Limits...
Meta-analytic evidence of low convergence between implicit and explicit measures of the needs for achievement, affiliation, and power.

Köllner MG, Schultheiss OC - Front Psychol (2014)

Bottom Line: Studies from a comprehensive search in PsycINFO, data sets of our research group, a literature list compiled by an expert, and the results of a request for gray literature were examined for relevance and coded.Participant age did not moderate the size of these relationships.However, a greater proportion of males in the samples and an earlier publication year were associated with larger effect sizes.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Human Motivation and Affective Neuroscience Lab, Department of Psychology and Sport Sciences, Institute of Psychology, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU) Erlangen, Germany.

ABSTRACT
The correlation between implicit and explicit motive measures and potential moderators of this relationship were examined meta-analytically, using Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) approach. Studies from a comprehensive search in PsycINFO, data sets of our research group, a literature list compiled by an expert, and the results of a request for gray literature were examined for relevance and coded. Analyses were based on 49 papers, 56 independent samples, 6151 subjects, and 167 correlations. The correlations (ρ) between implicit and explicit measures were 0.130 (CI: 0.077-0.183) for the overall relationship, 0.116 (CI: 0.050-0.182) for affiliation, 0.139 (CI: 0.080-0.198) for achievement, and 0.038 (CI: -0.055-0.131) for power. Participant age did not moderate the size of these relationships. However, a greater proportion of males in the samples and an earlier publication year were associated with larger effect sizes.

No MeSH data available.


Linear relationship of year of publication with study correlation corrected for sampling error.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4126572&req=5

Figure 3: Linear relationship of year of publication with study correlation corrected for sampling error.

Mentions: Contrary to expectations, publication year was negatively related to the relationship, as Figure 3 shows. The CI around Cor(ρ, y) did not include zero. Additional hypothesis 5.2 was not supported; the opposite was true. We added a 95% CI to Figure 3 to determine the year by which the correlation was no longer different from zero. As can be seen in the plot, the CI includes zero approximately by the year 2000. Follow-up analyses indicated that the overall negative correlation between study year and implicit-explicit correlations did not differ by motive domain.


Meta-analytic evidence of low convergence between implicit and explicit measures of the needs for achievement, affiliation, and power.

Köllner MG, Schultheiss OC - Front Psychol (2014)

Linear relationship of year of publication with study correlation corrected for sampling error.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4126572&req=5

Figure 3: Linear relationship of year of publication with study correlation corrected for sampling error.
Mentions: Contrary to expectations, publication year was negatively related to the relationship, as Figure 3 shows. The CI around Cor(ρ, y) did not include zero. Additional hypothesis 5.2 was not supported; the opposite was true. We added a 95% CI to Figure 3 to determine the year by which the correlation was no longer different from zero. As can be seen in the plot, the CI includes zero approximately by the year 2000. Follow-up analyses indicated that the overall negative correlation between study year and implicit-explicit correlations did not differ by motive domain.

Bottom Line: Studies from a comprehensive search in PsycINFO, data sets of our research group, a literature list compiled by an expert, and the results of a request for gray literature were examined for relevance and coded.Participant age did not moderate the size of these relationships.However, a greater proportion of males in the samples and an earlier publication year were associated with larger effect sizes.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Human Motivation and Affective Neuroscience Lab, Department of Psychology and Sport Sciences, Institute of Psychology, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU) Erlangen, Germany.

ABSTRACT
The correlation between implicit and explicit motive measures and potential moderators of this relationship were examined meta-analytically, using Hunter and Schmidt's (2004) approach. Studies from a comprehensive search in PsycINFO, data sets of our research group, a literature list compiled by an expert, and the results of a request for gray literature were examined for relevance and coded. Analyses were based on 49 papers, 56 independent samples, 6151 subjects, and 167 correlations. The correlations (ρ) between implicit and explicit measures were 0.130 (CI: 0.077-0.183) for the overall relationship, 0.116 (CI: 0.050-0.182) for affiliation, 0.139 (CI: 0.080-0.198) for achievement, and 0.038 (CI: -0.055-0.131) for power. Participant age did not moderate the size of these relationships. However, a greater proportion of males in the samples and an earlier publication year were associated with larger effect sizes.

No MeSH data available.