Consideration of Future Consequences Scale

What it measures

The most widely used measure of temporal self-regulation in consumer, health, and environmental psychology. Validated in three student samples (n=141–242) with alpha 0.80–0.86; convergent correlations with delay of gratification, preference for long-term rewards, and environmental concern. Discriminant from social desirability, intelligence, and need for cognition. High-CFC individuals show greater compliance with health warnings, larger willingness to pay for environmentally friendly products, greater savings behaviour, and stronger responses to future-framed health and environmental communications. Low-CFC individuals prefer immediate over delayed rewards, discount future consequences more steeply, and are less responsive to long-term consequence framing. Meta-analyses report robust CFC–health behaviour associations (rapprox.0.25–0.35) and CFC–environmental behaviour associations (rapprox.0.20–0.30). Joireman, Strathman & Balliet (2006) recommend treating immediate and future subscales as two correlated factors rather than a single bipolar dimension. Used extensively as a moderator in persuasion research examining temporal framing effects.

Response format

5-point Likert (1=extremely uncharacteristic of me to 5=extremely characteristic of me); items 3, 4, and 5 require reverse scoring. Items averaged for CFC score.

Scale items

• I consider how things might be in the future, and try to influence those things with my everyday behavior.
• Often I engage in a particular behavior in order to achieve outcomes that may not result for many years.
• I only act to satisfy immediate concerns, figuring the future will take care of itself. (R)
• My behavior is only influenced by the immediate (i.e., a matter of days or weeks) outcomes of my actions. (R)
• My convenience is a big factor in the decisions I make or the actions I take. (R)
• I am willing to sacrifice my immediate happiness or well-being in order to achieve future outcomes.
• I think it is important to take warnings about negative outcomes seriously even if the negative outcome will not occur for many years.
• I think about how my current behaviors influence future outcomes for myself.
• I often deal with problems on a short-term rather than long-term basis — it's easier.
• I am willing to trade enjoyment now for outcomes I will receive in the future.
• I think about my distant future — about things that might happen years from now.
• If I want to achieve something, I set specific goals and work toward those goals one step at a time.

Full scale items shown. Always cite the original source when using this scale in research.

Usage notes & scoring

Items 3, 4, and 5 require reverse scoring before averaging. Score = mean of all 12 items (range 1–5). Higher scores = greater consideration of future consequences. Joireman, Strathman & Balliet (2006, Personality and Individual Differences) identified two correlated subscales: CFC-Immediate (4 items; concern with immediate outcomes — reverse-scored items) and CFC-Future (8 items; consideration of distant outcomes). Reporting both subscales is recommended when the research question involves competing immediate vs. future motivations. CFC shows stronger predictive validity for behavioural outcomes than for self-reported attitudes — the construct operates through motivational engagement with imagined future states. Time-pressure manipulations and salience of immediate outcomes temporarily suppress CFC's influence on behaviour, suggesting it is most predictive in low-load, reflective decision contexts.

Recommended companion scales

Citation

Strathman, A., Gleicher, F., Boninger, D.S., & Edwards, C.S. (1994). The consideration of future consequences: Weighing immediate and distant outcomes of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(4), 742–752.

Keywords