,..
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
1984,Vol. 46, No.2, 269-279
Copyright 1984 by the
sychol no;
cal A
. 11. I
American P
-".
ssocla on, nc.
""
~,
,
i
The Emergence of Action
Daniel M. Wegner
Robin R. Vallacher
Trinity University
minois Institute of Technology
Gary Macomber, Russell Wood, and Kevin Arps
Trinity University
Peoplesometimesfind themselvesdoing things that they did not set out to do. The
theory of action identification suggests
that peoplewill make suchdiscoveriesunder
certain circumstancesand then will continue to perfonn the action as newly understood;new action, then, will be the result. This action emergencephenomenon
wasinvestigatedin two experiments.Each wasdesignedto test the idea that people
would embracea new understandingof action-an emergentact identity-to the
degree that this identity provided a more comprehensiveunderstandingof the
actionthan did a previousact identity. In Experiment 1,somesubjectswereinduced
to think aboutthe details of the act of "going to college" (e.g.,"studying"), whereas
otherswere led to focus on more comprehensivemeanings(e.g., "preparing for a
career").Thosewho concentratedon detailswere more susceptibleto an emergent
understandingof the act. They came to agree with an article that suggestedthat
"going to college" results in "improving one's sex life" or "impairing one's sex
life." Experiment 2 revealed that emergentidentification can be translated into
emergentaction. Subjectsin this studywho wereinduced to think about the details
of "drinking coffee"-by drinking their coffee in unwieldy cups-were more susceptiblethan thosewho drank from normal cupsto a suggestedactionidentification.
They came to believe that "drinking coffee" amounts to "making myself seek
stimulation" or to "making myself avoid stimulation," and subsequentlyfollowed
the suggestedaction identification by turning up or down the volume of music
they were hearing.
it'
Do people know what they are doing? Traditionally, the thinking of psychological theorists on this question has been strongly divided. Some have been impressed with the
human capacity to make plans, to verbalize
intentions, and to consider possible courses of
action, and so have argued that people know
what they are doing in advance of each action.
This was the way James (1890) framed the
role of mind in action, and such ideas have
been echoed in many theories since (e.g., Harre
& Secord, 1973; Luria, 1961; Miller, Galanter,
& Pribram, 1960). Other theorists, however,
have been more taken with the human tendency to err, to stumble blindly into courses
of action, and to imagine in retrospect what
the action might be. Freud (1914/1960) saw
knowledge of action largely as a matter of such
"self-discovery," and theorists since have argued that people can only begin to understand
an action once it is complete (e.g., Bem, 1972;
Mead, 1938; Ryle, 1949).
In this article, we hope to show how both
of these seemingly contradictory views can be
correct. For this purpose, we draw on the theory of action identification (Vallacher & Wegner, in press), a theory that suggeststhat people
always have available some conception of what
This
h
.
b N onalSci
they are doing. The theory indicates that in
researc was supported In part Y an
ence
...
Foundation
GrantBNS78-26380.
Wewishto thankKim some cases, an unders~ding of actIon arIses
Allio andGeorgeKierstedfor helpin conducting
the re- before the act and contInues to be relevant
searchand ToniGiuliano,William B. Swann,Jr., and during and after the action. In other cases,
RobertA. Wicklundfor valuablecomments
on anearlier however the conception that was held prior
D
th '.
h
Th
draft
ofests
thisfiarticle.. ts h ld be t t Dani I M Wi
to
e actIon
may c ange.
may
di
th
.d
.fte person
.
or repnn
s ou
sen 0 University,
e"
egner,equ
Department
of Psychology,
Trinity
715
~ove~
at some new i enti catIon 0 f th e
"
Stadium Drive, San Antonio, Texas78284.
actIon is more apt and then may set out to
269
",~:
.
270
WEGNER, VALLACHER, MACOMBER, WOOD, ARPS
continue the action as newly conceptualized.
In this analysis,knowledgeof what oneis doing
may thus contribute to the maintenanceof old
action or to the emergenceof new action. The
interesting issue for this theory, then, is the
determination of the conditions under which
each of these processeswill occur: When is
Jamesright, and when is Freud right? To provide a perspective on this issue, we concern
ourselvesfirst with the theory of action identification and then with its implications for
the nature of action emergence.
The Theory
Action identification theory holds that peopIe do what they think they are doing. The
person who is asked "What are you doing?"
will typically report one of a variety of potential identifications of the action, and we
believe that this report is descriptive of the
nature of the ongoing action-in a way that
other identificationsare not. This immediately
availableact identity will be the person'sprincipal cognitive representation of the action,
and despite the person's knowledge of other
identities, will serve as the template for engaging in the action. A person who is questioned while eating, for example, might identify the action as "chewing," as "gaining
weight," as "overcoming boredom," or in yet
other ways. The identity that is prepotent for
the person, however, will guide the action.
Thus, the person who thinks of the act as
"gaining weight" is in fact likely to be putting
on pounds (Wegner,Vallacher,Ewert, Dizadji,
& Reno, 1983). The theory holds, then, just
as James would have it, that the mind is
stronglyimplicated in the performance of action. To the degreethat people identify an action in a certain way, in advance, they will
maintain the action with reference to that
identification and often wind up doing the action exactlyasidentified. This idea constitutes
the first principle of the theory: An action is
maintained in terms of its prepotent identity.
Act identities may differ from one another,
however,in an important way.The theory goes
on to propose that the different identities a
person might have in mind for an action can
vary in their level in a cognitive hierarchy (cf.
Goldman, 1970). Some identities convey the
details or mechanicsof the action; such lower
level identities indicate howan action is done.
Other identities conveya more comprehensive
understandingof the action; such higher level
identities indicate why or with what effectthe
action is done. So, for example, "washing the
floors" is lower in level than "cleaning the
house" becauseit indicates how "cleaning the
house" is done; "preparing for guests,"in turn,
is higher in level than "cleaning the house"
becauseit describeswhy or with what effect
"cleaning the house" is done. As a rule, an
identity A is higher in level than identity B if
it makessenseto saythat one does A by doing
B. With this sort of analysis,all the identities
of a particular action can be arranged in an
identity structure that stretchesfrom the highestlevel consequences
of the action to the lowestlevel details. As suggestedby the first principle of the theory, a person might set out to
do something identified at anyone of these
levels.
