Motivation and emotion/Book/2021/What the hell effect

What the hell effect:
What is the WTHE and what are its consequences?

Multimedia presentation (3 min)

Overview

Example 1 Gunilla found the beautiful formal dress she wanted for the prom, but she needed to lose some weight. Her friend, fresh from a social psychology course, recommended that she set a specific, daily caloric goal. On the third day, after eating a serving of "light" spaghetti, Gunilla read the package and realised that she was slightly over her daily goal. Her response was interesting: She said to herself, "What-the-hell. Since I'm already over my goal it doesn't matter what I eat." And she proceeded to consume half of her mom's apple pie.' - Cochran & Tesser, 1996

This scenario depicts the what-the-hell effect (WTHE)! We have all fallen victim to this cycle of overindulging. All of us cheat restrictions and indulge ourselves in some way, whether it be sneaking an extra cookie, spending a bit too much money online or having a cheeky glance at some notes during an exam. We are all humans who make mistakes and experience lapses in motivation, but it is the point at which we throw the whole book out the window and say "what-the-hell!", proceed to finish the rest of that box of cookies, spend the rest of our pay check or cheat throughout the rest of the exam, where the behaviour can become unhealthy and damaging to our physical and/or mental health.

Although the existence of academic research surrounding this unique and complex behavioural phenomenon is lacking, it is an important motivational topic that this chapter attempts to cover in easily understandable terms.

Focus questions: What is the what the hell effect? Why should we study the WTHE? What are the consequences? How can we prevent the what the hell effect from occurring? What are some directions for future research?

What is the WTHE?

What the Hell Effect: The REAL Reason You Often Binge on a Bad Habit by Develop Good Choices https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwTfZmFgMjs&ab_channel=DevelopGoodHabits

Figure 1. Simple flowchart representation of the WTHE

The 'what-the-hell effect', also sometimes referred to as counterregulatory behaviour, is a cycle of indulging. It begins with failing a goal or breaking a streak of desired behaviour, followed by strong feelings of guilt and in a bid to soothe this guilt, doubling down on overindulging because why the hell not (Cochran & Tesser, 1996)?! Psychologist Kelly McGonigal (2013) explains in her book The Willpower Instinct, how when we experience self-criticism after we surrender to our initial cravings, we are motivated to find something to stimulate positive feelings. Usually, the most readily accessible activity to do so, is the activity that led to this self-criticism in the first place (McGonigal, 2013, p.145).

From a biopsychological perspective, this phenomenon occurs because as the brain senses these negative, self-critical feelings, and the automatic stress response activates the reward centre to produce dopamine which provides these positive sensations instead (OBen, 2017; Ulrich et al., 2010). This is when the conscious brain becomes motivated to find this readily accessible activity to feel better. By fulfilling this craving, the brain experiences a short rush of dopamine before resorting back to experiencing this negative self-criticism (Gruen et al., 1997; Baik, 2020).

Basically, once you have violated the restrictions of your goal by a small amount it is much easier to experience a downward spiral and violate these restrictions by a larger amount. In many ways, the self criticisms following the initial act of indulgence resembles all-or-none cognitive thinking patterns (Schlundt et al., 1998).

Example 2 'During the COVID-19 lockdowns in the ACT, one of the things that has kept me entertained and provided me with something to look forward to, has been online shopping. Recently, I was browsing on an online clothing style and found the grooviest pair of pants just HAD to have. I added them to my cart and then continued to browse the site. I found myself saying "Well, I'm already splurging and spending $90 on these pants, I might as well buy a few other things as well!" Before I knew it, I had spent just over $300! I had fallen victim, once again, to the what-the-hell effect.'

Origin

Figure 2. Polivy, Herman & Deo (2010) demonstrated that dieters who believed they had eaten a larger portion of pizza, suffered the WTHE and ate more cookies

Perhaps the most prominent research conducted to demonstrate and study the what-the-hell effect, was published in 2010 by researchers Janet Polivy, Peter Herman and Rajbir Deo. Their work was titled 'Effects on eating and emotion in restrained and unrestrained eaters'. 106 female undergraduate university students from an introductory psychology class volunteered for what they thought was a market taste test study. After being classified as either restrained or unrestrained eaters, according to the 10 Item Herman and Polivy (1975) Revised Restraint Scale, participants were served a piece of pizza that was presented either smaller or larger in comparison to another example slice that was in view, or there was no second comparative slice of pizza presented. Restrained eaters, as defined by Herman and Mack (1975), includes any person, regardless of their weight, who is consciously aware of their eating habits. Instead of eating based on physiological urges to satiate hunger, restrained eaters have switched to cognitive control to continuously be aware of what and how much food they are consuming (Herman & Mack, 1975). They were then required to taste and rate a variety of cookies, and informed that they could eat as many as they would like.

Results of this experiment showed that when the restrained eaters believed they were consuming a larger ostensible slice of pizza, they ate a significantly larger amount of cookies during the taste and rate section, compared to unrestrained eaters (Polivy et al., 2010). By simply making the restricted eaters believe they had eaten more pizza than the other female participants, the researchers were able to induce the what-the-hell effect.

Common applications

Although the effect is easily observable in dieting applications and provides a clear cut, observational example for easy explanation, the what-the-hell effect can surface in almost any area of life. It can also apply to 'cheating' in terms of behaviours associated with eating, smoking, drinking, shopping, spending as well as cheating in both the academic and adultery sense (Dean, 2011). Essentially, any behaviour that we are motivated to change can be affected by the WTHE. Once you have cheated a bit, it is so much easier to go on and cheat a lot!

Dieting and the brain

Although there is little to no specific research on the biopsychological processes that create the WTHE in a vast range of behaviours, some indirect research has been conducted in relation to dieting and overindulging. A study conducted by Epel et al. (2012) on the specifics of food related indulging, revealed that the brain can misinterpret emotional states such as stress, as hunger. Driven by the brain's automatic stress response, the limbic brain, amygdala and hypothalamus increase the arousal to consume appetising and calories dense food. In their experiment, Epel et al. (2012) demonstrated that even people with firm diet restrictions, lost self-control and overindulged when subjected to stressful and negative emotions.

Why should we study the WTHE?

It is important to understand the reasons why people fail, what people perceive as failure, and what they do when they fail. When we have an understanding of this we can workout what makes people susceptible to this phenomenon and how to prevent or lessen the effect and the negative consequences associated.

Studying the what-the-hell effect can also help us produce more successful outcomes when seeking to reduce or increase target behaviours.

What are the consequences?

Experiencing the WTHE comes with a range of negative consequences, but their severity may differ depending on the individual. As cliche as it sounds, it is true that we are all our own worst critics in life, and when this self-criticism is demonstrated during the WTHE it can produce consequences related to overindulgence, negative affective states, as well as the loss of motivation towards goals.

Direct consequences of overindulging

Immediate and direct consequences may arise from the lull in motivation and subsequent overindulgence. This depends on the individual's behaviour in question. For example, an immediate consequence of spending a large sum of money on online shopping after experiencing the WTHE, when the goal was to decrease this behaviour is obviously the large monetary loss to the individual. Or drinking a substantial amount of alcohol when attempting to quit, may result in physical consequences related to intoxication, monetary loss from purchasing liquor, or possible social consequences from decisions and actions made while drunk.

Negative affective state

It is not always necessarily succumbing to the craving that is the most damaging. Instead most of the damage comes from the harsh self-criticism and other deep negative feelings that follow. Your initial and natural reaction when experiencing low motivation and a setback to a goal may be to perceive yourself as a failure and not as good as other people. Although the reality is that we do not usually observe other people in these moments of perceived failure and lapses of motivation, when we are in a vulnerable state of guilt and shame we become vulnerable to this social comparison and the negative feelings associated (Longe et al., 2010).

