A Meta-Analysis of the Interactive, Additive, and Relative Effects of Cognitive Ability and Motivation on Performance

178 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Best-Practice Recommendations for Producers, Evaluators, and Users of Methodological Literature Reviews (2020, background): “…management literature (Aguinis, 2019), research performance problems such as a lack of transparency and QRPs are a result of insufficient (a) knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs); or (b) motivation; or (c) both (Aguinis, Hill, & Bailey, 2020; Aguinis et al., 2018; Van Iddekinge et al., 2018).”
Driving innovation: Public policy and human capital (2019, background): “This can do/will do taxonomy is highly consistent with almost a century of research on the determinants of human performance, research that recognizes both ability and motivation as independent determinants of job performance; for the most recent meta-analytic review of the roles of motivation and a”
Advancing Theory by Assessing Boundary Conditions With Metaregression: A Critical Review and Best-Practice Recommendations (2018, background): “For example, consider the relation between cognitive ability and performance and the potential boundary condition motivation such that we predict that the ability-performance relation will become stronger as motivation increases (Van Iddekinge et al., 2017).”