The secondprinciple of the theory suggests
that people would prefer to identify action at
the highestlevel possible: When an action can
be identified at both a higher and a lower level,
there will be a tendencyfor the higher level
identity to becomeprepotent. It is not too surprising, after all, that people would want to
be informed of what they are doing in the
most comprehensiveway.When one performs
an action that could be identified as both
"throwing dice" and "winning a million dollars," for example, adhering to the lower level
identity of "throwing dice" would seemfoolish
and shortsighted. Higher level act identities
inform the person of the contingencies surrounding the act-the things one doesby doing
the action-and the fullest knowledge of the
act inheres in such contingencies. Given a
choicebetweena lowerand higherlevel identity
for an action, then, people ordinarily opt for
the higher level identity (Vallacher& Wegner,
in press).
The third principle of the theory indicates
that such high-level identities can present
problems: When an action cannot be maintained in terms of its prepotent identity, there
will be a tendencyfor a lower level identity to
becomeprepotent. If one sets out to "cook a
meal," for instance, especiallyif one is not an
accomplished cook, one could very well fail
for the simple reasonthat one cannot perform
the action without thinking about some of its
details. Frequently, the preferred higher level
identities for action must be set aside in favor
I
A(;l'lUN
5~
'",
,
1~
'!
~
ii
7~
i
EMERGEN,CE
271
of lower level identities that provide representations of how the act can be completed. The
unskilled cook, for example, might haveto be
consciouslyconcernedwith "boiling water" or
even"finding the kettle" for the act of"cooking
a meal" to be completedsuccessfully.The tendencyto identify an action at high levels,then,
is counteracted by a tendency to identify an
action at a lower level when it cannot be main, tained in terms of a higher level identity.
The three principles of the theory prescribe
a systemof dynamic interaction betweenaction and identification. The person attempts
to perform action as identified, but because
of the attractivenessof high-level identities,
the person's "plans" always tend to become
more comprehensiveand high level.This press
toward higher levelsis thwarted, however,each
time the personsetsout to perform the action
and finds it cannot be maintained with reference to a high-level identity. The person
movesto lowerlevelsto discern how the action
can be continued and thus againbecomessus-
This sequenceis possiblebecauseany action
hasmultiple high-levelidentities, independent
comprehensivemeanings that can be substituted for one another. When one performs the
low-level identity of "opening a door," for example, one might be performing any of a variety of higher level identities. One might be
"going to work," "checking for squeaks," or
even"letting in freshair." On "going to work"
one morning and finding the door stuck, one
might have to think, however briefly, about
"opening the door." And in this instant, one
would have severaloptions for understanding
the action at a higher level. One might fix the
door and continue to "go to work." Or, it could
be that the rush of air encounteredasthe door
was opened would serve as a reminder that
one was "letting in fresh air." Emerging with
this higher level identification of the action
could conceivably lead one to continue the
action in this new direction. It might seem
reasonableat this point to "open a window"
as well. On moving to a lower level identifi-
ceptibleto the preferencefor higherlevel identities. Over time, then, the identification of
action movesin thesecyclestoward the highest
level of identification at which the personcan
maintain the action.
cation of action, one entersa realm of mundane details of action that could have many
high-level meanings. From this position, any
suggestionof a high-level meaning, even one
that is very unlike the initial meaning of the
act, could lead one to emergewith a new comprehensiveunderstanding.
Someinitial evidencefor this hypothesized
sequencehas been observed in a study of an
action that many peoplerealize can changein
meaning:the act of "getting married." Wegner,
Vallacher,and Kelly (1983, cited in Vallacher
& Wegner,in press)askeda number of people
to give descriptions of what one does in "getting married" and compiled a list of the 30
most frequently mentioned identities. In a series of telephone interviews, they then asked
people who were in various stagesof the .act
of "getting married" to rate the degreeto which
eachof theseidentitiesdescribedthe act. Factor
analysisof theseratings and tests of trends in
factor scoresrevealed an interesting pattern.
For respondentsquestioned a month before
their wedding day, "expressing my love" was
a compelli~g identity of ~e a~~;a factor composedof this and ~elatedIdentities wasstrongl"!
endorsed.So, prIor to the act, people saw It
in terms of a fairly generalhigh-level identity.
For respondentsquestioned the day before
their wedding, however,a factor composedof,
low-level identities was predominant; here!
The EmergenceProcess
If people generally know what they are
doing, asthe theory asserts,then how can they
sometimes perform behaviors that they did
not know they were doing in advance?We
believe that such action emergenceoccurs by
way of a particular sequenceof eve~ts that
can be charted through the principles of the
theory. The person begins an act with some
particular identity (in accord with the first
principle); if this identity is too high in level
for effective maintenance of the action, the
person moves to thinking about the act in
terms of a lower level identity (in accord with
the third principle); if this lower level identity
is effectively maintained, the person moves
back to thinking about the act in terms of a
higherlevel identity (in accord with the second
principle). This higher level identity, however,
is not necessarilythe one with which the act
wasinitiated. Emergenceof a new high-level
understanding of action occurs by way of a
transitional state in which the person thinks
about some detail of the action.
,...iou,"
11'"
272
WEGNER, VALLACHER, MACOMBER, WOOD, ARPS
people
noted
that
tographer,"
vows,"
and
the
it
act,
the
line
theory,
they
details
of
the
a
at
but
high-level
These
of
believe
in
a
the
emergence
illustrate
of
to
immersed
sight
in
of
the
adopt
a
a
process.
the
knowledge
of
what
the
details
initial
of
are
the
action,
of
that
And
The
research
this
The
reported
"getting
was
of
after
their
not
theIr
causal
two
experiments.
the
idea
an
a.
n
act.
people
at
low
to
The
gence
new
in
a different
addition
investigated
.'
which
In
into
both
move
subjects
a
to
changes
either
a
.
IdentificatIon
lowed
by
them
a
to
the
act.
.
.of
I
new
high-level
the
adoption
hi~-leve
.entIty
of
a
to
serve
this
study
we
n
that
an
I
of
d
d
epen
to
college
college."
t
en
IDlght
identification
plan
be
of
was
to
do
m ~e
to
possibility
of
classrooms,"
led
the
vary
to
act
embrace
of
initial
"going
iden-
On
the
very
(n =
the
act
the
next
extremes
to
make
a
Both
as they
a
The
check
s.ubject.
