Selective defensiveness or nondefensiveness: How does relative autonomy relate to excuse-making when goal pursuits do not succeed?

Abstract

Relative autonomy (RA) is high when goals are value-consistent and volitionally enacted. This research compared 2 views of RA's influence on excuse-making after hypothetical or recalled failures to attain exercise goals: i. e., RA could reduce all forms of excuse-making (nondefensiveness), or only those that harm continued goal-pursuit (selective defensiveness). Drawing on the typology of excuses by Schlenker et al. (Psychol Rev 101:632-652, 1994), Studies 1-3 showed that individuals with higher RA toward exercise perceived less legitimacy in, and especially avoided using excuses that denied the goal's self-relevance. This excuse-type, when compared with denying control, was most harmful to commitment, and was less effective at reducing culpability. Study 4 showed that internalization of the exercise goal was supported only when excuse-making was tolerated by an ostensible authority. Together, these findings support the selective defensiveness view. © 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC.