Psychological Constructs in Goal Setting
Research-based exploration of goal types, self-efficacy, and their relationship to long-term engagement and wellbeing.
Research-based exploration of goal types, self-efficacy, and their relationship to long-term engagement and wellbeing.
Behavioural psychology identifies multiple approaches to goal-setting, each with different characteristics and relationships to long-term adherence, motivation, and psychological wellbeing.
SMART goals are Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-Bound. This framework provides structure and clarity:
Strengths: Clear targets, measurable progress, defined timelines reduce ambiguity about expectations.
Limitations: Heavy focus on specific numerical outcomes can become sources of distress when outcomes fail to materialise as planned. Rigid timelines may not account for individual variation or unexpected obstacles. All-or-nothing thinking can develop ("failed the goal, so failed entirely").
SMART goals provide structure but can become psychologically rigid if outcomes fail to meet expectations in the specified timeframe.
Process-oriented goals focus on controllable behaviours and actions rather than specific outcomes. Examples: "Move daily," "Prepare home-cooked meals regularly," "Sleep 7–8 hours consistently."
Strengths: Focus on behaviours within individual control. Less susceptible to external variability (e.g., genetics, adaptation) affecting outcomes. Research suggests stronger association with long-term adherence and psychological resilience. Support returning after lapses ("failed yesterday but can try today").
Limitations: May feel less motivating initially without concrete outcome targets. Progress feels less tangible without numerical markers.
Outcome-focused goals target specific results: "Lose 10 kg," "Fit into target dress size," "Reach target body weight."
Strengths: Can provide strong initial motivation. Clear endpoint feels motivating to many individuals. Specific targets give direction.
Limitations: Focus on uncontrollable factors (genetics, adaptation, age, sex determine actual outcomes). When outcomes plateau despite effort, psychological distress increases. Can create all-or-nothing thinking. Limited motivation during plateaus when outcome seems unattainable.
Self-efficacy—confidence in one's ability to accomplish specific tasks—is one of the strongest predictors of sustained effort. Goal-setting affects self-efficacy both positively and negatively.
Realistic Goals and Self-Efficacy: Setting goals that feel achievable based on past experience builds self-efficacy. Success experiences strengthen confidence. Each success creates momentum for continued effort.
Unrealistic Goals and Self-Efficacy: Setting goals perceived as unachievable reduces self-efficacy. Repeated perceived failures damage confidence and increase likelihood of withdrawal from effort.
Goals that feel achievable but challenging build self-efficacy. Goals perceived as unachievable damage self-efficacy and reduce long-term engagement.
Research on motivation distinguishes between intrinsic motivation (internal drive, values-based) and extrinsic motivation (external rewards, social approval).
Intrinsic Motivation: Pursuing goals because they align with personal values, interests, or identity. Associated with greater long-term persistence and psychological wellbeing.
Extrinsic Motivation: Pursuing goals for external rewards, social approval, or to avoid punishment. Provides initial drive but typically weaker for long-term persistence.
Effective approaches often combine both—extrinsic factors for initial engagement, transitioning toward intrinsic motivation for long-term persistence.
Research on goal specificity yields nuanced findings: specific goals generally improve performance, but very specific outcome goals focused solely on uncontrollable factors may backfire by creating rigid expectations and reducing adaptability.
Moderate specificity combined with flexibility and process focus appears to support better long-term outcomes than rigid numerical targets alone.
Research in Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) and related approaches suggests that psychological flexibility—ability to adjust approach when circumstances change—predicts better long-term outcomes than rigid goal commitment regardless of obstacles.
This suggests combining clear intentions with flexibility to adapt as situations evolve, rather than rigid adherence to fixed goals that circumstances make difficult or impossible to achieve.
Research-based factors supporting sustained engagement include:
Individual preferences for goal types vary. Some individuals thrive with specific numerical targets; others find them psychologically distressing. Some prefer process focus; others need concrete outcomes for motivation.
Effective approaches match goal types to individual preferences, personality, and past experience rather than assuming one approach works universally.
This article provides educational information about psychological research on goal-setting and its relationship to adherence. It does not constitute personal advice about what goals you should set. Individual circumstances, preferences, and psychological needs vary considerably. Consulting qualified mental health professionals can help identify approaches matched to your individual situation.
Learn about other psychological and physiological dimensions of realistic weight change.
Back to Articles