Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33927251›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Interactive effects of incentive value and valence on the performance of discrete action sequences.

Tyler J Adkins, Bradley S Gary, Taraz G Lee

Abstract readControlled Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Tyler J AdkinsDepartment of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. adkinsty@umich.edu.
Bradley S GaryDepartment of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Taraz G LeeDepartment of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Incentives can be used to increase motivation, leading to better learning and performance on skilled motor tasks. Prior work has shown that monetary punishments enhance on-line performance while equivalent monetary rewards enhance off-line skill retention. However, a large body of literature on loss aversion has shown that losses are treated as larger than equivalent gains. The divergence between the effects of punishments and reward on motor learning could be due to perceived differences in incentive value rather than valence per se. We test this hypothesis by manipulating incentive value and valence while participants trained to perform motor sequences. Consistent with our hypothesis, we found that large reward enhanced on-line performance but impaired the ability to retain the level of performance achieved during training. However, we also found that on-line performance was better with reward than punishment and that the effect of increasing incentive value was more linear with reward (small, medium, large) while the effect of value was more binary with punishment (large vs not large). These results suggest that there are differential effects of punishment and reward on motor learning and that these effects of valence are unlikely to be driven by differences in the subjective magnitude of gains and losses.

Indexed as

Psychomotor PerformanceRetention, PsychologyRewardHumansMotivationPunishmentYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID33927251
PMCPMC8084955

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.