It described
had
been
10) of undergraduate
were
arranged
textb~?~,"
campus,
5
students'
to
include
'~itti~g
in
'studymg,
high-level
on
was
and
identities
("be-
my
exCIting
and "getting
in on. college
social
recorded
on 7-pomt
scales
anby
describes
very
poorly
(1)
and
(7).
page
of
article
was attributed
cri..c
of
whereas
to college.
identities
as to how well
These
identities
and
and
was
.."..."""""",
a list
college,
of
my
parents,"
"improving
a Job
.""
I want;
nllssmg
more
emergence
that
Subjects
make
constituted
("reading
class")
well
of resulting
arranged
to
asked
gomg
many
as
around
in
to
of
to p~o-
level.
to
~pulation.
of 10 Identities
to college."
independent
of getting
designed
we:e
booklet
~
"walking
notes
asked
of
small
exper-
distribution
were
.or going
four
20.
identi~es
at
) as
in
the
identification
as part
to list
the
of
of
random
conditions
a sample
low-level
chore~
i.de~tity
life
laboratory
one
were
do
of
the
to
as a result
of
from
to
of prior
limit
page
descriptions
"taking
the
identi-
sex
and ~ measure
began
WIth a page
low-level
a
next
descnbes
students
Our
5
my
for
at
to
prior
emergent
booklets
things,"
"spen~
money;'
activities").
Ratings
were
the
the
assigned
~e~
the
~e
conditions
to rate each
act of "going
free
new
1
examined
of
students
with
lmpmrmg
through
the
things
they
were
encouraged
gathered
of
this
e
asked
~~
vs.
assigned
bookl~ts.
effectiveness
-the
expose
'.
emergent
the
0
p
I
claims
test
randomly
came
each
they
coming
chances
eriment
unusual
design
l?,w)
life
Subjects
high-level
up
The
level
Interest.
Ex
emer-
undergraduate
were
vs:
sex.
were
.thin~
could,
was
to
as
such
Sixty-one
as a manipulation
of
groups
to
identity
th
of
conditions.
process.
the manIpulations
Each
booklet
s~bJects
are
low
.Ii
actIon
d
articles
degree
stringent
X 2 factorial
conditions
in the
behavior.
arranged
.
I
varIables
of
. d
ul
ar
manIpulatIon
Measures
serve
the
actIon
or
a p~c
a potential
the
planned
high
these
variables.
and
VIde both
emergence.
emer-
degree
in
in
that
one's
males)
participated
in exchange
introductory
psychology
classes
(high
my
e::rperimental
operations
of
le:vel
imental
.list
manipulation
..'
of
of
the
observable
studies,
test
sus-
the
of
'...
IdentificatIons
emergent
translated
set
in
the
fairly
They
a 2
Procedure.
about
IdentificatIons
of
groups
to
think
tested
an
claim,
experimental
design.
and 32
in their
mdependent
exaIDlne
especially
experiment
using
to
and
(l~proVIng
conducted
designed
led
become
high-level
second
process
and
was
are
level
..,.
we
read
"impairing
belief
emergence
University.
~~.ation
events,
To
detail;
first
who
0
ceptIble
m
The
that
cti
Trinity
only
of
mterd~pende~ce.
process
in
belief
a
the
conditions
.the
emergence
of
Subjects
to
.'
the
that
potential
Some
to college"
has
the
sex life";
others
read
assess
the
provide
females
credit
all,
sequence
to
of
does
groups
Method
emergence.
study,
hypothesized
of
used
one
both
opposite
Measures
does
were
and
of
desIgned
action
the
results
each
what
act.
"going
one's
college"
thought
power
lose
action
sense
here
married"
the
in
.extra
conceptualization
shows
then
gence
one
when,
they
their
makes
were
would
People
doing
life."
the
were
Others
far-fetched,
of
making
to
what
Then,
a rather
make
Some
college.
college.
that
to
act.
identities,
to
identity
article
We
Freudian
action.
they
meaning
meaning
that
to
low-level
of going
to
student
the
identities,
going
claiming
of , 'improving
sex
natural
of
list
"going
each
of
high-level
exposed
an
a
problems."
.(29
cIrcumstances.
current
test
the
"discover"
de-
sequence
also
conception
appear
had
endorsed
illustrate
they
were
to
article
effect
act
high-low-high
typifies
sense,
the
list
a part
the
wedding
endorsement
often
thus
the
as
asking
identities
result
high-level
"getting
observations
the
by
the
to
a
respondents
the
more
factor:
occurrence
we
of
now
of
asked
of
with
following
level.
Their
identities
they
as
"expressing
Finally,
month
high
low-level
of
principle
level
list
asked
maintain
themselves
action.
tification
a
performing
longer
third
pho-
"saying
of
no
thinking
the
a
outfit,"
course
concerned
the
questioned
were
again
clined,
the
by
with
"hiring
special
could
merely
In
new
In
people
properly
were
a
like.
then,
love."
of
they
"getting
presented.
the
booklet,
the
Subjects
(falsely)
opportunity
encountered
to The
""
"'
,Iii
New
for
a
York
~hort
TImes.
i"
Ii
. ~ :;
.;;;;:;
ACTION
EMERGENCE
I~ began: ".Washington,
D.C. In a recent study at the NatIonal InstItute
~f M:n~
Health,
researchers found that
a college educatIon
SIgnIficantly
affects a person's future.
sex life." The article continued,
then, in differing
versions
prior
identification
of variance
(ANOVA)
depending
level
was
sIgnificant,
and
other
effects
dition.
on the subject's
For those
attendance
do similar
went
one's
individuals
to think
con-
that
college
said,
"Dr.
college."
of the
fr~m
this versi°.n
other
than
do similar
The accompanying
to the same overall
It
(fictitious)
and
exhave
four
as the
fi
al
e
f
n
page
of emergence
series
of
college
th
bo
0
k1
e
t
0
and was the same
Likert-type
life, three
tal .
e
rating
con
th
on several
were embedded
for students
my
"I think
sex life will
Results
Dr. Wolfram's
at Trinity,"
and
be about
and
the
Amidst
a
was
aspects
of
level
that were in-
identity-rating
nipulation
to
check
nificant,
h
ot er
are true
note
cluded
high-level
identification
the
task
listing
sonably
we
began
by
of
high-level
ratings
forming
the
The
proved
index
index
(a
= .33).
e
in
other
main
So,
for
Low-level
1983).
For
this
elsewhere,
index
as
the
was
effective.
the
index
to
the
best
level
By
35)
tification
have
was
in
group
the
low-level
for
and
the
23.8
for
the
the
e
.
artic
1 e
was
not
relation
with
.05.
was
support
to
led
action,
in
can
opposite
by
identity
subjects,
the
low-level
check
was
the
measure
degree
to
by
subjects
in
suggested
terms
emer-
index,
in
turn,
with
the
belief
negative
the
sig-
ofbelief,
that
college"
the
a
between
target
expected
attenuated
cor-
unreliability
of
index.
results
People
and
level
relation
high-level
the
level
supported
correlated
perhaps
low
and
adopted
The
in
were
high
entirely
the
To
they
action.
the
"going
they
high-level
The
the
p <
suffi-
a change
what
manipulation
significantly
measure;
iden-
all
identified
and
5
of
across
was
at
also
level
correlated
details,
(on
was
Across
.27,
observed.
low-level
to
same
analysis
identity.
from
the
identification
=
act
In-
("improv-
of
toward
of
as the
that
and
promote
an
move
mI~t
significant
college"
a stimulus
conclusion
initially
the
to
no
~e
("impairing"),
to
sig-
.
was
conceptions
to
was
whereas
no
females,
low-
X 2 ANOVA,
analYSIs
optimistic
about
people
pnor
level
are
"going
Thinking
gent
high-level
t
a 2
and
context
overall
of its
subject's
prior
this
used
In
interaction
that
lead
manipulation
low-level
In
as a factor,
or
of
et al.,
a low-level
vary
In
in
h
In the
a separate
males
encountering
r(59)
is
identification
potentially
e
subjects
pessimistic
nificantly
hierarachy.
index,
could
not
research
the
in
index
identifi-
on
of
identity
Mean
26.8
this
depended
low-level
that
in
indicator
an
did
Wegner
effect
and
initial
observed
high-level
(e.g.,
reason,
we
overall
f
~c
whereas
subject
emergence.
identification
is mUltidimensional
In
of
correlational
sub-
whereas
of a finding
that
both
This
the
identification
is typical
studies:
= .80),
cts,
belief
1.
.
= 4.99,
p < .05,
h d
..
fi
re.ac
e
sigm
cance.
then
and
each
Table
identification
identities
doing.
identification
a
57)
understandings
summing
low-level
£(1,
ects
sex
cient
subsequent
for
prior
sex
subjects'
rea-
low-level
by
high-level
unidimensional,
cation
of
(Cronbach's
for
be
in
we~e
belief
beli f
groupS.
of
also
and
determination,
identities
for
This
of
this
indexes
relevant
reliable
the
causes
make
to
shown
of
of
the
behaved
they.
Index
levels
pr
and
So,
edi
Hi
ma-
low-
directed.
(with
.39)
overall
are
identification
through
enough
identification
of
ject.
To
listing
the
induced
durable
as
effects.
introduced
the
states
were
understood
emergence
on
whether
an
mean
for .those
effect
target
determine
yield
at the
Likert-type
correlated
r =
iden-
"
was
conditIons:
eory
in
~o college.
three
.05,
listing
persist
The
mean
Identification
the
ing")
the
g.OIng
p <
the
manipulatIon
The
~eate~t
I expect
We
to
article.
conditions
college,
same."
effectiveness.
Thus,
...
Discussion
Manipulation
0
A th th
findings
"Following
".
X 2 analysis
to the st d
~ y
IdentIficatIon
= 4.65,
not.
subjects
acr?ss
e
ten~ed to tap subjects' belief in the article
they had seen.
RatIngs
of agreement
on 1-7 scales were requested
for
these items: "The results of Dr. Wolfram's
study seemed
to be accurate,"
were
reversed,
to
pnor
57)
significantly
item
-s
measures
e
for all subjects.
items
key items
ed
n
for
F(l,
the
the
article.
versIon.
Th
in
summed
length
words)
WhICh
sImilarly
the
effect
.f
e .actIon
were
third
details and quotes brought
(175
to
items
For s.ubjects
who
g
group.
In a 2
corresponding
led
th
Belief
Dr. Wolf:am
people
m.mn
manipulation
level
not attended
for this ob~~tion.
less enjoyment
not attended.
th~
have
of the details
plaiDed
m the contrastIng
that college experimental
graduates have
condition,
sex less frequently
the article
report
desIgn,
ti fyi n
several. quotes
explanatIon.
identity
that college graduates have sex
greater enjoyment
of sex than
who
some
and to proff~r
?n the likely
emergent
sex life, the article
discovered
and report
on to indicate
researc~
target
to be encouraged
impro,;,es
Ernest Wolfram
more frequently
i
273
of this
the
to
action
to
were
in
sum,
identification
concentrate
contrast
consequences,
experiment,
those
more
lend
analysis.
on
the
led
to
inclined
minutia
think
of
about
to
agree
:
I
274
WEGNER.VALLACHER,MACOMBER,WOOD, ARPS
Table 1
Experiment 1..Mean Belief in the Article
Pri .d Ufi U. 1 1
orien caoneve
Targetemergent
identity
High
n
Low
n
from the campus cafeteria. Others, however,
were given their coffee in special cups, ones
designed to disrupt their action and to induce
..
them to think about It at lower levels. Then,
we gave both groups biased questionnaires (cf.
Salancik & Conway, 1975) planned to lead
Impr?~ngmy sexI!fe
10.9
15
11.9
15 them toward one or the other of the two ophigh I I .d U.U'
Impamngmy sexlife
8.3
15
11.4
16
.
'.
poSIng
-eve 1 en es 0f thea. ct 0 ne
Note.The beliefmeasure
couldvary from 3 to 21,with questionnaire asked subjects to indicate the
greatervaluesindicatinggreaterbeliefin thearticle.
degree to which coffee made them seek out
stimulation; the other asked the degree to
which coffee promoted the avoidance of stimwith a communication indicating that their ulation. All subjects were then given the opaction might have an odd new meaning. Still,
portunity to seek or to avoid stimulation-by
these results must be viewed as less than en- turning up or down the volume of music they
tirely conclusive regarding the value of the were hearing. Our expectation was that subpresent theoretical analysis. It is pqssible to jects given disruptive cups would be responsive
argue, for example, that commitment theory to the biased questionnaire and so would adjust
(Kiesler, 1971) could provide an account of their listening volume in the direction the
the same effects. Although that theory ob- questionnaire had suggested.
viously does not distinguish between levels of
This study was planned, then, to move beaction identification, one could propose that yond the findings of Experiment 1 in two ways.
asking subjects to list high-level identities has First, it would test not only emergent action
the effect of committing them to these to the identification but also the emergence of new
degree that a subsequent suggestion of a high- action. Second; because subjects in this study
level identification would be rejected. This in- would not be exposed to any procedure that
terpretation depends on the idea that subjects might promote commitment to their action
listing low-level identifications, and so becom- identifications, this research held promise for
ing committed to them, do not see the sug- establishing the operation of action identifigested high-level emergent identity as a chal- cation processes apart from the processes of
lenge to their earlier commitment. Thus, commitment.
low-level subjects might have accepted the
emergent identity because of their lack of prior Method
commitment to any high-level identification.
Because the present experiment did not conSubjects
anddesign. Fortyundergra;du.ate
students
(~6
tain conditions in which subjects made no lists, fe~~ and ~4 male)who reportedd;I.nnn~coffeedaily
...partiCIpated
m exchange
forextracreditm theIrpsychology
~d s? rema1ne~ unc?mmI~ed. to any Id~n- classes
at Trinity University.Theywereeachrandomly
uficauon of theIr actIon, this InterpretatIon
assigned
to a cellof the2 (highvs.lowprior identification
cannot be ruled out. However, Experiment 2 level)X 2 ("seeking
stimulation"
vs."avoidingstimulation"
provides an empirical assessmentof the action targetemergent
identity~factor~al
design.
'
...
Iden~cauon
th
di
~ory
pr:
...Procedure.
~on~
m a settIng
devoId of commItment Implications.
was informed
Each subject arnved at the laboratory and
that the study was concerned with the phys-
io10gical
effectsof coffee.Thesubjectwasgivena cupof
coffee and was offered cream and sugar. The experimenter
that the particular cups being used were espe-
.mentioned
ciallysafefor usenearelectricalequipment.For some
d
.subjects,
this wasa standardcoffeecup with saucer.For
This expenment ~as .arr.ange to :~~ne
others,the cupwasfastenedsecurely
atopa tin can that
whether the act of drinking coffee mIght had beenfilled with rocks.Thesedisruptivecupsstood
emerge as something quite different-the
act some20 cm high,weighed0.5 kg,and~eredesigned
to
of "making myself seek stimulation" or the beunwieldy.Thesubjectwasaskedto drink thecoffeeas
act of "making myself avoid stimulation." For the :xpe~menterb.usied
~mse1fsettingup an.array of
...phYSIological
recording
eqUIpment.
Althoughsubjects
were
this purpose, we arranged for subjects to drink
not informed decaffeinated
coffeewasusedin all cases
coffee in the lab. Some subjects were given to eliminate:my specialeffectsresultingfrom caffeinecoffee in familiar cups, ones we had borrowed
inducedarousal.As the subjectfinishedthe coffee,the
..
Expenment 2
.
"',.,
ok
,
'"
"oi'.' "I
.j
j
i
j
.1
~-
ACrION EMERGENCE
ex
h
severd al sensing
electrodes
to the
~
b ct.~enter d atta;ched
su ~e s non ommant
an.
The experimenter
then asked the subject to complete
groups
a preliminary
the
of coffee"
questionnaire.
rating
!orm.
This
and served
was called
as the .manipulation
using
and
the "effects
of
275
then
act
tities
either
normal
or disru
...
asked
IndiVIdually
were
of
"drinking
(provided
by
target emergent
identity.
The form reqUIred
all subjects
to rate a set of statements
on the effects of coffee as to
how certain they were that each effect occurred
for them.
on 1-7
scales
ha
d
w
t.was
one.
Subjects
rotatIon)
in the "seeking
stimulation"
condition
certainty
of each of
17 statements
increases
stimulation
seeking
rated
indicating
(e.g., "Coffee
that
makes
their
coffee
of
factors
me want
CUp
m the "avoiding
the
remmmng
ent
higher
parallel
set of statements
condition,
suggesting
in turn,
that
coffee
rated
a
decreases
stimulatio~
see~ng ~~:~., "Coffee
makes me avoid going
out and doing things,
Coffee makes me want to do things
that soothe and calm me," etc.). In both questionnaires,
then,
subjects
alleged
embedded
that the
express
much
in both
that
rated their
exciting
provided
certainty
music,"
chance
restful
cues to
subjects
alert
(three
identities),
the idea
habit"
to begin.
He
music-and
that
noted
that
his
stimulus-an
agreement
was to adjust
the subject
setting
this to a "comfortable
was .just to relax
as the
level."
physiologi~
unteer
preferred
at 5 standard
and the mean setting
dependent
volume
points
level was recorded
in the 8-min
for the subject
served
session,
as the primary
was
Results
and
Discussion
Effectiveness
tification
pIe
think
els
of
important
believed
might
identities.
of
the
of manipulation
level.
Do
about
"drinking
identification?
one
that
serve
in
the
we
versus
of prior
identification
study.
Thirty-two
the
disruptive
level
undergraduate
invited
to
drink
,
lev-
context
certain
cup
also
manip-
p
be noted
small
ratings
"'
<
.01.
act
=
attenuations
but
that
produced
an
not
tift
.
catIon
with
dis-
those
with
p <
.01.
nervous"
as the
<
proindexes.
"getting
p
other
were
disruption
as "promoting
from
.12
The
to
endorse-
high-level
.07
2.84,
vol-
Indexes
= 2.79,
as
to
an
on subjects'
~his potentIal
for
t(30)
the
.13
t(30)
showed
student
vol-
the
of the act
was
reduced
disruption
.'"
of
from
of
tendency
subjects
than
expected,
in
simple
scores.
relative
for
.55)
.43),
be
reduced
in a separate
in
would
=
decrements
tiftcation
habit"
2.74,
=
factors.
of
on each
factor.
I
I
I .d
ow- eve
I en
greater
(M
disruption,
effectiveness
coffee
"'
cups
as
the
.01,
result
and
my
.08,
to
analysis
comparable
using
=
indexes
as a consequence
so.
of
iden-
caffeine
t(30)
high-level
significantly
f
on
usually
factor
identities
. d
m ex,
all
Impact
impinges
To avert
0
subject's
lieu
people
of the
each
m
loaded
subjects'
positively,
the
s
the
the
on
ma-
on
the
on
in
reduce
statement
Id~ntIt~.
Identification
we
this
to
normal
was
loaded
style
(M
t,he
Experiment
of
chosen,
an
cups
on
IdentItIes
sum
identities
significantly
duced
is an
experiment,
examined
normal
link
the
h
ruptive
And
peo-
at lower
this
present
iden-
make
coffee"
inserting
a check
in
to
commit
subjects
Thus,
were
cups
Although
wation
unteers
of prior
unwieldy
the
IdentificatIon
suc
perform
a score
of the
worded
to
wIth
in
This
was
...U
as measures
of
y
used
to
act
us
computed
were
the
ment
B
need"
caffeine
performed
identities
any
ev~ry
computed
measure.
With
my
check
subject.
by
all
are
artIfact,
Each subject's
we
the
volume.
surreptitiously
that
response
agree
with
rat~ngs
of
act.
my
allowed
.
identities
..
ratIngs,
m~ureme~ts
were ~ng
~n.
The prerecorded
mUSiC
the
Varied
subjects
considerably
made one mor recording
more adjustments
level, andin over
the playback
85% of.
and
differ-
"satIsfying
than
indexes
Because
a
these
included
) "bec
.
.es,
OJDlng
"promoting
exacting
s ratIngs
summed
and that the
listening
of the
divided
of
of the
contained
identifications
criterion,
(three.
dentiti
each
subject
factor
begin
volume
be listening
a
These
at a random
soon
the
ratings
Then,
would
was in
of recorded
five
65%
factor
represented
more
of
for
.,.
to
subject
subject
interest
interval
for
first
factors
Specifically,
factor
revealed
factors
of
set
this. The ~ubject was given a set of headphones
and was
told to adjust the volume
on these by means of a control
knob in easy reach. The experimenter
said that he would
the music
the
form, the expermeasurements
sample)
identities).
mpuiation
smaller
iden-
identities
(e g
"putting
" "
.' .'"
swalloWIng,
etc.),.
and
array
a .some~hat
makes me prefer
subject
ratIngs
IdentItIes),
(two
This
1.
to a standard
level
30
each
described
...
.anal~SIS
(WIth
var1max
The
four
(three
music."
soon
mouth,
we
in the "avoiding"
that "Coffee
~y.
the
makes me enjoy
the s';lbject had complet~
~
explaIned
that the physiological
reactions
deny
level
rating
accounted
ratings.
cu p s
identify
well
subjects
a .40-item-loading
"getting
nervous"
"
...I
~ a good
way to
m the "seeking"
that "Coffee
certainty
to
questionnaires,
specific
whereas
rated their
.When
imenter
were
given
Also,
items
condition
soft,
not
of coffee.
control
of mu~ic
v~lume
w?uld
the emergent
identity.
Subjects
condition
loud,
were
effects
by
earlier
how
A fa~or
lower
to
an
to
together
in
seven
as
all
that
variance
to.go out an? do things,"
"Coffee
makes me want to do
things that will shock my senses," etc.). These ratings were
?n 5-point scales from certain (5) to uncertain
(I). Subjects
stimulation"
coffee"
p tive
to
It
of
might
simple
summed
findings.
Overall,
~~
;:~~
II:;;~C
276
1;1"
8,
:,'~j.'
'~il
then, it can be concluded that the disruptive
coffee cups in~reased l~w-Ie,:el i~entification
and
Endorsement
reduced high-level
of the "effects
IdentIficatIon.
of coffee." In
I~
11'1
¥m
It!
~'
'"
a sense, the leading questionnaIre can be understood as a measure of the emergence of
action identification. That is, although it was
designed as a manipulation and not as a mea-
I
sure,. like the ~lief indexes reported in the
preVIOuSstud~ It ~y tap ~he emergence of
the target act IdentIty. Looking first at overall
ratings of certainty of the "effects of coffee,"
we find that an ANOYAcorresponding to the
study design revealed no significant effects.
Mean certainty was greater in the low-level
conditions, as expected; but perhaps because
many of the items on the form were stated in
the extreme to serve as manipulations (e.g.,
"Coffee makes.me want to smell strong odors")
and so drew little endorsement, the effect of
in the high-level conditions. The "seeking"
subjects at low level set the volume higher than
did "seeking" subjects at high level, t(36) =
2.08, p < .05, and the "avoiding" subjects at
low level tended to set the volume lower than
did the "avoiding" subjects at high level,
t(36):= 1.9~, p. < .06. High-level subjects. did
not differ sIgnIficantly between the "seeking"
~; .prior
~
Jf
~i.
l
identification level was not reliable. It is
instructive, though, to look at the ratings of
the items that were uniquely relevant to the
final dependent variable-certainty that coffee
"makes me enjoy loud, exciting music" or
and "avoiding" conditions.
These findings provide support for our
analysis of action emergence. Subjects in this
study who were moved to a low level of identification of ' 'coffee drinking," by virtue of an
f
1
1f
i!
"~es
me enjo.y soft, restful music." ~en
odd coffee cup, .and ~ho were then exposed
certainty of the Item relevant to the subject's to a subtle manIpulatIon arranged to suggest
target emergent identity condition was treated a new high-level identification of the act were
as a dependent variable in a 2 X 2 ANOYA, indeed affected by this procedure. Initially,
there occurred a tendency for higher certainty
they tended to agree more with the suggested
in the low-level condition (M = 2.43) than in identity. And then, they enacted the target
thehigh-Ievelcondition(M=
1.74),F(1, 36) = emergent identity when an opportunity be3.18, p < .09. Like the subjects in the previous came available. Those for whom the new highstudy, those in the present experiment who level identity was "making myself seek stimwere prepared for emergence through exposure ulation" proceeded to seek out stimulation by
to a low-level stimulus became prone to en- turning up the amplitude of music; those for
dorse a suggested emergent identity.
whom the new high-level identity was "making
Volume settings. Means for the volume myself avoid stimulation" proceeded to avoid
level measure of emergent action are shown stimulation by turning down the amplitude.
in Table 2. These volume setting means could Emergent identification of action, it seems,can
vary from 1 (very soft) to 7 (very loud). The be translated into emergent action.
