Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32946448›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Interindividual differences in incentive sensitivity moderate motivational effects of competition and cooperation on motor performance.

Florian Müller, Rouwen Cañal-Bruland

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Florian MüllerDepartment for the Psychology of Human Movement and Sport, Institute of Sport Science, Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3749-3182
Rouwen Cañal-BrulandDepartment for the Psychology of Human Movement and Sport, Institute of Sport Science, Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Established research has documented the pervasive influence of incentives (i.e., food, sex, money) on animal and human behavior. Additionally, motivational theories postulating intra-individually stable preferences for specific types of incentives (i.e., motives) highlight that effects of a given incentive are highly dependent on the motive disposition of the individual. Indeed, also research on motor performance has documented the interactive effects of motives and motive-specific incentives on motor outcomes. However, the majority of this research has relied on correlational designs focusing on the effects of the achievement motive, with few studies addressing the role of the affiliation and power motive. In order to extend findings in this domain, we tested whether a fit between individuals' power (affiliation) motive and incentives of competition (cooperation) would improve motor performance. Following baseline measures, participants performed a dart-throwing task as part of a dyadic performance (i.e., cooperative) or a one-on-one competition scenario. In the dyadic performance scenario, a stronger affiliation motive did not translate to better performance. However, in the one-on-one competition scenario a stronger power motive was associated with better performance. Results highlight the role of the power motive in predicting motor performance, particularly in competitive situations.

Indexed as

Competitive BehaviorCooperative BehaviorMotivationPsychomotor PerformanceAchievementAdultFemaleHumansMalePersonalityYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID32946448
PMCPMC7500601

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.