The feeling of guilt activates regions in the temporal lobe including the fusiform gyrus and the middle temporal gyrus, as well as the amygdala and the insula (Takahashi et al., 2004). Shame also activates the anterior cingulate cortex and the parahippocampal gyrus areas in the temporal lobe, as well as the medial and inferior frontal gyrus in the frontal lobe (Takahashi, 2004).

Failure to achieve personal goals which are framed around fulfilling obligations and things we feel we ought to do, can result in symptoms or the diagnosis of a range of negative affective states and psychopathological disorders such as depression and anxiety (Lieberman, 2018). This is due to the submission to repetitive and intrusive negative thinking styles.

Loss of motivation

With the violation of self-imposed restrictions comes feelings of guilt and shame, and a perceived loss of control. This may lead to the abandonment of the initial goal altogether. Sometimes when people believe that their progress is lost and that they have failed, there is no longer any remaining incentive for continued restraint, so they continue to conduct the undesired, target behaviour (Lieberman, 2018).

Summary Quiz Choose the correct answer and click "Submit": True or False? The only consequence of experiencing the WTHE whilst online shopping is that you have more cute clothes to wear. False True

How can we prevent the WTHE from occurring?

The what-the-hell effect can have some very damaging effects on the individual so it is important to learn how to cope with and/or prevent this motivational phenomenon from occurring.

Self-compassion

Figure 4. Researchers believe that the most effective way to combat the WTHE is to practice self-compassion and self-forgiveness when confronted with a setback

Most people, when experiencing disappointing setbacks which damages their motivation to achieve the desired goal, shift into a mindset of self-criticism which fuels the feelings of guilt and shame. There is a deeply ingrained belief that the way to modify undesirable behaviour is through strict rules and boundaries, paired with punishments when we violate these boundaries (OBen, 2017). This is not helpful. Instead researchers (Adams & Leary, 2007; Ben-Yehuda, n.d; McGonigal, 2013) suggest that practicing self-compassion, encourages resilience and prevents the feelings of guilt and shame that are catalysts for overindulging. As OBen (2017) discusses, forgiving yourself at first may seem quite counterintuitive, because it may feel like you are giving yourself permission to continue undesired behaviour.

A study conducted by Adams and Leary (2007) revealed that women who received messages of compassion and self-forgiveness ate 28 grams of lollies compared to a significantly larger 70 grams of lollies by the group that did not receive such compassionate and encouraging messages.

The what-the-hell effect does not address the underlying negative emotions that are produced from indulging, but instead focuses on finding instant pleasure and distraction. When you take responsibility for your actions and forgive yourself, you neutralise the guilt response right when it starts, so your brain does not need to seek this relief.

Set acquisitional goals

The types of goals that we initially set and the achievability of them can prevent the disappointment of initially suffering a setback on a goal, low motivation and setting in motion the WTHE (Jones et al., 2013). Although complete abstinence can be effective when overcoming addiction, or focusing on behaviour change, depending on the individual it can also be very unsuccessful.

Psychologists Jeremy Dean (2011) and Polivy et al. (2010) have all concluded that acquisitional goals provide a more positive framework about gaining something, rather than inhibitional goals which introduce pressure and a negative framework of controlling urges and taking something away from the individual. Inhibitional goals increase pressure and may cause long-term self-control to fatigue. It is through acquistional goal framing that the WTHE can be avoided or reduced. This has been proven in an experiment conducted by Polivy et al. (2010), where participants achieved better performances with acquisitional goals than with inhibitional goals. Dean (2011) uses the example of Alcoholics Anonymous groups to demonstrate the effective implementation of the acquisitional system of goal framing. Individuals in Alcoholics Anonymous focus on accumulating days, weeks, months and years sober, as opposed to concentrating on inhibitional goals of complete abstinence.

So, by setting attainable goals that focus on gaining something such as days without performing the undesired behaviour, that also aren't overly restrictive, the WTHE can be reduced or even avoided completely.

Table 1.

