ArticleCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2025
A cross-cultural comparison of intrinsic and extrinsic motivational drives for learning.
Article in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- From interest to engagement: a serial mediation model of self-efficacy and academic buoyancy.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- The Impact of AI Guide Language Strategies on Museum Visitor Experience: The Mediating Role of Psychological Distance in the Arousal-Topic Fit Effect.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Drivers and Moderators of Social Media-Enabled Cooperative Learning in Design Education: An Extended TAM Perspective from Chinese Students.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Introduction to the special issue on individual differences in memory modulation.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2025Article
- Intrinsic vs. extrinsic motivation in high school physical education: Which fuels adolescent achievement emotions better?PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Intrinsic motivational drives, like the autonomous feeling of control, and extrinsic motivational drives, like monetary reward, can benefit learning. Extensive research has focused on neurobiological and psychological factors that affect these drives, but our understanding of the sociocultural factors is limited. Here, we compared the effects of autonomy and rewards on episodic recognition memory between students from Dutch and Chinese universities. In an exploratory learning task, participants viewed partially obscured objects that they needed to subsequently remember. We independently manipulated autonomy, as volitional control over an exploration trajectory, as well as the chance to receive monetary rewards. The learning task was followed by memory tests for objects and locations. For both cultural groups, we found that participants learned better in autonomous than non-autonomous conditions. However, the beneficial effect of reward on memory performance was stronger for Chinese than for Dutch participants. By incorporating the sociocultural brain perspective, we discuss how differences in norms and values between Eastern and Western cultures can be integrated with the neurocognitive framework about dorsal lateral and ventral medial prefrontal cortex and dopaminergic reward modulations on learning and memory. These findings have important implications for understanding the neurocognitive mechanisms in which both autonomy and extrinsic rewards are commonly used to motivate students in the realm of education and urge more attention to investigate cultural differences in learning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.