Cited by 19Memory Processes and InfluencesPsychological Testing and AssessmentEducation, Achievement, and Giftedness

Rewarded remembering: dissociations between self-rated motivation and memory performance

NGAOSUVAN, LEONARD, MÄNTYLÄ, TIMO·2005·Scandinavian Journal of Psychology

Abstract

People often claim that they perform better in memory performance tasks when they are more motivated. However, past research has shown minimal effects of motivation on memory performance when factors contributing to item-specific biases during encoding and retrieval are taken into account. The purpose of the present study was to examine the generality of this apparent dissociation by using more sensitive measures of experienced motivation and memory performance. Extrinsic motivation was manipulated through competition instructions, and subjective ratings of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation were obtained before and after study instructions. Participants studied a series of words, and memory performance was assessed by content recall (Experiment 1) and source recall (Experiment 2). Both experiments showed dissociation between subjective ratings of extrinsic motivation and actual memory performance, so that competition increased self-rated extrinsic motivation but had no effects on memory performance, including source recall. Inconsistent with most people's expectations, the findings suggest that extrinsic motivation has minimal effects on memory performance.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1467-9450.2005.00462.x

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Earlier cognitive psychology experiments on the effects of reward on memory used shorter retention intervals than the aforementioned studies.

    “It is noteworthy that earlier cognitive psychology experiments on the effects of reward on memory used shorter retention intervals than the aforementioned studies (e.g. [58, 59]).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
NGAOSUVAN, L., & MÄNTYLÄ, T.
Affiliations
Umeå University (SE)
Corresponding author
NGAOSUVAN, LEONARD
Venue
Scandinavian Journal of Psychology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-07-13
Volume
46
Issue
4
Pages
323-330
ISSN
  • 0036-5564 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9450
OpenAlex
W1502400002
Cited by
19
References
28
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2
FWCI
0.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Scandinavian Journal of Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Education, Achievement, and Giftedness
Keywords
extrinsic motivation, intrinsic motivation, memory performance, competition, source memory, content recall
MeSH terms
Adult, Attention, Humans, Internal-External Control, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Motivation, Reward, Self-Assessment, Speech Perception, Verbal Learning

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