A post by Michael Dufner
Imagine socializing with a group of friends, trying to influence other people’s decisions, or mastering a challenging task. Prominent motive theories suggest that people differ in the extent to which they value such positive motive-specific experiences and that these individual differences lie at the heart of motive dispositions. Affiliative experiences, such as meeting one’s friends can be more enjoyable for some individuals than others. Those who enjoy affiliation a lot should also be highly motivated to affiliate with others in many life situations, simply because affiliation is highly rewarding for them. This means that in theory, positive affective contingencies (PACs) between motive-specific experiences and positive affective reactions should be crucial for the functioning of motive dispositions and motivated behaviour. In an ongoing research program, we are putting this assumption to a comprehensive empirical test.
Previous research
In a previous study on the topic (Dufner et al., 2015), we focused on affiliation-specific PACs. That is, we tapped into the spontaneous tendency to respond with positive affect to affiliation. To assess the affiliation-specific PACs, we presented participants with affiliative images (e.g. groups of friends or romantic couples) and captured their immediate affective reactions via electromyography (EMG) responses that were indicative of subtle smiling. We found reliable individual differences in this affiliation-specific PAC measure, meaning that some persons systematically smiled more while viewing affiliative images than others. PAC scores were linked to self- and peer-reports of the affiliation motive as well as to a number of affiliative outcomes such as socializing behaviour in the laboratory. The results of a follow-up investigation (Dufner et al., 2018) indicated that it might also be possible to assess PACs in the power and achievement domain and that affective reactivity might not only be captured via EMG recordings, but also by having participants rate their affective experience while watching the motive-specific images. Yet, the analysed sample size was rather small, some of the measures were unreliable, and only a single validation criterion was used.
The current study
In the current study, we focused on affiliation- and power-specific PACs. As before, we presented participants with positive motive-specific images (e.g., groups of friends or romantic couples as affiliative images and persons on a stage facing a crowd or status symbols as power-related images) and assessed their immediate affective reactions. We did so by capturing their smile responses via EMG and by having them rate their affective experience after the presentation of each image. We thus obtained an EMG-based and a rating-based PAC indicator for the content domains of affiliation and power. The internal consistencies of all four PAC measures were high this time (alphas >.80), which means that they were able to capture individual differences reliably.
We then investigated associations with established motives measures, namely motive self-reports and scores from a Picture Story Exercise (PSE), a projective test that is typically used to assess implicit motives. Most of the PAC measures were positively related to motive self-reports, yet the PAC measures were not consistently related to PSE scores. In all cases, correlations were relatively small (r < .30), which indicated that the PACs tapped into content that was distinct from what established motive measures capture.
Were the PAC measures able to predict motive-specific outcomes? To gain outcome measures that are as objective as possible, we focused on indicators that could be assessed without the usage of self-reports. Specifically, we assessed participants’ attentional orientation to motive-specific cues via eye tracking, daily diary assessments of behaviour in everyday life, video-observed behaviour in the laboratory, and motive ratings made by external observers and close informants. In the affiliation domain, the rating-based PAC measure was positively linked to all of the outcomes and the EMG-based PAC measure was positively linked to all but one. Even though many outcomes were also linked to affiliation motive self-reports, most relations between the PAC measures and the outcomes remained significant when motive self-reports were controlled for. Thus, the PAC measures possessed incremental validity beyond motive self-reports.
For the power domain, the pattern of results was different. Even though most outcomes were related to power motive self-reports, only few of them were also linked to the PAC measures and in no case did these links persist once self-reports were controlled for. Possibly, the images we used as power-specific cues in our study were not ideal for stimulating the complex and multi-faceted power motive. For example, we did not distinguish between the power, prestige and leadership facets of the power motive. It is also possible that an assessment of affective reactions that are specifically linked to the experience of power (i.e., feelings of strength and excitement) would have been better suited for capturing power-specific PACs.
Conclusion and Implications
In line with the central claim from motive theory, people in our study indeed differed systematically in their affective reactivity to motive-specific cues. Persons with strong motive-specific PACs had stronger self-reported motives and at least in the affiliation domain, were also more attentive to motive-specific cues, showed more motivated behaviour, and were seen by others as more motivated than persons with weaker PACs. Accordingly, PACs seem to matter for motivation.
Our findings have implications for the conceptualization of motive systems. The traditional paradigm distinguishes between explicit motives that are consciously represented and assessed via self-reports and implicit motives that are largely unconscious and assessed via PSEs. In the current study as well as in our earlier research, PAC measures were virtually unrelated to PSE scores and at the same time predicted motive-relevant outcomes above and beyond self-reports. Thus, PACs seem to tap into aspects of the motivational system that are distinct from what the PSE captures and nevertheless operate partly independently from explicit self-reports. Thus, the idea of a unitary implicit motive system needs to be reconsidered.
The findings also have implications for motive assessment. The PAC measures had high internal consistency and predicted many motive-relevant outcomes (at least in the affiliation domain). Researchers interested in explaining motivated behaviour might therefore do well to include PAC measures in their investigations. Especially rating-based PAC scales, which are economic and easy to implement even in online studies, could be a valuable addition. We are currently developing a validated picture set that can be used to assess PACs in all three major motive domains (affiliation, achievement, power). So stay tuned!
Recent studies even indicate that the PAC approach can be applied not only to the classic “Big Three” of motive research, but also to further constructs that have an affective-motivational character. For example, we have assessed partner-related PACs by recording participants’ EMG reactions while viewing pictures of their romantic partners (Krause & Dufner, 2020) and self-related PACs by recording participants’ EMG reactions while viewing pictures of themselves (Schliebener et al., 2023). In each case, reliable indicators could be gained that predicted relevant outcomes above and beyond explicit self-reports in the respective domain. It will be exciting to see whether the method can be applied to other affective-motivational constructs, such as anxieties, aspects of sexuality, or attitudes.
References
Dufner, M., Arslan, R. C., & Denissen, J.J.A. (2018). The unconscious side of Facebook: online
social networks profiles leak cues to users’ explicit and implicit motive dispositions.
Motivation and Emotion, 42, 79-89.
Dufner, M., Arslan, R. C., Hagemeyer, B., Schönbrodt, F. D., & Denissen J. J. A. (2015).
Affective contingencies in the affiliative domain: Physiological assessment,
associations with the affiliation motive, and prediction of behavior. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 662-676.
Krause, S., & Dufner, M. (2019). Predicting romantic relationship behaviors with explicit and implicit
partner evaluations: an actor-partner interdependence analysis. Journal of Personality
Assessment, online first publication, 102, 662-676.
Schliebener, M. Kraft, L. &, Dufner, M. (2023). An EMG-Based Approach Toward the Assessment of
Implicit Self-Esteem. Acta Psychologica, online first publication.