Primed Interference: The Cognitive and Behavioral Costs of an Incongruity between Chronic and Primed Motivational Orientations

Research has shown that temporarily primed motivational orientations have essentially the same effects on how people pursue their goals as their chronic orientations. This article shows that, despite the interchangeability of temporary and chronic motivations, primed motivational orientations that are incongruent with chronic orientations create interference, requiring the deployment of cognitive resources and thus undermining performance on subsequent tasks that rely on these resources. Across 6 studies, we primed motivational orientations that were either congruent or incongruent with participants' chronic orientations and then assessed their performance on subsequent tasks that required cognitive resources. Consistent with the primed interference hypothesis, we found that incongruity between temporary and chronic motivational orientations undermined participants' (a) inhibition of incorrect but highly accessible responses, (b) mental arithmetic, (c) analytical reasoning, and (d) resistance to temptation. These results--which were observed following the activation of motivations for promotion or prevention (Studies 1-2 and 5-6), high or low need for belonging (Study 3), and high or low power orientations (Study 4)--illustrate the broad implications of holding incongruent chronic and primed orientations.