Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCole, Scott N.
dc.contributor.authorSmith, Debbie M.
dc.contributor.authorRagan, Kathryn
dc.contributor.authorSuurmond, Robert
dc.contributor.authorArmitage, Christopher J.; email: chris.armitage@manchester.ac.uk
dc.date.accessioned2021-10-09T15:19:42Z
dc.date.available2021-10-09T15:19:42Z
dc.date.issued2021-05-04
dc.identifierhttps://chesterrep.openrepository.com/bitstream/handle/10034/626068/13423_2021_Article_1880_nlm.xml?sequence=2
dc.identifierhttps://chesterrep.openrepository.com/bitstream/handle/10034/626068/additional-files.zip?sequence=3
dc.identifierhttps://chesterrep.openrepository.com/bitstream/handle/10034/626068/13423_2021_Article_1880.pdf?sequence=4
dc.identifier.citationPsychonomic Bulletin & Review, volume 28, issue 5, page 1514-1537
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10034/626068
dc.descriptionFrom Springer Nature via Jisc Publications Router
dc.descriptionHistory: registration 2021-01-05, online 2021-05-04, pub-electronic 2021-05-04, pub-print 2021-10
dc.descriptionPublication status: Published
dc.description.abstractAbstract: Mental simulation of future scenarios is hypothesized to affect future behavior, but a large and inconsistent literature means it is unclear whether, and under what conditions, mental simulation can change people’s behavior. A meta-analysis was conducted to synthesize the effects of mental simulation on behavior and examine under what conditions mental simulation works best. An inclusive systematic database search identified 123 (N = 5,685) effect sizes comparing mental simulation to a control group. After applying a multilevel random effects model, a statistically-reliable positive effect of Hedges’ g = 0.49, 95% CI [0.37; 0.62] was found, which was significantly different than zero. Using a taxonomy to identify different subtypes of mental simulation (along two dimensions, class [process, performance, outcome] and purpose [whether an inferior, standard, superior version of that behavior is simulated]), it was found that superior simulations garnered more reliable beneficial effects than inferior simulations. These findings have implications for integrating theories of how mental simulations change behavior, how mental simulations are classified, and may help guide professionals seeking evidence-based and cost-effective methods of changing behavior.
dc.languageen
dc.publisherSpringer US
dc.rightsLicence for this article: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.sourcepissn: 1069-9384
dc.sourceeissn: 1531-5320
dc.subjectTheoretical Review
dc.subjectMental simulation
dc.subjectMental practice
dc.subjectBehavior change
dc.subjectProcess simulations
dc.subjectOutcome simulations
dc.titleSynthesizing the effects of mental simulation on behavior change: Systematic review and multilevel meta-analysis
dc.typearticle
dc.date.updated2021-10-09T15:19:42Z


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
13423_2021_Article_1880_nlm.xml
Size:
195.6Kb
Format:
XML
Thumbnail
Name:
additional-files.zip
Size:
76.34Kb
Format:
Unknown
Thumbnail
Name:
13423_2021_Article_1880.pdf
Size:
1.324Mb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record