Moving beyond Inhibition: Capturing a Broader Scope of the Self-Control Construct with the Self-Control Strategy Scale (SCSS)

Abstract

The purpose of the present research was to develop a more comprehensive measure of self-control that reflects recent theoretical advancements that extend beyond inhibition. Across six samples (N = 1,946, 48.95% males, Ages 18-76, US-MTurkers/Israelis), we sought to develop and validate the Self-Control Strategies Scale (SCSS), as well as examine its predictive validity across important life domains (e.g., weight, physical activity, savings). The SCSS is comprised of eight self-control strategies that represent three categories: anticipatory control (situation selection, reward, punishment, pre-commitment), down-regulation of temptation (distraction, cognitive change, acceptance), and behavioral inhibition. Results indicate that there was a strong association between the widely used Brief Self-Control Scale (BSCS). and the behavioral inhibition strategy of the SCSS. While the behavioral inhibition strategy was a strong and consistent predictor of most self-control related outcomes, results further indicate that in some domains, but not others, certain strategies may be beneficial whereas others may be detrimental. While inhibition remains to be an important factor of self-control, our findings point to the importance of adapting the use of different strategies to different domains. The SCSS can therefore be used to gain a more fine-grained understanding of the self-control construct.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Einav Shimoni for translating, preparing, and running Study 1c in Ben Gurion University and sharing the data with us. We would also like to thank Amir Ghoniem for contributing to the pool of items used in Study 1a.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in Open Science Framework (OSF) at https://osf.io/hpaxy/?view_only=0119fd67e4974da99cd0b3a8f40576a7. Five out of the six studies were pre-registered (links: Study 1a; Study 1 b; Study 2a; Study 2 b; Study 2c).

Notes

1 We opted for an EFA, instead of Exploratory SEM, to enable flexibility in case the data deviate from our pre-registered theoretical model, as it slightly did (see Table 1). A parallel analysis indicated 7 factors (see SOM for scree plot), and Eigenvalues indicated 10 factors. The model that made most theoretical sense was based on the 10-factor model, see SOM for loadings.

2 Because only three items loaded above the pre-registered cut-off (i.e., 0.40) on pre-commitment, we decided to select all the five items originally phrased as examining pre-commitment to allow for enough items to examine this facet in Sample 1b. Results of the CFA in Sample 1b indicated that one of the pre-commitment items had a loading below 0.40 and was therefore removed, leaving 38 items in the final SCSS. The low reliability of the final pre-commitment subscale presumably reflects a theoretically driven constructs with different aspects that do not highly correlate, yet future research should improve this subscale. Reports of the CFA refer to the 38-item scale. The final scale in Figure 3 includes very slight modifications in the phrasing of some items due to grammatical errors or an attempt to make them more general.

3 Please note that measuring savings with number of savings is limited as a person could invest a lot of money into only one savings account, or could be limited by debt, family wealth and other factors.

4 For brevity and ease of presentation, Table 7 includes only the results concerning strategies, which are the most relevant variables. Full Tables can be found in SOM, where Sample as well as all the interactions are presented.

5 For initial support of this claim and the full analysis of initiatory and inhibitory control see SOM.

6 We excluded 31 additional participants who did not answer “definitely use my answers” to an item asking them whether their data should be excluded from analysis.

Additional information

Funding

Part of the work on this paper took place while the first author was a post-doc in Wilhelm Hofmann’s research group at the University of Cologne. This stay was funded by the Leo Spitzer research grant from the University of Cologne awarded to Wilhelm Hofmann.