2 X 2 ANOYA on these indicated a significant
interaction of prior identification level and
General Discussion
target emergent identity, F(l, 36) = 8.16, p <
.01, and a subsequent set of planned comThese experiments show that when people
parisons revealed that the means fit the ex-come to think about the details of their action,
pected pattern. Subjects in the low-level "seek- they become particularly impressionable about
ing" condition were expected to listen at high the overall meaning of what they are doing.
volume, and their mean' setting was indeed A new understanding of the action can emerge,
higher than that of subjects in the low-level and this understanding can then lead to the
"avoiding" conditions, t(36) = 2.40, p < .05. development of new action. We believe that
The mean volumes in these low-level condi- this action emergence phenomenon is pertitions also differed from the comparable means nent to many of the instances of behavior
I:
:':
'"
;'fi
i~}
c1,
'1:
i~1'
;![~
crf
;)["
~:,'
I
WEGNER.YALLACHED
"" MACOMBER
" WOOD ARPS
Table 2
Experiment2: Mean Music VolumeSettings
Prior identIficatIon
level
Targetemergent
identity
High
n
Low
n
See~~gsti~ulati~n
AvoidingstImulatIon
4.22
5.20
10
9
5.47
4.03
8
13
.j
Note.The volumesettingcould vary from 1 to 7, with
highervaluesindicatinggreatervolume.
.,
j
..,
",,'
"",""'.'"
t
:,
"
,"",
ACflON EMERGENCE ...1111
277
change that are observed in everydaylife. To siderablymore complicated than it looks from
gaug~t.he.wisdom of this ge?e!a1ization,how- a distance.In this and other cases,people find
ever,I~ISImportant t~ scrutinIZethe phen?m- they cannot maintain an act as initially conenon In two ways. First, we should consider ceptualized, and they turn therefore to
the likely limits of the effect; under what con- thinking about how to contin~e. Lower l~vel
ditions does emergence occur? Second, we identities of the act are sought to serve as
should concern ourselveswith the place of ac- guides. At this point people do not need to
tion ide.ntification in processesof behavior encountera carefully 'wordedarticle or leading
production ~ore generally; what does this questionnaire to suggestto them a new hightheory contribute to the psychologicalunder- level identity for the act. We suspectthat the
standing of the role of thou~t in action?
low-levelunderstandingof action is sufficiently
.lackluster
and devoid of meaning that people
The Scope ofActlon Emergence
tend to escapefrom it in any way possible.
Taken together, the results of these exper- The slightest hint coming from memory or
iments offer severalclues about the conditions from simple observationcan serveto unleash
under which people will come to an emergent a high-levelidentification. The potential highunderstanding of their actions. The two most level meaningsof an action are usually many,
critical conditions, of coUrse,are the onesthat and each of these provides a possible avenue
were manipulated in both studies: (a) the of emergence.
stimulus to low-level identification, followed
There is anotherlimiting condition for these
by (b) the suggestionof a relevant high-level effectsthat is worth noting. Resultsof the kind
identity. Experiment 1 showedthat thesecon- observedin these experiments should be obditions were sufficient to promote emergent tained most strongly with individuals who are
identification. Experiment 2 demonstrated familiar with the action. People who are faonce more the operation of the two conditions miliar with an action are likely to have dein the production of emergence,this time with veloped sufficient skill or "automaticity" in
a very different setof concreteproceduresused the performanceof the act (cf. Bryan & Harter,
to precipitate the conditions. Becausesubjects 1899; Kimble & Perlmuter, 1970; Langer,
in this second study were not called on to 1978)that their thoughts about the act rarely
report their action identifications prior to the descendto lower levels. Thus, when the stimsuggestionof the new high-level identity, we ulus to low level is delivered, their previous
can be fairly certain that theseconditions, not high-level conception of the act will be dissiprocessesof commitment, wereresponsiblefor pated and a new high level can be substituted
the observed emergenceeffect. So, although that will be maintained. The novice at an acyet other alternate explanations are possible tion, it hasbeenfound in severalinvestigations
and additional research is surely needed to (Wegneret al., 1983),is usuallythinking about
establishthe parametersof the observedphe- the act at low levels. Such a person might not
nomenon, the evidenceto this point suggests be much affected by a stimulus to low level,
that emergencecan be demonstrated under a and indeed, such a person should already be
clearly circumscribed set of laboratory con- prone to emergewith a high-levelunderstandditions.
ing. However, because the novice cannot
We believetheseconditions commonly pro- maintain the act at a high level of identifiduce emergentaction in everydaylife. Requests cation, this person'sexperienceof emergence
to make a list of act identities or to drink from may be brief. It was for this reason that we
an unusual cup do not, of course, come up included in the present experiments subjects
very often, but a variety of kindred pressures who were at least moderatelyexperiencedwith
to low-level action identification are experi- the action (i.e., college studentsfor "going to
enced in natural settings. Perhaps most fre- college" and coffeedrinkers for "drinking cofquently, people simply find that they cannot fee"). Subjectswith no experienceat all might
do what they had in mind to do before be- have shown little response to our low-level
ginning the action. The person planning to identification induction and, on emergenceat
"expresslove" by getting married, for example, high level, might havedisplayedonly a fleeting
finds that the act of "expressinglove" is con- graspof the new high-level identity.
'..
.278
1IIIIIIIt~~ WEGNER.
VALLACHER,
MACOMBER,
WOOD,
ARPS.
.The emergenceproc~ss,in this.light, is partI~ularly ap~ for changIn.gbehaVIorsthat are
highly practIced and habItual. Many behavior
problems fall into this class,and people who
have these problems are notoriously difficult
to persuadeof the problematic nature of their
?ehavior. Telling heavy smokersthat they are
In the processof "killing themselves," or informing alcoholics that they are "destroying
brain cells," it should be remembered,is typicallyan exercisein futility. Becausefamiliar
actions are ordinarily maintained with highlevel identifications, offering the personalternative high-levelidentities amounts to asking
the personto accept new meaning for action
before the old meaning is gone. With the
emergence procedure, it seems possible to
erasefor a moment the person'spreconceived
high-level identification for such problem behaviors and so to open the way for new and
perhaps more adaptive understandings.
