Which one works best? Considering the relative importance of motivational regulation strategies

By Malte Schwinger, Nantje Otterpohl. 2017

90 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/57c66c22eefaca4c760b0d690c64029930d3eb4f

How researchers see this paper

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

In Applied Psychology

1. David B. Miele
2. Abigail A. Scholer

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

1. David B. Miele
2. Abigail A. Scholer

In Social Psychology

1. David B. Miele
2. Abigail A. Scholer

Citations in the corpus

• New Directions in Self-Regulation: The Role of Metamotivational Beliefs (2018, unknown): “Regulating motivational quantity typically involves knowing what types of strategies can increase motivation (e.g., Schwinger & Otterpohl, 2017), whereas regulating motivational quality requires that people also understand that motivation not only differs in level, but also in type.”
• The Role of Metamotivational Monitoring in Motivation Regulation (2018, methodology): “Studies using these questionnaires have shown that the subscales have good reliability and predictive validity (Grunschel, Schwinger, Steinmayr, & Fries, 2016; Schwinger & Otterpohl, 2017; Schwinger et al., 2009; Schwinger & Stiensmeier-Pelster, 2012).”