Example Goal Reframing from Inhibitional to Acquisitional Goals

Targeted Behaviour	Inhibitional Goal	Acquisitional Goal
Decrease alcohol intake	Stop drinking	Gain days without drinking
Decrease online shopping	Stop shopping online	Gain more money in bank account to spend on experiences
Increase amount of exercise	Stop being so lazy and spend less time on the couch Stop having current physique	Gain a better routine Gain strength, and positive relationship with exercise Gain a more toned physique
Decrease junk food intake	Stop eating so unhealthy Eat less foods packed with fat, sugar, sodium	Gain a healthier diet Gain an expanded palette

Summary Quiz Choose the correct answer and click "Submit": Syntax error What is the best way to prevent the what-the-hell effect from occurring?

What are some directions for future research?

Currently, limited research exists on this specific motivation phenomenon, so there is a lot of room for further study to be conducted. Although the what-the-hell effect is remarkably common, there is an obvious lack of academic studies and resources available. And despite the fact that it can be linked in part to other well-researched topics such as motivation, willpower, dieting, self-improvement, goal-setting, health psychology, behaviour modification, and even addiction, the WTHE is complicated and multifaceted, and deserves more academic attention.

Specifically, the formal research studies that do exist focus solely on dietary examples of the what-the-hell effect. It would be extremely valuable for other behaviours which people commonly seek to change to be investigated, and this scope of research to be broadened. This may include research into decreasing the behaviours of smoking, online shopping, time on your phone or drinking, or increasing behaviours such as working out, but may apply to any sought after behavioural change.

Zemack-Rugar et al. (2010) also suggests that future research should also focus on individual differences and their impacts on the WTHE, as current research focuses on situational antecedents. They have also proposed the possible investigation of specific cognitions and emotions that are generated from the WTHE and how they vary between individuals, as well as investigation into the effects of subsequent occurrences of the WTHE on the individual.

Finally, more specific research should be conducted into the brain processes associated with experiencing the WTHE.

Conclusion

Overall, the unique lapse in motivation, perceived goal failure and cycle of overindulgence, dubbed the 'what the hell effect', can be a highly damaging behaviour that can produce both negative physical and mental consequences. Loss of motivation for the pursuit of further goals, direct consequences of indulging, such as loss of money, and negative affective states, such as depression and anxiety, are some of these detrimental effects. However, through practices of self-compassion and normalisation of setbacks, the loaded implications of failure and experiencing wavering motivation when attempting to achieve a goal, can be lessened.

The WTHE can be a vicious cycle of self-criticism, guilt and shame, and more research should be conducted into all of its complexities.

Takeaway message Be kind to yourself in all of your journeys of self improvement. After all, we are all flawed human beings and we can only learn and grow from our mistakes and failures. By acknowledging and normalising setbacks to our desired goals and behavioural changes, we can disarm these feelings of self-criticism and shame which force us into downward spirals, and encourage our personal growth.

See also

• Counterregulatory eating (Wikipedia)
• Guilty pleasure (Book chapter, 2020)
• Self-regulation of overeating (Book chapter, 2011)

References

Adams, C. E., & Leary, M. R. (2007). Promoting Self–Compassionate Attitudes Toward Eating Among Restrictive and Guilty Eaters. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 26(10), 1120–1144. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2007.26.10.1120

Baik, J.H. (2020). Stress and the dopaminergic reward system. Experimental & Molecular Medicine, 52(12), 1879–1890. https://doi.org/10.1038/s12276-020-00532-4

Baumeister, R. F., Schmeichel, B. J., & Vohs, K. D. (2007). Self-regulation and the executive function: The self as controlling agent. In A. W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 516–539). The Guilford Press.

Ben-Yehuda, R. (n.d.). Goal Setting and The What-the-Hell Effect | LifeLabs Learning. Ideas.lifelabslearning.com. Retrieved October 15, 2021, from https://ideas.lifelabslearning.com/goal-setting-and-what-the-hell-effect

Cochran, W., & Tesser, A. (1996). The "what the hell" effect: Some effects of goal proximity and goal framing on performance. In L. L. Martin & A. Tesser (Eds.), Striving and feeling: Interactions among goals, affect, and self-regulation (pp. 99–120). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Dean, J. (2011). The What-The-Hell Effect [Review of The What-The-Hell Effect]. PsyBlog. https://www.spring.org.uk/2011/03/the-what-the-hell-effect.php

Epel, E. S., Tomiyama, A. J., & Dallman, M. F. (2012). Stress and reward. Food and addiction: A comprehensive handbook, 266.

