More than 4 decades of research and 9 meta-analyses have focused on the undermining effect: namely, the debate over whether the provision of extrinsic incentives erodes intrinsic motivation. This review and meta-analysis builds on such previous reviews by focusing on the interrelationship among intrinsic motivation, extrinsic incentives, and performance, with reference to 2 moderators: performance type (quality vs. quantity) and incentive contingency (directly performance-salient vs. indirectly performance-salient), which have not been systematically reviewed to date. Based on random-effects meta-analytic methods, findings from school, work, and physical domains (k = 183, N = 212,468) indicate that intrinsic motivation is a medium to strong predictor of performance (ρ = .21-45). The importance of intrinsic motivation to performance remained in place whether incentives were presented. In addition, incentive salience influenced the predictive validity of intrinsic motivation for performance: In a "crowding out" fashion, intrinsic motivation was less important to performance when incentives were directly tied to performance and was more important when incentives were indirectly tied to performance. Considered simultaneously through meta-analytic regression, intrinsic motivation predicted more unique variance in quality of performance, whereas incentives were a better predictor of quantity of performance. With respect to performance, incentives and intrinsic motivation are not necessarily antagonistic and are best considered simultaneously. Future research should consider using nonperformance criteria (e.g., well-being, job satisfaction) as well as applying the percent-of-maximum-possible (POMP) method in meta-analyses.

No abstract

Debriefs are a relatively inexpensive and quick intervention for enhancing performance. Our results lend support for continued and expanded use of debriefing in training and in situ. To gain maximum results, it is important to ensure alignment between participants, focus and intent, and level of measurement.

The relationships between health and job performance problems have received increased attention in business and scientific communities. This paper attempts to synthesize theoretical and empirical work in this arena. First, the theoretical links between health and work performance are presented. This is followed by a meta-analysis of the relations between psychological, physical, and behavioural health variables and work performance criteria. Meta-analytic results from 111 independent samples obtained from a search of the literature indicate that psychological health, in the form of psychological well-being, depression, general anxiety, and life satisfaction, is a moderate-to-strong correlate of work performance. Associations between physical health, particularly somatic complaints and hypertension, and performance were weak-to-moderate. Regarding health behaviour, alcohol consumption, and smoking were weakly and sleep problems moderately associated with performance problems. Effect sizes sometimes differed across performance dimensions and data sources. The results are consistent with the notion that ill-health is associated with substantial reductions in work performance. This implies that interventions to improve health may have an impact on performance. However, as most of the research in this area has been crosssectional, more longitudinal research is needed to test theoretical and alternative causal explanations for the relations summarized in this review.