The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS OF INCENTIVE MOTIVATORS ON WORK PERFORMANCE.
Abstract
In this field experiment, we first compared the performance effects of money systematically administered through the organizational behavior modification (O.B. Mod.) model and routine pay for performance and then compared the effects of O.B. Mod.- administered money, social recognition, and performance feedback. The money intervention based on the O.B. Mod. outperformed routine pay for performance (performance increase = 37% vs. 11%) and also had stronger effects on performance than social recognition (24%) and performance feedback (20%).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.254 · Cited by 5,882
Task complexity: Definition of the construct
Wood, R. E. (1986) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(86)90044-0 · Cited by 1,393 · cited 2×
“In particular, in comparison to low task complexity, high task complexity places greater demands on individuals' (1) required knowledge, (2) skill capacity, (3) behavioral facility, (4) information processing, (5) persistence, and (6) self-efficacy (Bandura, 1986, 1997; Stajkovic & Luthans, 1998a; Wood, 1986).”
BackgroundMethodTask complexity as a moderator of goal effects: a meta-analysis
Wood, R. E., Mento, A. J., & Locke, E. A. (1987) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.72.3.416 · Cited by 598
Cited by
Negative Self-Efficacy and Goal Effects Revisited
Bandura, A., & Locke, E. A. (2003) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.1.87 · Cited by 2,813
How low does ethical leadership flow? Test of a trickle-down model
Mayer, D. M., Kuenzi, M., Greenbaum, R., Bardes, M., & Salvador, R. (. (2009) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2008.04.002 · Cited by 1,598
Kuvaas, B. (2006) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.377 · Cited by 422
Perreira, T. A., Morin, A. J. S., Hebert, M., Gillet, N., Houle, S. A., & Berta, W. (2018) · Journal of Vocational Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2017.12.004 · Cited by 130
Thibault Landry, A., Gagné, M., Forest, J., Guerrero, S., Séguin, M., & Papachristopoulos, K. (2017) · Journal of Personnel Psychology · doi:10.1027/1866-5888/a000182 · Cited by 58
Metadata
- Authors
- Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Journal
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 2001-06-01
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 580-590
- ISSN
- 0001-4273 (ISSN-L)
- 1948-0989
- OpenAlex
- W2038372220
- Cited by
- 357
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 17.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS OF INCENTIVE MOTIVATORS ON WORK PERFORMANCE. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/3069372
- The paper
- Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (2001). DIFFERENTIAL EFFECTS OF INCENTIVE MOTIVATORS ON WORK PERFORMANCE. Academy of Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069372
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