Gruen, R. J., Silva, R., Ehrlich, J., Schweitzer, J. W., & Friedhoff, A. J. (1997). Vulnerability to Stress: Self-Criticism and Stress-Induced Changes In Biochemistry. Journal of Personality, 65(1), 33–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1997.tb00528.x

Herman, C. P., & Mack, D. (1975). Restrained and unrestrained eating. Journal of Personality, 43(4), 647–660. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1975.tb00727.x

Herman, C. P., & Polivy, J. (1983). A boundary model for the regulation of eating. Psychiatric Annals, 13(12), 918–927. https://doi.org/10.3928/0048-5713-19831201-03

Jones, N. P., Papadakis, A. A., Orr, C. A., & Strauman, T. J. (2013). Cognitive Processes in Response to Goal Failure: A Study of Ruminative Thought and its Affective Consequences. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 32(5), 482–503. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2013.32.5.482

Lieberman, C. (2018). Why You Should Stop Being So Hard on Yourself Self-criticism can take a toll on our minds and bodies. It’s time to ease up. http://wwmr.us/support/HardOnSelf.pdf

Locher, J. L., Yoels, W. C., Maurer, D., & van Ells, J. (2005). Comfort Foods: An Exploratory Journey Into The Social and Emotional Significance of Food. Food and Foodways, 13(4), 273–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/07409710500334509

Longe, O., Maratos, F. A., Gilbert, P., Evans, G., Volker, F., Rockliff, H., & Rippon, G. (2010). Having a word with yourself: Neural correlates of self-criticism and self-reassurance. NeuroImage, 49(2), 1849–1856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.09.019

McGonigal, K. (2013). The willpower instinct : how self-control works, why it matters, and what you can do to get more of it. Avery.

OBen, R. (2017, June 6). Have You Fallen Victim to The What The Hell Effect? Medium. https://medium.com/@richardobenjr/have-you-fallen-victim-to-the-what-the-hell-effect-39d47c97df98

Polivy, J., Herman, C. P., & Deo, R. (2010). Getting a bigger slice of the pie. Effects on eating and emotion in restrained and unrestrained eaters. Appetite, 55(3), 426–430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appet.2010.07.015

Research, S., & Planning. (n.d.). Beating the “What-the-hell” effect. Stancombe Research + Planning. Retrieved October 15, 2021, from https://www.stancombe.com.au/www.inconversation.com.au//2011/04/beating-what-hell-effect.html

Takahashi, H., Yahata, N., Koeda, M., Matsuda, T., Asai, K., & Okubo, Y. (2004). Brain activation associated with evaluative processes of guilt and embarrassment: an fMRI study. NeuroImage, 23(3), 967–974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.07.054

Ulrich-Lai, Y. M., Christiansen, A. M., Ostrander, M. M., Jones, A. A., Jones, K. R., Choi, D. C., Krause, E. G., Evanson, N. K., Furay, A. R., Davis, J. F., Solomon, M. B., de Kloet, A. D., Tamashiro, K. L., Sakai, R. R., Seeley, R. J., Woods, S. C., & Herman, J. P. (2010). Pleasurable behaviors reduce stress via brain reward pathways. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107(47), 20529–20534. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1007740107

Zemack-Rugar, Y., Corus, C., & Brinberg, D. (2010). The “What the Hell Effect” Scale: Measuring Post-Failure Sequential Self-Control Choice Tendencies. ACR North American Advances, NA-37. https://www.acrwebsite.org/volumes/15024/volumes/v37/NA-37

External links

• What is the what the hell effect? (YouTube video, 2020)
• What the hell effect: The REAL reason you often binge on a bad habit (YouTube video, 2020)
• How to Break The Cycle of The What The Hell Effect (Youtube video, 2017)