When rightness is wrong: Chronic prevention orientation predicts cardiovascular threat responses under regulatory fit

Grounded in regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1997) and the Biopsychosocial Model of Challenge/Threat (BPSC/T; e.g., Blascovich, 2008), the present research tests the impact of chronic and situational regulatory orientations on cardiovascular responses during active goal pursuit. We propose two hypotheses: the “Non-Fit Threat Hypothesis,” which predicts that prevention-dominant individuals in promotion- (vs. prevention-) framed situations will evidence greater cardiovascular threat; and the “Prevention Threat Hypothesis,” which predicts that prevention-dominant individuals in prevention- (vs. promotion-) framed situations will evidence greater cardiovascular threat. Across two studies (N = 265), participants' cardiovascular responses were assessed during motivated performance situations (giving a speech, solving math problems). Findings were consistent with the Prevention Threat Hypothesis, such that prevention-dominant individuals exhibited greater cardiovascular threat during prevention-framed situations. This outcome contrasts with previous research emphasizing the benefits of regulatory fit for motivation and performance outcomes, but aligns with evidence suggesting that prevention-dominance amplifies sensitivity to situational demands during active goal pursuit. Results highlight the role of regulatory focus in shaping real-time psychological states. Importantly, future research should extend the present and previous findings using different conceptualizations of fit versus non-fit situations.