No abstract

Motivation for bodily movement, physical activity and exercise varies from moment to moment. These motivation states may be “affectively-charged,” ranging from instances of lower tension (e.g., desires, wants) to higher tension (e.g., cravings and urges). Currently, it is not known how often these states have been investigated in clinical populations (e.g., eating disorders, exercise dependence/addiction, Restless Legs Syndrome, diabetes, obesity) vs. healthy populations (e.g., in studies of motor control; groove in music psychology). The objective of this scoping review protocol is to quantify the literature on motivation states, to determine what topical areas are represented in investigations of clinical and healthy populations, and to discover pertinent details, such as instrumentation, terminology, theories, and conceptual models, correlates and mechanisms of action. Iterative searches of scholarly databases will take place to determine which combination of search terms (e.g., “motivation states” and “physical activity”; “desire to be physically active,” etc.) captures the greatest number of relevant results. Studies will be included if motivation states for movement (e.g., desires, urges) are specifically measured or addressed. Studies will be excluded if referring to motivation as a trait. A charting data form was developed to scan all relevant documents for later data extraction. The primary outcome is simply the extent of the literature on the topic. Results will be stratified by population/condition. This scoping review will unify a diverse literature, which may result in the creation of unique models or paradigms that can be utilized to better understand motivation for bodily movement and exercise.

No abstract

Summary Three studies draw from evolutionary theory to assess whether sleepiness increases interpretive biases in workplace social judgments. Study 1 established a relationship between sleepiness and interpretive bias using ambiguous interpersonal scenarios from a measure commonly used in personnel selection (N = 148). Study 2 explored the boundary conditions of the sleepiness–interpretive bias link via an experimental online field survey of U.S. adults (N = 433). Sleepiness increased interpretive bias when social threats were clearly present (unfair workplace) but did not affect bias in the absence of threat (fair workplace). Study 3 replicated and extended findings from the previous two studies using objective measures of sleep loss and a quasi‐experimental manipulation of minor sleep loss (N = 175). Negative affect, ego depletion, or personality variables did not influence the observed relationships. Overall, results suggest that a self‐protection/evolutionary perspective best explains the effects of sleepiness on workplace interpretive biases. These studies advance the current research on sleep in organizations by adding a cognitive “threat interpretation” bias approach to past work examining the emotional reaction/behavioral side of sleep disruption. Interpretive biases due to sleepiness may have significant implications for employee health and counterproductive behavior. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Sleep loss and daytime sleepiness are common experiences for employees across many occupations. Although researchers commonly focus on the detrimental effects of sleep issues for attention and vigilance during task performance, we review research that examines how sleep issues influence interpretations of, and interactions in, the work environment. This review begins by differentiating between sleep loss and sleepiness. We then highlight how sleep issues can negatively bias the interpretation of environmental information and result in aggressive responding. We also examine how sleep issues impair self-regulatory ability and contribute to workplace deviance. After each section, we discuss the implications of these findings for the work environment. A closer examination of sleep's influence on workplace interactions can spur a beneficial discussion for researchers across a variety of disciplines and employees across all organizational levels.