The Dynamics of Goal Revision: A Cybernetic Multiperiod Test-Operate-Test-Adjust-Loop (TOTAL) Model of Self-Regulation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This research presents a comprehensive conceptual model of the dynamics of goal revision over multiple periods. First, based on an integrative literature review, we derive four principles that govern how individuals update their goals over time (monotonicity, diminishing sensitivity, aspiration maximization, and performance satisficing). We then integrate these principles logically as well as mathematically into a goal-discrepancy response function. Next, we advance existing cybernetic models of self-regulation by synthesizing the four principles and the response function into a Test-Operate-Test-Adjust-Loop (TOTAL) model, which captures the dynamics of goal revision in self-regulation. We report four laboratory experiments that demonstrate initial support for the postulates of our model and conclude with a discussion of limitations and future directions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it