License to Sin : A Justification-Based Account of Self-Regulation Failure

Abstract

Few phenomena question the authority of reason over our behavior more than self-regulation failure. As a result, most accounts of self-regulation failure have explained such self-defeating behavior as arising from impulsive factors that undermine our ability to act as we intend. In the present dissertation the conventional notion that self-regulation failure is by default the result of a disabled reflective system was challenged. Instead, it was hypothesized that reasoning processes might even contribute actively to self-regulation failure. Specifically, by applying principles from the literature on judgment and decision making to self-regulation, we hypothesized that by looking for justifications, sometimes reasoning allows people to engage in behavior that violates their own goals.