IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/socpsy/v68y2022i2p435-442.html

Desire for control and the integrated motivational-volitional model of suicidal behavior: Results from a pilot investigation of adults in the United Kingdom

Author

Listed:
  • Neielle Saint-Cyr
  • Brendan Gallagher
  • Robert J Cramer
  • Susan Rasmussen

Abstract

Background: Suicidal behavior remains a pressing problem in the United Kingdom. Continued theory development is a critical step toward designing effective prevention. Aims: The present study tested a novel element to suicide theory, the Desire for Control, for its direct and moderating roles within the Integrated Motivational-Volitional (IMV) Model of Suicidal Behavior. Method: An online-administered cross-sectional suicide risk survey study ( n  = 116) was conducted among adults living in the United Kingdom. Results: Mean suicidal ideation scores were in the non-clinical range. DOC Leadership and Destiny Control were associated with good mental health. DOC Decision Avoidance was associated with poor mental health. DOC Decision Avoidance also acted as a motivational moderator in which the entrapment-suicidal thinking link was worse among those high in decisional avoidance. Conclusion: DOC represents a novel, valuable addition to suicide theory and may inform suicide-specific psychotherapeutic intervention. Additional research is needed to full understand the role of DOC and its factor structures in the IMV.

Suggested Citation

  • Neielle Saint-Cyr & Brendan Gallagher & Robert J Cramer & Susan Rasmussen, 2022. "Desire for control and the integrated motivational-volitional model of suicidal behavior: Results from a pilot investigation of adults in the United Kingdom," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 68(2), pages 435-442, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:socpsy:v:68:y:2022:i:2:p:435-442
    DOI: 10.1177/00207640211003606
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00207640211003606
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00207640211003606?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jozef Bavoľár & Oľga Orosová, 2015. "Decision-making styles and their associations with decision-making competencies and mental health," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 10(1), pages 115-122, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tomasz Wachowicz & Ewa Roszkowska & Marzena Filipowicz-Chomko, 2023. "Identifying decision-making style: Do REI-20 and GDMS measure the same?," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 50(4), pages 415-437, December.
    2. Shujing Liang & Yuwei Zou, 2018. "Validation of Adult Decision-Making Competence in Chinese college students," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(4), pages 393-400, July.
    3. Tariq Mahadeen & Kostas Galanakis & Elpida Samara & Pavlos Kilintzis, 2021. "Heuristics and Evidences Decision (HeED) Making: a Case Study in a Systemic Model for Transforming Decision Making from Heuristics-Based to Evidenced-Based," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(4), pages 1668-1693, December.
    4. Renata M. Heilman & Petko Kusev & Mircea Miclea & Joseph Teal & Rose Martin & Alessia Passanisi & Ugo Pace, 2021. "Are Impulsive Decisions Always Irrational? An Experimental Investigation of Impulsive Decisions in the Domains of Gains and Losses," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(16), pages 1-14, August.
    5. Dorien F Bangma & Lara Tucha & Anselm B M Fuermaier & Oliver Tucha & Janneke Koerts, 2020. "Financial decision-making in a community sample of adults with and without current symptoms of ADHD," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-20, October.
    6. Adrián Alacreu-Crespo & María C. Fuentes & Diana Abad-Tortosa & Irene Cano-Lopez & Esperanza González & Miguel à ngel Serrano, 2019. "Spanish validation of General Decision-Making Style scale: Sex invariance, sex differences and relationships with personality and coping styles," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 14(6), pages 739-751, November.
    7. Tianshi Li & Wenli Li & Yuqing Zhao & Jingpei Ma, 2023. "Rationality manipulation during consumer decision-making process: an analysis of Alibaba’s online shopping carnival," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 331-364, March.
    8. Kim, Bum Seok & Kim, Woosub & Min, Jae H., 2025. "Decision-making styles and cognitive biases: Experimental results from a Korean sample," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    9. Jozef Bavolar, 2018. "Psychometric characteristics of two forms of the Slovak version of the Indecisiveness Scale," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(3), pages 287-296, May.
    10. Tomasz Wachowicz & Ewa Roszkowska & Marzena Filipowicz-Chomko, 2024. "Decision-makers’ behavioral characteristics and multiple criteria decision aiding. Impact of decision-making style and experience on methods’ use, evaluation, and recommendation," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 34(3), pages 287-323.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:socpsy:v:68:y:2022:i:2:p:435-442. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.