The Role of Thought in Action
The emergenceprocess provides a useful
perspectiveon the role of mind in action. In
essence,the findings of this researchcan be
interpreted to saythat peopleare alwaysaware
of what they are doing-before, during, and
after action. These ways of knowing action
may very well differ from one another, and all
are likely to be incomplete in contrast to the
full array of identities that are available for
describingan act, but they standasknowledge
of action nonetheless.This analysiscontrasts,
of co~,
with the Jamesian view of action
understandingand with the Freudian view as
well. At the sametime, it offersan interesting
counterpoint to each.
to do things that they know they can do. They
may engagein actions that have previously
beeninitiated and maintained with a particular
identity, or they may engagein actions that
havecome to have an emergentidentification
in the courseof their performance. With these
sourcesof identities for new action, the person
is alwaysin a position to attempt to perform
actions that can in fact be done. The cognitive
effort that people put into understandingpast
action-through justification, the discoveryof
"hidden motives," or simple reinterpretation-is thus not wasted. The emergenceof
act identities provides a selectionof performable plans for action, and so brings the Jamesian personback from the edgeof imagination
to a realm of workable and useful act knowledge.
The Freudian view of act knowledge might
also be expanded. BecauseFreud held that
action was frequently known only in retrospect, he found it necessaryto posit an extremely "smart" system of unconsciousmotives that could plan out and do all the intricate
things that peopleoften only discoverthey have
done after the fact. Psychologistssince have
often accepted some form of this idea, but
havehesitatedto imbue the unconsciouswith
suchtremendousintellect (e.g.,Zajonc, 1980).
In our view, the unconscious is "smart" because it is simply forgotten consciousness.
People may set out to do something with a
particular act identity, and the identity might
guide action for but an instant. They may then
continue to act in a variety of low-level identifications, maintaining in some respectsthe
generalplan with which they beganbut failing
to know in a high-levelway what is beingdone.
The psychoanalyst'sprovisionof ,'insight" into
As we have noted, James wrote primarily the unconsciousmotivesof the act, then, could
about the possibility that people know what be merely a rediscoveryof the high-levelidenthey are doing in advanceof each action. He tity with which the act was undertaken. Or,
did not specify,however,where this knowledge and perhapsjust as likely, the "insight" could
comes from, and at the extreme, his analysis be an emergentidentification that makessense
could be interpreted to mean that suchknowl- of the low-leveldetailsof the act but that misses
edge is wholly unconstrained. Each new act the initial high-levelidentity of the act entirely.
could conceivably come from the farthest
In a way,then, the action identification the.,
stretchesof the imagination, limited only by ory acount of emergenceadds something to
the person's capacity to "think up" new each of its constituents-the Jamesian view
courses of action. The action identification and the Freudian view. This is fitting, for
theory view of this process,in contrast,suggests emergenceis a term traditionally used in scian important limit on what people will set out ence and philosophy to refer to a transforto do. We believe that people typically set out mation in which the whole comes to have a
.
~
(
~
i"""C
~~(
rf;
..ACTION
1~
!~~
new meaning, untraceable to its parts. Action
emergence occurs when people are led to consider the parts of their action, and these parts
are then put together into a new whole.
EMERGENCE
R ~
elerences
Bem, D. (1972). Self-perceptiontheory. In L. Berkowitz
(Ed.),Advancesin experimentalsocialpsychology(Vol.
6, pp. 1-62). New York: AcademicPress.
Bryan, W. L., & Harter, L. (1899). Studies on the telegraphiclanguage:The acquisitionof a hierarchyof habits. Psychological
Review, 6, 345-378.
Freud, S. (1914/1960).
279
Kidd (Eds.),Newdirectionsin attribution research(Vol.
2, pp. 35-58). Hinsdale,NJ: Erlbaum.
Luria, A. R. (1961). The role of speechin the regulation
of normal an.dal?normalbehavior(J. Tizard, Trans.).
New York: Llverlght.
Mead, G. H. (1938). The philosophy of the act. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Miller, G. A., Galanter,E., & Pribram, K. H. (1960).Plans
and the structure ofbehavior.New York: Holt.
Ryle,G. (1949). Theconceptofmind. London:Hutchinson.
Salancik,G., & Conway,M. (1975). Attitude inferences
fro~ salientand relevantcognitive content about behaVlor. Journal
The psychopathology
of everyday
of Personality
and Social Psychology,
32, 829-840.
life. New York: Norton.
Vallacher,R. R., & Wegner,D. M. (in press).A theory of
Goldman,A. I. (1970).A theory ofhuman action.Princeaction identification.Hinsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
ton, NJ: Princeton UniversitYPress.
Wegner,D. M., Vallacher,R. R., Ewert, J., Dizadji, D.,
Harre, R., & Secord,P. F. (1973). The explanation of
~ Re,n°'~. (1983). Knowing whatone is doing: Action
social behaviour.Oxford: Blackwell.
Identificationand self-control.Unpublishedmanuscript,
James,
W. (1890).Principlesofpsychology.
NewYork:Holt.
!rinity University.
Kiesler, C. A. (1971). The psychology ofcommitment: Experiments linking behavior to belief New York: Academic
Press.
ZaJonc, R. B. (1980). Feeling and thinking: Preferences
need no inferences. American Psychologist, 35, 151175.
Kimble, G. A., & Perlmuter,L. C. (1970). The problem
of volition.
Psychological
Review,
361-384.
Langer,
E. J. (1978).
Rethinking
the77,
role
of thought in
social interaction. In J. H. Harvey,W. Ickes,& R. F.
New Journal
Received December 20 1982
Revision received August 8: 1983 .
on Aging: Call for Nominations
By action of APA's Publications and Communications
resentatives, the APA is publishing a quarterly journal
Board and Council of Repcalled Psychology and Aging,
the first issue of which will appear in 1985. Psychology and Aging will contain original
articles on adult development and aging. The articles may be reports of research or
applications of research, and they may be biobehavioral,
psychosocial, educational,
methodological,
clinical, applied, or experimental (laboratory, field, or naturalistic)
studies. For more information
about the new journal, see the November issue of the
APA
Monitor.
Nominations
for the editor of Psychology and Aging are now open. Candidates
must be members of APA and should be available to start receiving manuscripts in
mid-1984 to prepare for issues published in 1985. To nominate candidates, prepare
a statement of one page or less in support of each candidate. Submit nominations
no later than April
2, 1984, to:
Martha A. Storandt
Department of Psychology
Box 1125
Washington University
St. Louis, Missouri 63130
(314) 889-6508
"".
Wi