THE INTERACTION OF ABILITY AND MOTIVATION IN PERFORMANCE: AN EXPLORATION OF THE MEANING OF MODERATORS¹

Abstract

It was hypothesized that one possible explanation of moderator effects is that they are due to different degrees of homogeneity with respect to a causal variable among different subgroups. This hypothesis was tested in a laboratory experiment in which performance was predicted from ability using motivation as the moderator. Ability was measured with a work sample and motivation was varied by assigning goals with different degrees of difficulty and specificity. It was found that ability predicted performance better in groups which were homogeneous with respect to motivation that in those which were motivationally heterogeneous. A moderated regression analysis showed that most of the differential validity was reducible to main effects, but significant interaction effects were found. One of them was caused by the fact that in one low motivation condition the variance in performance was reduced, thus decreasing the slope of the regression line.THERE has been persistent controversy over the issue of whether motivation and ability interact to produce performance ( P ) . If ability ( A ) is defined as the capacity to perform (i.e., knowledge and skill), and motivation ( M ) is defined as the desire to perform (i.e., effort), then the interaction hypothesis is that P = A X M. A second hypothesis, except for cases where A or M equal 0, is that A and M combine additively, thus P = A + M . A third alternative is to combine the first two, so that P = A + M + ( A X M ) .Since numerous studies have shown evidence for the main effects of both A and M, the real controversy is over the existence of the interaction term in the additive model.

The roles of political skill and political will in job performance prediction: a moderated nonlinear perspective

“…Previous research has described two concepts that effectively parallel political skill and political will, and also lead to performance: ability and motivation (Kanfer and Ackerman, 1989;Locke et al, 1978). Kanfer and Ackerman (1989) described how the various cognitive abilities individuals possess serve as strong predictors of individual job performance, and can help explain the differences in job performance between individuals.…”

Me and us: differential relationships among goal‐setting training, efficacy and effectiveness at the individual and team level

“…The combined effects of personal goal-setting and self-ef®cacy provide an inclination and a target, often motivating the individual to become better focused on what will be required in order to perform effectively, such that they eventually reach their goals (Bandura, 1997;Bandura and Jourden, 1991;Latham and Lee, 1986;Locke, 1982;Locke and Latham, 1990;Locke et al, 1978;Stajkovic and Luthans, 1998).…”

Predicting Typical and Maximum Performance with Measures of Motivation and Abilities

“…Job performance is a function of an individual's job-related ability and motivation (Locke, Mento, & Katcher, 1978;Maier, 1955). Job-related ability comprises requisite declarative and procedural knowledge and skills (Campbell, 1990;Campbell, Gasser, & Oswald, 1996;Campbell, McCloy, Oppler, & Sager, 1993;Hunter, 1983;Motowidlo, Borman, & Schmit, 1997), which in turn are a function of other factors such as performers' general mental ability.…”