Cited by 12Sports Analytics and PerformanceSport Psychology and PerformanceTeam Dynamics and Performance

Combining theoretical modelling and machine learning approaches: The case of teamwork effects on individual effort expenditure

Open access
Eisbach, Simon, Mai, Oliver, Hertel, Guido·2024·New Ideas in Psychology

Abstract

Machine learning modelling of psychological processes is often considered as competing alternative to theoretical modelling. In contrast, the current study explores potential synergetic effects of these two general approaches both for predictive accuracy and theoretical understanding. Theoretical models have high explanatory value but can have weak predictive power. Machine learning models have high predictive power but low transparency and require large amounts of data and computational power. The combination of machine learning and theoretical models may yield both higher predictive accuracy as well as higher explanatory value and lower requirements of data and computational power as compared to either of the two approaches alone. We examine our assumptions in the field of team motivation, using archival performance data from 1,425,926 individual and relay races of swimming competitions. While the results revealed better prediction of the machine learning model, an exploration of the machine learning model with explainable artificial intelligence methods offered new insights also for the theoretical model. Finally, the combination of machine learning and theoretical modelling required less computational power than the machine learning approach alone, but not less data for building the model.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.newideapsych.2024.101077

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Karau, 2000, On the elusive search for motivation gains in groups: Insights from the Collective Effort Model, Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 31, 179, 10.1024//0044-3514.31.4.179 · DOI
  2. 2015, Psychology. Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science, Science (New York, N.Y.), 349

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Eisbach, S., Mai, O., & Hertel, G.
Affiliations
University of Münster (DE)
Corresponding author
Hertel, Guido
Venue
New Ideas in Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-04
Volume
73
Pages
101077
ISSN
0732-118X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4392119704
Cited by
12
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4
FWCI
3.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
New Ideas in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Sports Analytics and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Sport Psychology and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
Keywords
teamwork, team motivation, machine learning, theoretical modeling, explainable AI, prediction accuracy, computational efficiency, data requirements, cognitive processes

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