Increasing and decreasing intrinsic interest with contingent rewards: A test of cognitive evaluation theory
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The usual finding is that rewards given regardless of quality of performance tend to reduce interest, whereas rewards for performances signifying competence sustain high interest.
“Although results are somewhat variable, the usual finding is that rewards given regardless of quality of performance tend to reduce interest, whereas rewards for performances signifying competence sustain high interest (Boggiano & Ruble, 1979;Enzle & Ross, 1978;Lepper & Greene, 1979;Ross, 1976).”
From Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. (1981) · cites this paper as Enzle & Ross, 1978
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 16 · Cited by 94
- Authors
- Enzle, M. E., & Ross, J. M.
- Affiliations
- University of Alberta (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Enzle, Michael E
- Venue
- Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1978-11
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 588-597
- ISSN
- 0022-1031 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2043589836
- Cited by
- 94
- References
- 16
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 7.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Motivation and Self-Concept in Sports
- Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
- Keywords
- intrinsic motivation, contingent reward, cognitive evaluation theory, task interest, reward value, performance standards, extrinsic motivation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
