Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Interpretation of physiological indicators of m...

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Interpretation of physiological indicators of motivation: Caveats and recommendations

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Interpretation of physiological indicators of motivation: Caveats and recommendations. / Richter, M.; Slade, K.
In: International Journal of Psychophysiology, Vol. 119, 30.09.2017, p. 4-10.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Richter M, Slade K. Interpretation of physiological indicators of motivation: Caveats and recommendations. International Journal of Psychophysiology. 2017 Sept 30;119:4-10. Epub 2017 Aug 25. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2017.04.007

Author

Richter, M. ; Slade, K. / Interpretation of physiological indicators of motivation : Caveats and recommendations. In: International Journal of Psychophysiology. 2017 ; Vol. 119. pp. 4-10.

Bibtex

@article{9336445bf2694405b9667b4e996f3234,
title = "Interpretation of physiological indicators of motivation: Caveats and recommendations",
abstract = "Motivation scientists employing physiological measures to gather information about motivation-related states are at risk of committing two fundamental errors: overstating the inferences that can be drawn from their physiological measures and circular reasoning. We critically discuss two complementary approaches, Cacioppo and colleagues' model of psychophysiological relations and construct validation theory, to highlight the conditions under which these errors are committed and provide guidance on how to avoid them. In particular, we demonstrate that the direct inference from changes in a physiological measure to changes in a motivation-related state requires the demonstration that the measure is not related to other relevant psychological states. We also point out that circular reasoning can be avoided by separating the definition of the motivation-related state from the hypotheses that are empirically tested.",
keywords = "Motivation, Psychophysiology, Psychophysiological measures, Indicator, Marker",
author = "M. Richter and K. Slade",
year = "2017",
month = sep,
day = "30",
doi = "10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2017.04.007",
language = "English",
volume = "119",
pages = "4--10",
journal = "International Journal of Psychophysiology",
issn = "0167-8760",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Interpretation of physiological indicators of motivation

T2 - Caveats and recommendations

AU - Richter, M.

AU - Slade, K.

PY - 2017/9/30

Y1 - 2017/9/30

N2 - Motivation scientists employing physiological measures to gather information about motivation-related states are at risk of committing two fundamental errors: overstating the inferences that can be drawn from their physiological measures and circular reasoning. We critically discuss two complementary approaches, Cacioppo and colleagues' model of psychophysiological relations and construct validation theory, to highlight the conditions under which these errors are committed and provide guidance on how to avoid them. In particular, we demonstrate that the direct inference from changes in a physiological measure to changes in a motivation-related state requires the demonstration that the measure is not related to other relevant psychological states. We also point out that circular reasoning can be avoided by separating the definition of the motivation-related state from the hypotheses that are empirically tested.

AB - Motivation scientists employing physiological measures to gather information about motivation-related states are at risk of committing two fundamental errors: overstating the inferences that can be drawn from their physiological measures and circular reasoning. We critically discuss two complementary approaches, Cacioppo and colleagues' model of psychophysiological relations and construct validation theory, to highlight the conditions under which these errors are committed and provide guidance on how to avoid them. In particular, we demonstrate that the direct inference from changes in a physiological measure to changes in a motivation-related state requires the demonstration that the measure is not related to other relevant psychological states. We also point out that circular reasoning can be avoided by separating the definition of the motivation-related state from the hypotheses that are empirically tested.

KW - Motivation

KW - Psychophysiology

KW - Psychophysiological measures

KW - Indicator

KW - Marker

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2017.04.007

DO - 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2017.04.007

M3 - Journal article

VL - 119

SP - 4

EP - 10

JO - International Journal of Psychophysiology

JF - International Journal of Psychophysiology

SN - 0167-8760

ER -