Dataset Information

Interindividual differences in incentive sensitivity moderate motivational effects of competition and cooperation on motor performance.

ABSTRACT: Established research has documented the pervasive influence of incentives (i.e., food, sex, money) on animal and human behavior. Additionally, motivational theories postulating intra-individually stable preferences for specific types of incentives (i.e., motives) highlight that effects of a given incentive are highly dependent on the motive disposition of the individual. Indeed, also research on motor performance has documented the interactive effects of motives and motive-specific incentives on motor outcomes. However, the majority of this research has relied on correlational designs focusing on the effects of the achievement motive, with few studies addressing the role of the affiliation and power motive. In order to extend findings in this domain, we tested whether a fit between individuals' power (affiliation) motive and incentives of competition (cooperation) would improve motor performance. Following baseline measures, participants performed a dart-throwing task as part of a dyadic performance (i.e., cooperative) or a one-on-one competition scenario. In the dyadic performance scenario, a stronger affiliation motive did not translate to better performance. However, in the one-on-one competition scenario a stronger power motive was associated with better performance. Results highlight the role of the power motive in predicting motor performance, particularly in competitive situations.

SUBMITTER: Muller F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7500601 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Interindividual differences in incentive sensitivity moderate motivational effects of competition and cooperation on motor performance.

Müller Florian F Cañal-Bruland Rouwen R

PloS one 20200918 9

Established research has documented the pervasive influence of incentives (i.e., food, sex, money) on animal and human behavior. Additionally, motivational theories postulating intra-individually stable preferences for specific types of incentives (i.e., motives) highlight that effects of a given incentive are highly dependent on the motive disposition of the individual. Indeed, also research on motor performance has documented the interactive effects of motives and motive-specific incentives on ...[more]

PMID: 32946448

Similar Datasets

Project description:What is the role of ipsilateral motor and premotor areas in motor learning? One view is that ipsilateral activity suppresses contralateral motor cortex and, accordingly, that inhibiting ipsilateral regions can improve motor learning. Alternatively, the ipsilateral motor cortex may play an active role in the control and/or learning of unilateral hand movements. We approached this question by applying double-blind bihemispheric transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over both contralateral and ipsilateral motor cortex in a between-group design during 4 d of unimanual explicit sequence training in human participants. Independently of whether the anode was placed over contralateral or ipsilateral motor cortex, bihemispheric stimulation yielded substantial performance gains relative to unihemispheric or sham stimulation. This performance advantage appeared to be supported by plastic changes in both hemispheres. First, we found that behavioral advantages generalized strongly to the untrained hand, suggesting that tDCS strengthened effector-independent representations. Second, functional imaging during speed-matched execution of trained sequences conducted 48 h after training revealed sustained, polarity-independent increases in activity in both motor cortices relative to the sham group. These results suggest a cooperative rather than competitive interaction of the two motor cortices during skill learning and suggest that bihemispheric brain stimulation during unimanual skill learning may be beneficial because it harnesses plasticity in the ipsilateral hemisphere.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Many neurorehabilitation approaches are based on the idea that is beneficial to boost excitability in the contralateral hemisphere while attenuating that of the ipsilateral cortex to reduce interhemispheric inhibition. We observed that bihemispheric transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) with the excitatory anode either over contralateral or ipsilateral motor cortex facilitated motor learning nearly twice as strongly as unihemispheric tDCS. These increases in motor learning were accompanied by increases in fMRI activation in both motor cortices that outlasted the stimulation period, as well as increased generalization to the untrained hand. Collectively, our findings suggest a cooperative rather than a competitive role of the hemispheres and imply that it is most beneficial to harness plasticity in both hemispheres in neurorehabilitation of motor deficits.

Dataset Information

Interindividual differences in incentive sensitivity moderate motivational effects of competition and cooperation on motor performance.

Publications

Interindividual differences in incentive sensitivity moderate motivational effects of competition and cooperation on motor performance.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets