Charles S. Carver & Michael F. Scheier (1982), Psychological Bulletin
92(1):111–135 — DOI-10.1037/0033-2909.92.1.111. PubMed (PMID 7134324) dates
the issue July 1982, and published: carries the first of that month.
Key takeaways
Not read. Nothing is said here about what the review argues beyond its title.
Standing in the record
Filed on 2026-10-03 at the owner’s request, for the record’s coverage of behavioural control. It is the review the owner named for the feedback-control view of self-regulation in psychology.
The record already meets Carver and Scheier once, second-hand: Deci and Ryan’s 2000 target article (LIT-558, NOTE-439) reports their commentary objection that the basic psychological needs are “simply another set of goals”. That commentary is a different text, also unread.
Where it would bear, once read. The record’s readings of behavioural control filed with it are Daw, Niv and Dayan (LIT-580), Shenhav, Botvinick and Cohen (LIT-585) and Botvinick, Niv and Barto (LIT-581). All three formalize control as value maximization. This review is the older tradition of control as reducing a discrepancy from a reference value, and the record does not yet hold that tradition first-hand. Shenhav et al. say their account “accords well with the definition of control in other fields, most notably control theory in engineering”.
No instruction for machine-learning practice; nothing here belongs in the anthology.