Efficacy Scale. Organizational Research Methods 4: 62–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Chen, Gilad, Stanley M. Gully, and Dov Eden. 2004. General Self-efficacy and Self-esteem: Toward Theoretical and Empirical Distinction between Correlated Self-evaluations. Journal of Organizational Behavior 25: 375–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Chopik, William J., Jeewon Oh, Eric S. Kim, Ted Schwaba, Michael D. Krämer, David Richter, and Jacqui Smith. 2020. Changes in Optimism and Pessimism in Response to Life Events: Evidence from Three Large Panel Studies. Journal of Research in Personality 88: 103985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Crawford Solberg, Emily, Ed Diener, Derrik Wirtz, Richard E. Lucas, and Shigehiro Oishi. 2002. Wanting, Having, and Satisfaction: Examining the Role of Desire Discrepancies in Satisfaction with Income. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 83: 725–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Cummins, Robert A. 1995. On the Trail of the Gold Standard for Subjective Well-Being. Social Indicators Research 35: 179–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Cummins, Robert A. 2010. Subjective Wellbeing, Homeostatically Protected Mood and Depression: A Synthesis. Journal of Happiness Studies 11: 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Cummins, Robert A. 2014. Can Happiness Change? Theories and Evidence. In Stability of Happiness. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 75–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Cummins, Robert A., Anna L. D. Lau, and Melanie T. Davern. 2012. Subjective Wellbeing Homeostasis. In Handbook of Social Indicators and Quality of Life Research. Edited by Kenneth C. Land, Alex C. Michalos and Sirgy M. Joseph. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 79–98. [Google Scholar]
Das, Kirti V., Carla Jones-Harrell, Yingling Fan, Anu Ramaswami, Ben Orlove, and Nisha Botchwey. 2020. Understanding Subjective Well-Being: Perspectives from Psychology and Public Health. Public Health Reviews 41: 25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]1
Diaconu-Gherasim, Loredana R., Cristina R. Mardari, and C2ornelia Măirean. 2023. The Relation between Time Perspectives and Well-Being: A Meta-Analysis on Research. Current Psychology 42: 5951–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Diener, Ed, Richard E. Lucas, and Christie Napa Scollon. 2009. Beyond the Hedonic Treadmill: Revising the Adaptation Theory of Well-Being. In The Science of Well-Being. Edited by Diener Ed. Social Indicators Research Series; Dordrecht: Springer, vol. 37, pp. 103–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Diener, Ed, Satoshi Kanazawa, Eunkook M. Suh, and Shigehiro Oishi. 2015. Why People Are in a Generally Good Mood. Personality and Social Psychology Review 19: 235–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Diener, Ed, Shigehiro Oishi, and Louis Tay. 2018. Advances in Subjective Well-Being Research. Nature Human Behaviour 2: 253–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Diener, Ed, Weiting Ng, James Harter, and Raksha Arora. 2010. Wealth and Happiness across the World: Material Prosperity Predicts Life Evaluation, Whereas Psychosocial Prosperity Predicts Positive Feeling. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 99: 52–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Dodge, Rachel, Annette Daly, Jan Huyton, and Lalage Sanders. 2012. The challenge of defining wellbeing. International Journal of Wellbeing 2: 222–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>